Guildford Cathedral played host as town and gown come together to see formal installation of Professor Stephen Jarvis as Surrey’s sixth Vice-Chancellor

In a ceremony that fused a message about the dual research and teaching purpose of the University, the urgency of a rapidly changing world, and age-old academic pageantry, Professor Stephen Jarvis was formally installed as the University of Surrey’s sixth President and Vice-Chancellor at Guildford Cathedral on 11 February.

The academic and civic occasion was attended by community representatives and leaders – including council leaders, current and former MPs and representatives from across the region’s business and academic communities, alongside hundreds of staff and students from across the University community.

Professor Jarvis shared a message of a University with deep local roots – bringing together our community of academics, students and graduates with the wider community in Guildford, Surrey and beyond to contribute to social, economic and cultural wellbeing. He spoke of a University with a critical leadership role in combining entrepreneurship and purpose to find solutions to the challenges of the modern world, and in driving economic growth, social opportunity and the future skills agenda.

A computational scientist and former Royal Society Industry Fellow who helped establish The Alan Turing Institute, Professor Jarvis is internationally recognised for his academic leadership in high-performance computing, data science and applied artificial intelligence. On these foundations, he has established himself as an institutional and sector leader. At the University of Birmingham, where he served as Provost and Vice-Principal, he played a central role in shaping strategic vision, whilst at the University of Warwick he led industry-academic partnerships in big data as Deputy Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research).

Professor Jarvis took up the role of President and Vice-Chancellor at the University of Surrey on 15 September 2025. In his address to a packed cathedral, he said:

“The University of Surrey is defined by a dual commitment to excellence in both education and research. Ours is also a university with a clear sense of purpose: to provide an education that equips graduates for the world of work, and to undertake research that addresses some of the most urgent challenges facing society.

“Surrey aspires to be recognised among the very best universities in the UK, with a strong and growing global reputation, reach and influence. I firmly believe that the UK needs universities like ours to navigate the opportunities and challenges of technological change, respond to critical skills needs, and prepare students for the workplaces of the future.

“The University of Surrey is deeply rooted in its local community – not only a place of learning and discovery, but also an active contributor to the social, economic and cultural wellbeing of the communities we serve. The long-term success of a place is built through a shared endeavour: universities, colleges and schools that educate and inspire; public services that protect and enable; infrastructure that connects people to opportunity; and governance that provides stability, trust and direction. Aligned, we don’t just function, we flourish.”

The installation ceremony featured a traditional academic procession with full regalia, a specially commissioned fanfare, and music from the University Chamber Choir. The fanfare has been arranged for the installation by Dr Christopher Wiley, Head of Music and Media at the University, having been originally composed by the renowned composer of the day Dame Ethel Smyth. Dame Ethel lived in Surrey for most of her life and is commemorated at the University and with a statue in her home town of Woking. More information on the fanfare is included in the Notes to Editors, below.

Professor Jarvis joins Surrey as the University continues to deliver Vision 2041, its long-term strategy to become a globally recognised top 100 leader in research, innovation, education and civic engagement. The University has achieved its highest-ever global position of 219th in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2026 and remains within the UK top 15 for student satisfaction, with 85% of graduates progressing into highly skilled employment.

Surrey University

---

The specially commissioned fanfare was originally composed in the 1930s as one of eight Fanfares for the Musicians’ Benevolent Fund, each composed by one of the eight best-known British composers of the day, based on a traditional military bugle call. The ‘Men’s Meal (2nd call)’ bugle call, also known as ‘Hot Potatoes’ was composed as a fanfare by Dame Ethel Smyth, who lived in Surrey for most of her life and is commemorated at the University and with a statue in her home town of Woking. As well as producing an impressive canon of musical works, Dame Smyth was a much-published author and an influential suffragette. Her fanfare was first performed by the Royal Military School Bandsmen under Captain H.E. Adkins at a Musicians’ Benevolent Fund Annual Dinner held in London’s Savoy Hotel on 8 May 1930. It was recorded by the same ensemble and performed on other occasions, but the manuscript was lost, with Dr Wiley using the 1930s recording to bring the fanfare back to life for today’s installation.

Related report:

Surrey’s suffragette composer re-imagined in many ways

---

Rediscovering long forgotten music does not mean recovering how it was meant to be performed, and that is a major challenge for the arts, finds a new study from the University of Surrey. An expert found that rediscovered music comes with no shared understanding for how it should sound, leaving performers to make radically different interpretive choices that reshape the work itself. 

