Your letters to the editor: A lament for Farnham

Our beautiful historic Farnham Town, plenty of chaos all around.

Traffic lights and queues everywhere, visitors and locals really despair.

We now have more pollution than ever before, in every street and at every door.

Now even more traffic coming through the town, with all the extra houses being built all around.

We were led to believe the traffic would flow, but they really meant completely stop or slow.

Castle Street will soon be finished, but alas, my hopes are diminished.

It was not thought out how ambulances and fire engines would get through the town, with all the unnecessary road hold-ups all around.

Just be glad you can sit on a seat, walk on wide pavements, breathing in fumes from the street.

Shirley Dymond,

Farnham resident

I read with interest the article on Moushill Lane, Milford in Peeps in the Past.

I was, however, surprised to learn the omission of other famous residents of the lane, namely the late Penelope Keith and one of the few husband-and-wife members of parliament teams, Virginia and Peter Bottomley.

Back in the early 2000s, I built a two-story Rookery Barns annexe in the grounds of the Bottomley’s house, Chimneys, in which Ms Bottomley planned to write her memoirs.

I recall visiting the building at one point after we had finished and seeing one room piled high with the famous red ministerial boxes from when she was Minister of State for Health.

They were the most delightful couple to work for.

Also, when the new A3 was proposed it cut right through the garden of Chimneys. I imagine that Peter Bottomley, then Minister of Transport may have had his own feelings on the location of the new road!

Robin Welland-Jones,

Pax Hill,

Bentley

When a national monument to Winston Churchill can be defaced with graffiti expressing support for extremism and hatred, and the person responsible is subsequently acquitted of criminal damage, we must ask ourselves what message this sends.

The danger is that repeated incidents of this kind create a sense that the rules no longer apply equally to everyone.

It also risks giving hooligans and extremists confidence to break the law with impunity and push boundaries even further, while ordinary law-abiding people in Britain are left wondering where the limits are. This is deeply dangerous.

Winston Churchill was one of the defining figures in our nation’s history. His leadership and determination during the Second World War helped Britain withstand the Nazi threat at a time when our freedom and democracy were in grave danger. That contribution deserves to be remembered and respected.

This matters locally too. The strength of our communities depends upon respect for the law, public property and one another. Once those basic standards begin to erode, rebuilding trust becomes much harder.

We must not allow lawlessness and extremism to become normalised. If social tensions in our communities are to be contained, the rule of law must mean the same thing for everyone.

David Lancaster,

Address supplied

In response to your article, “Residents demand action over Farnham parking squeeze”, Wykeham Road is in the Zone A parking area and