In an article published in Performance Research: A Journal of the Performing Arts, a researcher focused on a little-known piano miniature by Surrey-based British composer Ethel Smyth, written in the late nineteenth century and forgotten for 120 years. When the piece re-emerged in the 1990s and began to be performed again, no traditions of interpretation had survived. There were no clear instructions for tempo, expression or dynamics, and no recordings of historical performances to learn from. 

To understand what happens when performers face this problem, the research compared all professional recordings of the same rediscovered work. Using specialist audio analysis software, each performance was measured beat by beat to track tempo and rhythmic fluctuation across the piece. 

Each pianist approached the music in a fundamentally different way, particularly at its unfinished ending. Some slowed dramatically, others pushed forward and none aligned closely with one another. Even the earliest modern recording failed to establish a shared interpretive reference point. 

Dr Christopher Wiley, author of the study and Head of Music and Media at the University of Surrey, said:

“When musicians open a score like this, they are standing on empty ground. While written in standard notation that is commonly understood, there is no inherited wisdom to lean on as to how the piece is supposed to be played. What I found when analysing modern recordings was not small variation in interpretation but completely different musical identities emerging from the same notes. This is creative and exciting, but also unsettling.” 

The research argues that this challenge will only grow, as more pieces by historically marginalised composers are rediscovered. Nor is it an issue unique to music: performers across arts disciplines such as theatre and dance will likewise increasingly encounter works stripped of their original interpretive traditions. 

Rather than relying solely on manuscripts, the study proposes more imaginative solutions: performers may need to draw on unconventional sources such as letters, memoirs and personal writings to guide interpretation. In this case, Smyth’s later autobiographical descriptions of the person she aimed to portray through her music offered valuable insight into its character, mood and emotional intent. 

Surrey University

Image: Ethel Smyth with score to her composition March of the Women in the background. Sources: English composer and suffragette Ethel Smyth (1858-1944)  Library of Congress‘s Prints and Photographs division under the digital ID ggbain.33693, Author George Grantham Bain Collection; Restored by Adam Cuerden Score: https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/smyth-march-of-the-women. Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. Montage created by Epsom and Ewell Times and is copyrighted.

---

Epsom and Ewell Times adds: Dame Ethel Mary Smyth DBE (22 April 1858 – 8 May 1944) was an English composer and a member of the women’s suffrage movement. Her compositions include songs, works for piano, chamber music, orchestral works, choral works and operas. She lived in Surrey from childhood.

---

Surrey young people using NHS mental health services have taken their artwork to the heart of government, with an exhibition at the House of Commons offering MPs an insight into their experiences and the support they received.

The exhibition, taking place from 10-15 February, showcases work created by young people supported by the STARS and New Leaf services, part of Mindworks Surrey. STARS supports young people affected by sexual abuse and assault, while New Leaf supports those who are in care, leaving care, adopted or under special guardianship orders.

Young people are sharing their artwork with MPs to showcase how creativity supports young people’s mental health and to highlight the positive impact of the services.

The pieces explore identity, hope, growth and recovery, capturing what can be difficult to articulate in words and offering an honest reflection of young peoples’ lived experiences of mental health support.

One young person whose artwork is being exhibited said: “STARS has changed my life, I can be me now. I was shocked when I heard my art would be at the House of Commons, I am really proud that people like my picture and what I created.”

Rebecca Robertson, Specialist Mental Health and Art Therapist said: “The young people we support have expressed their thoughts and feelings around their life experiences using art materials.

“Art making can provide an important alternative to more traditional verbal therapies and can be a vital part of helping young people to engage in support, particularly when working with trauma.”

The House of Commons event was sponsored by Helen Maguire, MP for Epsom and Ewell, who attended the exhibition last summer and supported bringing the art to Parliament.

Helen said: “I’m delighted to see this exhibition come alive. It demonstrates the powerful work that New Leaf and STARS do and the importance of young people getting the right care and support for their mental health.”

Emina Atic-Lee, Service Manager for STARS and New Leaf services, said: “We are incredibly proud to see the voices of the young people we support take to the stage at the House of Commons. Each piece offers an honest and powerful window into how young people use creativity to make sense of their experiences, express emotions that are hard to put into words, and recognise their own strength.

“To showcase this work in such a nationally significant setting is a truly special moment for them and for everyone involved in the services.”

Press release from Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust

AI systems already decide how ambulances are routed, how supply chains operate and how autonomous drones plan their missions. Yet when those systems make a risky or counter-intuitive choice, humans are often expected to accept it without challenge, warns a new study from the University of Surrey. 

---

Epsom and Ewell Times adds that the Civil Aviation Authority has granted Amazon a licence to deliver items by drone. It is uncertain when this service will actually begin.

---

The research, published in the Annals of Operations Research, looked at the use of optimisation algorithms in relevant areas such as transport, logistics, healthcare and autonomous systems. Optimisation algorithms are systems that decide the best possible action by weighing trade-offs under fixed rules such as time, cost or capacity. Unlike prediction models that estimate what will happen, optimisation algorithms choose what should be done. 

Optimisation algorithms decide what gets prioritised, delayed or excluded under strict limits such as weight, cost, time and capacity. Yet those decisions are mathematically correct but practically opaque. 

The research team’s findings implies that our increasing ‘blind trust’ creates serious safety and accountability risks in the increasing areas of everyday life where optimisation algorithms are used. 

Using a classic optimisation challenge known as the Knapsack problem, the research demonstrates how machine learning models can learn the structure of an optimisation decision and then explain it in plain language. The method shows which constraints mattered most, why certain options were selected and what trade-offs pushed others out. 

The study shows how organisations can challenge optimisation algorithms before their decisions are put into practice. Rather than replacing existing systems, the approach works alongside them, using machine learning to analyse decisions and explainable AI to reveal why one option was chosen over another and which constraints and trade-offs shaped the outcome. 

Dr Wolfgang Garn, author of the study and Associate Professor of Analytics at the University of Surrey, said: 

“People are increasingly asked to trust optimisation systems that quietly shape major decisions. When something looks wrong, they often have no way to challenge it. Our work opens those decisions up so humans can see the logic, question it and intervene before real-world consequences occur.” 

This is particularly important for autonomous systems such as delivery drones. Drones must constantly decide which packages to carry while balancing battery life, payload weight and safety requirements. Without transparency, regulators and operators cannot easily justify or audit those decisions. 

Rather than replacing existing optimisation software, the approach works alongside it. Machine learning is used in this approach to analyse solutions, explain feasibility and identify brittle or high-risk decisions before deployment. 

The research introduces a structured framework that ensures explanations are tailored to real decision makers. Instead of technical outputs, systems can provide human-readable reasoning, such as: “too many heavy items were selected, or battery limits were prioritised over delivery value.” 

Dr Garn continued: 

“Regulators are starting to ask harder questions about automated decisions. If you can’t explain why your system chose one option over another, you’ll struggle to get approval — or defend yourself when something goes wrong. This framework makes that explanation possible.” 

Surrey University

Photo credit www.routexl.com. Llicence https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

Inside the Claims and Counter-Claims at EEBC’s 2026/27 Budget Meeting

Epsom & Ewell Borough Council (EEBC) declared Tuesday (10th February) that it has delivered a “balanced budget without the use of reserves” for 2026/27.

The ruling Residents’ Association (RA) described it as the culmination of decades of prudent financial management. Opposition councillors from Labour, Liberal Democrat and Independent benches described something rather different: a one-year balancing act achieved by withdrawing revenue support for maintenance and capital projects, while pushing structural deficits into the future and increasing council tax to the legal maximum.

“Balanced Without the Use of Reserves” — What Does That Mean?

The morning after the meeting, EEBC issued a press release stating that the final budget had been “balanced without the use of reserves” following “£700,000-worth of savings” and a more favourable government funding settlement, particularly relating to temporary accommodation costs.

In the chamber, Cllr Neil Dallen (RA Town), Chair of Strategy & Resources, framed the result as both fiscally responsible and stable: “We have produced a balanced budget without using reserves… while ensuring the borough’s finances are stable.”

Cllr Clive Woodbridge (RA Ewell Village) went further, calling EEBC: “an island of financial calm and stability” and describing the budget as “balanced… with no cuts… the continuation and culmination of decades of sound RA-led financial management.”

On the face of it, the claim is correct — in Year 1. The budget report states that, following savings and funding uplifts, the council has set a balanced budget for 2026/27.

However, the same report pack makes clear that this balance applies to the first year only. The medium-term financial strategy still shows a projected gap of approximately £0.206m in Year 2 and £0.373m in Year 3 — around £0.579m in total across the later years of the plan. The Section 151 Officer’s robustness statement acknowledges that the estimated gap by 2028/29 remains in the region of £0.56m–£0.57m.

So the question is not whether Year 1 balances — it does — but whether the structural challenge has been solved or merely deferred.

From £5 Million Gap to £579,000 — How Was It Done?

Back in July 2025, the projected three-year funding gap stood at £5.063 million. By February 2026, that gap had reduced to £0.579 million.

The improvement is attributed to three principal factors:

1. A favourable uplift in Revenue Support Grant (around £1.4 million) under revised funding formulae.*
2. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) funding that exceeded expectations — around £1.08 million received versus £0.337 million forecast. [Click here for an Epsom and Ewell Times guide to EPR.]
3. Approximately £700,000 of savings achieved largely by removing planned revenue contributions toward capital projects and maintenance budgets.

The opposition did not dispute the arithmetic. They disputed the sustainability.

Liberal Democrat Warning: “We Are No Longer Maintaining Our Assets”

Cllr James Lawrence (Lib Dem College) delivered the most detailed financial critique of the evening. Referring directly to the budget papers, he acknowledged that the headline gap had fallen dramatically — but argued the method used to close it was deeply concerning.

He told Council: “We have 930k of savings being put forth for this year, 700,000 of that is because we’re no longer putting any revenue contributions towards our capital projects, and we’re not putting any towards our maintenance projects… That is 700,000 this year and all future years that we are not putting towards repairing and maintaining our buildings and capital assets.”

In other words, the largest element of recurring savings is the removal of revenue support for asset upkeep.

Lawrence also criticised what he described as unrealistic budgeting assumptions on temporary accommodation numbers the previous year, stating that predictions had been far below actual demand. He argued that the in-year deficit had only been reduced from around £900,000 to £500,000 because: “we took 400,000 out of the Rainbow Leisure Centre contingency.”

That reference would become a flashpoint later in the debate.

Temporary Accommodation: Windfall or Long-Overdue Reimbursement?

Homelessness spending sits at the heart of this budget story. The report pack acknowledges that 2025/26 is forecast to end with a deficit of around £520,000, largely due to housing and homelessness pressures, with a £750,000 increase built into 2026/27 for nightly paid accommodation.

The RA’s defence is that central government has finally begun to recognise real costs through revised funding formulae. Cllr Dallen told Council: “For years, they haven’t [paid], and we have been subsidizing that service by millions of pounds… The one and a half million they’ve given us still doesn’t cover the cost… So it’s not a windfall. It is actually starting to pay what they should be paying for homelessness.”

Opposition councillors saw it differently.

Cllr Chris Ames (Labour Court) argued that the scale of temporary accommodation expenditure reflected years of policy failure: “The council is spending huge amounts… on managing a homelessness problem, largely of its own making… People should be housed in permanent homes, not expensive temporary accommodation.”

Cllr Kate Chinn (Labour Court) added that prevention should sit “at the heart of our budget as a serious financial and moral commitment.”

The debate therefore split along a clear line: RA framing increased grant as overdue reimbursement; Labour framing homelessness spending as structural failure.

Council Tax: “Expected by Government” or “Squeezing Residents”?

The budget applies a 2.98% council tax increase — effectively the maximum allowed without triggering a referendum.

Cllr Dallen told Council that government “expects us to raise council tax by this amount,” warning that failure to do so could have grant consequences.

The report pack itself notes that the funding settlement assumes councils apply maximum Band D increases and deliver taxbase growth.

But Cllr Chinn challenged the choice: “The RA are again proposing residents pay the maximum increase allowed… this council should be reducing the pressure… not adding further costs.”

The political divide here is clear: RA sees the increase as prudent and necessary; opposition sees it as avoidable and poorly timed during cost-of-living pressures.

The Strategic Priorities Reserve — A Missed Opportunity?

One of the most substantive amendments came from Cllr Lawrence, seconded by Ruxley Independent Cllr Alex Coley, proposing that the Strategic Priorities Reserve — originally funded with approximately £2.3 million and still containing around £1.6 million unallocated — be dissolved and transferred to general reserves.

Lawrence argued that, with local government reorganisation and a shadow authority imminent, earmarking funds for long-term “wish list” projects no longer made sense.

Coley supported him: “I just don’t see the reason for keeping this money out of our general reserves any longer.”

Cllr Dallen rejected the amendment, invoking process: “We have a financial strategy advisory group… to suddenly have a knee jerk reaction at a council meeting where officers are not allowed to speak… I think is crazy… We have proper processes.”

The amendment failed. The reserve remains intact.

The deeper issue: what constitutes prudence at the end of a council’s life — ring-fenced ambition, or flexible liquidity?

Rainbow Leisure Centre — The Unresolved Liability

During debate, Cllr Ames alleged that the transfer of Rainbow Leisure Centre to a new operator could leave the council facing: “a bill of around half a million pounds plus legal costs.”

Lawrence’s separate reference to drawing £400,000 from the Rainbow contingency fund amplified the concern.

The budget papers do not explicitly quantify any final Rainbow liability within the headline figures, and no detailed rebuttal was provided during the meeting.

For residents, the question is simple: if liabilities exist, where do they sit within the risk assessment of the medium-term plan?

Reserves: Not Used — But Still Doing the Heavy Lifting

The claim that the 2026/27 budget is balanced without reserves is technically correct. However, the report pack confirms that 2025/26 is forecast to close with a deficit to be managed through earmarked reserves, while the General Fund reserve stands at £1.555m — only £55,000 above the council’s stated minimum threshold of £1.5m.

The distinction is important. “No reserves used in 2026/27” does not mean reserves are irrelevant to the council’s overall financial stability.

The Vote — And What It Revealed

The budget passed on a recorded division: 19 in favour, 10 against, one abstention.

Cllr Julian Freeman (LibDem College) criticised what he described as bloc voting by the RA: “Residents councillors just voting along with their group.”

The RA closed ranks. Opposition parties voted against.

So — Balanced, or Balanced for Now?

The 2026/27 budget does balance in accounting terms.

But it does so through a combination of:
• Exceptional government funding uplifts.
• Removal of recurring revenue support for capital and maintenance.
• Maximum council tax increase.
• Deferral of structural gaps into later years.

The ruling group describes this as prudent stewardship at the end of an administration.

Opposition councillors describe it as a one-year fix achieved by stopping maintenance contributions and raising tax while underlying pressures remain.

With local government reorganisation approaching and a shadow authority soon to assume control, the final judgement may not be made by this council at all — but by its successor.

Sam Jones – Reporter

Image: Any resemblance to any particular councillor is random and their position on the see-saw is not indicative of whether they supported the budget or not.

*A general grant paid by central government to local authorities to help fund their day-to-day services, with no requirement that it be spent on any specific activity

Related reports:

Cllr Dallen accused of £1/2 m Epsom & Ewell Council cover-up

Ewell’s Bourne Hall plans knocked back by scrutiny

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council claws back millions to balance books before government shakeup

Process matters — but so does the balance sheet

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council reveals scale of vacancies and agency costs

Epsom reserves vs investment

A council decision to invest in the future of Bourne Hall Museum has been sent back to the drawing board after councillors ruled it was made without all the relevant information being made public.

The decision, taken unanimously by the Epsom and Ewell Borough Council’s Community and Wellbeing Committee in January, backed plans to improve the museum rather than close it or leave it as it is. But at an Audit and Scrutiny Committee meeting last week, councillors voted to halt that decision and refer it back, arguing key reports were missing when the original choice was made.

At the heart of the row are two reports commissioned using public money: a service review by an external consultant and a Cultural Peer Challenge by the Local Government Association (LGA). Both were repeatedly referenced in the January committee report and described as providing “valuable insights” and a “blueprint” for the museum’s future but yet neither was included in the public agenda papers. Even for the call-in meeting, the essential reports were not published in full.

Cllr Alex Coley, (Independent Ruxley) who called in the decision, said councillors were effectively being asked to vote blind. He told the scrutiny committee that members had been promised the reports would be published but they never appeared before the meeting. “None of us know what’s in the service review, so none of us can tell how this might have influenced the decision,” he said. “Either we do things properly or they get done again.”

Other councillors backed that view, raising concerns not just about missing information but about transparency for the public. Cllr Chris Ames (Labour Court) warned it may be unlawful to rely on background documents without publishing them, adding that members of the public watching the meeting had no way of knowing what evidence councillors were relying on.

He highlighted one finding from the LGA report that was not clearly reflected in the summary given to councillors, that the museum’s finances were “skewed” by how building and central council costs were allocated, potentially giving a misleading picture of how expensive it is to run. “That’s absolutely crucial information,” he said.

Council officers and the committee chair argued that all the important points from the reports had been summarised and that the final decision, to invest rather than close, matched the reports’ overall conclusions. They also said funding would still need to be approved by another committee.

But scrutiny councillors stressed their role was not to re-argue the museum’s future, but to decide whether the original committee had all the evidence it should have had at the time. In the end, they voted to refer the decision back to Community and Wellbeing with a view to reconsider the issue from scratch but this time with the full reports available.

Emily Dalton LDRS

Related reports:

Independent view of Ewell’s Bourne Hall

Ewell’s “UFO” shaped Bourne Hall to take off anew

View of Bourne Hall and Museum, Spring Street, Ewell. (Credit: Google Street View)

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Citizens Advice Epsom & Ewell (CAEE) is inviting frontline workers and volunteers from other charities and organisations to train as Advice First Aiders, equipping them with the skills to identify people in need and direct them to CAEE and other vital advice services.

Advice First Aiders do not provide advice themselves. Instead, by asking the right questions, they are able to identify relevant issues, signpost people to appropriate organisations, and recognise when more urgent or complex cases should be referred to CAEE’s qualified advisers and caseworkers.

The programme places a strong emphasis on identifying marginalised or vulnerable groups who may be less likely to seek advice when they need it. These include young people and people with learning difficulties, carers, LGBTQIA+ individuals, ethnic minorities, displaced people, and older or socially isolated residents.

The free training session lasts around two hours, is delivered in person, and is designed to be a lively and interactive experience. Local organisations that have already taken part and trained Advice First Aiders include Epsom & Ewell Family Centre, Fox Grove School (part of The Howard Partnership Trust), the Home Improvement Agency Team at Epsom & Ewell Borough Council, Sunnybank Trust, Epsom Hub, and Epsom Baptist Church.

Feedback from participants has been positive, with one attendee saying: “I am now more aware and perceptive of people’s needs which may not at first be obvious,” while another commented that “the course covered a wide range of possible scenarios troubling most clients”.

Lisa Davis, chief executive of CAEE, said: “Advice First Aiders serve as a critical link, connecting people in our community with advice and the essential support services necessary to improve their situations.”

Beyond immediate advice and crisis intervention, the Advice First Aid programme also helps CAEE to identify and address the underlying causes of problems affecting residents across the Epsom & Ewell borough, informing its wider policy and advocacy work.

Organisations interested in taking part can find more information and sign up via the Citizens Advice Epsom & Ewell website.

CAEE release

Council tax in Mole Valley is expected to rise by the highest possible amount – and still leave the district in financial deficit and relying on reserves to cover the gap. The decision was recommended at the Tuesday, February 3, meeting of the Mole Valley District Council’s executive committee ahead of its expected rubber stamping later this month, and the increase will go hand in hand with the 4.99 per cent hike imposed by Surrey County Council.

This is the final full year for many public bodies in Surrey before they are merged into two mega authorities, and Mole Valley’s budget comes amid warnings it could be among a number of councils to pass on a deficit to the newly merged East Surrey next year.

This year’s budget shortfall, projected to be about £1.5m, is to be covered by existing reserves and will allow the council to continue funding projects close to its heart including free summer activities for children, the Mole Valley Employment Hub, and a grant to Citizens Advice. The biggest loss in projected revenue is expected to come from the enforced closure of Dorking Halls during its costly multi-million pound refurbishment.

Councillor Andrew Matthews, portfolio holder for finance, said: “This budget is unlike previous years. Instead of setting a medium term plan, with local government reorganisation taking effect in April 2027, we are presenting a single year budget alongside indicative figures for the two years beyond to support planning for the new East Surrey Council. The council is forecasting that it will cost £14.3m to fund services next year with £12.8m income. The shortfall will be covered by using £1.5m of reserves.”

Part of the shortfall, he said, was due to the revenue drop off caused by the long closure of Dorking Halls while it undergoes refurbishment.

The 2.99 per cent increase in council tax will now be put before full council for formal approval and would see Mole Valley’s share for band D properties rise from about £211 to £217 a year. Mole Valley’s take is about 9 per cent of a person’s annual council tax bill, with Surrey County Council accounting for 75 per cent. The rest is distributed between Surrey Police at 14 per cent and any parish council. Currently band D homeowners in non-parished areas pay £2,395.20 – this will now go up.

Car parking within the council-owned sites will continue to be free on evenings and Sundays.

Looking forward, Cllr Andrew Matthews said: “The financial environment remains uncertain. Inflationary pressures, rising costs, and the transition to a new unitary authority means that the medium term projections for 2027 and 2028 show that the new East Surrey Council will inherit a predicted budget deficit from Mole Valley.” He said this was in part due to changes in central government funding that gave areas less able to raise money – those with fewer high council tax band homes – a larger share than those with larger tax bases. He expected other councils would be in a similar boat and could have financial implications for the new council going forward.

He told the meeting: “This is not unique. Other councils forming a new East Surrey Council are also predicting a potential budget deficit in their projections. This is a key risk for sustainability of services under the new Surrey Council.”

Cllr Paula Keay said the employment hub played a vital role in the community and was important to fund. She said: “I’m delighted that this one off revenue spend has gone through. It will ensure the long-term sustainability of such an important facility. We know there is no job centre anywhere in Mole Valley and it provides a valuable service to both employers and local people seeking work and skills.”

Chris Caulfield LDRS

Mole Valley District Council offices in Dorking. (Credit: Google Street View)

A pregnant mum facing eviction from her police-owned home has said Surrey Police’s latest concessions ‘do not go far enough’ and are “insulting”, despite the force extending the moving deadline and halving rents.

Around 21 families living in properties owned by Surrey Police were served ‘no fault’ eviction notices, known as Section 21 notices, at the end of January. The notices gave families just 12 weeks to leave homes many believed they could stay in for the duration of their service.

In a press statement, Ms Townsend said she must ensure the force’s limited housing stock is used “in the fairest way possible” across more than 4,000 officers and staff. She said her ambition is to ensure new recruits can access affordable housing so they are not deterred from joining Surrey Police.

Following criticism from tenants and politicians, Surrey Police confirmed last week that affected families will now be allowed to remain in their homes until 18 July. The force also announced a 50 per cent rent reduction until tenants move out, described as a “gesture of goodwill” from Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) Lisa Townsend.

However, the pregnant mum, who asked to remain anonymous, said the changes fail to address the core issue of affordability. She said describing the rent cut as a goodwill gesture was “insulting”, adding that even with reduced rent her family still needs to find around £5,500 upfront for a deposit and first month’s rent, followed by monthly payments of an extra £1,500.

“We feel as if the rug has been pulled out from under our feet,” she said, explaining that the family had always felt fortunate to live in police accommodation and had believed their housing situation was secure.

She said families had previously been told there were no plans to change their housing arrangements, including during refurbishment works in December 2024, when tenants were even asked to help design renovations. She added that had families been given more warning, they could have saved towards a move. “We’re not sitting on pots of money,” she said.

While she accepted that her household does not meet the new eligibility criteria for subsidised accommodation, which includes a joint income threshold of £80,000, she argued the policy fails to consider the retention of experienced officers. She said police officers are underpaid for being the “ones who run towards danger when everyone else runs away”.

The mum said extending the deadline was better than nothing but warned the fundamental problem remains money. She said the decision risks forcing long-serving officers out of the force because they simply cannot afford to leave Surrey. She also raised concerns about the possibility of emergency temporary accommodation, warning it could split her family up and may not be safe.

She added that prioritising subsidised housing for new recruits “does not make housing in Surrey more affordable” and said the force could face the same retention problems in the future. The mum said she did not know any new officers who were homeless, while her own family now faces the prospect of sofa surfing after her baby is born.

Liberal Democrat MPs in Surrey have urged the PCC to reconsider the approach. Guildford MP Zoe Franklin said there was no “legal cliff edge” requiring evictions ahead of the introduction of the Renters’ Rights law and argued police forces would still be able to recover service-linked accommodation where genuinely needed. Ms Townsend has said she has taken legal advice on the issue.

Families affected by the decision say they are now urgently searching for alternative homes and fear they will be priced out of the communities where they live and work.

Emily Dalton LDRS

Related report

Paradox of Protection policy for tenants: triggers Surrey police evictions

A new spectator stand that will “support the continued success” of Dorking Wanderers Football Club can stay after the club secured planning permission.

The Mole Valley club had already erected the four-row seating section in the northern corner of its Meadowbank Ground in Dorking, and it has been used since April 2025, giving spectators a better view of games. The planning application was submitted retrospectively and was granted at the February Development Management Committee meeting of Mole Valley District Council.

The tiered 100-seater stand will not increase the club’s overall capacity of 4,121, but will instead upgrade facilities for supporters who had previously been required to stand pitch-side. Objectors raised concerns about the potential for increased noise and disturbance, but planning officers said an October 2025 site visit found that existing sound-damping fencing and newly planted trees would mitigate such issues, and that the stand would not affect maximum attendances.

Mole Valley’s environmental health team said the stand would result in a negligible increase and no material change in terms of noise impacts on match days. Officers told the meeting that the new stand, which can be folded away as required, “would not increase spectator numbers, though the arrangements for spectators would differ to the current arrangement, with the three-tier seating area instead of ground-level standing.”

She added that the stand would enhance facilities at the established community ground and support the continued success of Dorking Wanderers. The application was approved without opposition after councillors were told the stand was already in place and that all objections raised had been addressed.

The approval follows a number of upgrades to the ground in recent years, including a new part-covered terrace at the western end approved in 2022, alongside LED floodlighting, additional turnstiles, TV facilities and an expanded fan zone. The western terrace was constructed after the club’s promotion to the National League in order to meet entry requirements.

Chris Caulfield LDRS

---

Epsom and Ewell Times puts local clubs in the context of the hierarchy of English football:

Level	League	Club example
1	Premier League	Arsenal, Man City
2	EFL Championship	Norwich City, Watford
3	EFL League One	Portsmouth, Ipswich Town
4	EFL League Two	Sutton United (recently until 2024)
5	National League	Sutton United (now)
6	National League South	Dorking Wanderers
7-8	Isthmian League etc.	Kingstonian, Leatherhead
9-10	Combined Counties	Epsom and Ewell

Photo: Meadowbank Stadium, the home ground of Dorking Wanderers Football Club, with the spire of St Martin’s Church in the background (May 2021, looking south). Credit: Mertbiol. Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.

Hazel Diana Tibbert, 86, of Longthorpe, Peterborough, passed away peacefully on 28th January 2026.

Hazel was born on 8th July 1939 in Surrey, growing up in New Malden. Following her marriage to Peter she had two children and took on roles at the Sunday School at Epsom Methodist Church. After moving to Bookham in 1975 she became heavily involved in 1st Bookham Scout Group, taking on many roles before moving to be Secretary for Leatherhead Scout District.

She is survived by her husband, two children, five grandchildren and three great grandchildren. She will be remembered for her kind and caring nature, looking to help others and her yummy cooking.

The Service will be held at Peterborough Crematorium on 2nd March 2026 at 10:30am. In lieu of flowers, the family requests donations be made to CROPS (Christian Options in Peterborough Schools), an organisation Hazel held close to her heart. https://rememberinghazel.wordpress.com/

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Over 90 Nescot students gathered at Epsom Downs Racecourse on Friday for their Higher Education Graduation Ceremony, donning caps and gowns to celebrate their success with proud parents, families and tutors.

The event marked a major milestone for students who completed university-level qualifications while studying close to home, proving that higher education doesn’t have to mean moving away to succeed. For many, Nescot offered the best of both worlds: small, supportive classes with expert teaching, alongside the flexibility to continue living with family while balancing study with local work.

Nescot partners with several prestigious universities including Kingston University, the University of Greenwich, the University of West London, The Open University and the University of Arts London (UAL), offering degrees and other university-level qualifications across subjects including healthcare, performing arts, education, art and design, teaching, management and sports science. 

Guests of Honour on the day included the Mayor of Epsom & Ewell, Councillor Robert Leach, alongside Nescot honorary fellows Paul Nicholson, former professional darts player, and Jane Wilson-Howarth, world-renowned physician, author and zoologist.

Julie Kapsalis, CEO and Principal at Nescot said: “Our higher education graduation ceremony is one of my favourite days of the year. It’s exciting and joyful, but the overwhelming emotion is pride. Students, who’ve put their heart and soul into achieving their qualifications, feel so proud of themselves as they step on stage. Families, who’ve often been there for students every step of the way, burst with pride at what their son, daughter, brother or sister has achieved. There are usually a few tears too, some from our incredible staff who have watched these students persevere, learn and grow and are now waving them off to careers in their chosen fields. Whether you come to us aged 16 or 66, Nescot is a launchpad and I wish all our graduates every success with whatever comes next.”

Students from across the college were fully involved in the ceremony. Travel and tourism students welcomed guests on arrival, music students provided DJ sets and live music throughout, and performing arts students surprised the audience with an incredible singing flashmob. 

Guest of honour, Paul Nicholson, gave an inspiring speech, telling students: “What you’ve done to get here is remarkable – you should be extremely proud of yourselves. But by being here you haven’t finished; you’ve only just started. Your ambitions should never have an end date…with the skills and experience Nescot has given you, make our world a little bit better every day.”

Madiha Mahmood who studied for a BA (Hons) in Education Studies gave a speech at the ceremony, including a thank you to lecturers, tutors and support staff at Nescot: “Your dedication, patience, and belief in us, especially during challenging moments, has made a lasting difference. You have guided us, encouraged us, and pushed us to be the best versions of ourselves.  

Today is a celebration, but it is also a reminder. A reminder that it doesn’t matter how long it takes. It doesn’t matter if you fail at the start. It doesn’t matter how many people doubt you. If you keep going, you can change your whole story. Congratulations to every graduate here today, we did it!”  

No matter which qualification students are working towards, Nescot’s lecturers and tutors are dedicated to helping them reach their full potential. Staff are experienced tutors but also have substantial experience of working in the relevant industry too. Student satisfaction is high, with National Student Survey results showing the college is “significantly above the benchmark” across all 27 categories.

To find out more about studying at Nescot call 020 8394 3038, visit www.nescot.ac.uk or email adviceteam@nescot.ac.uk

NESCOT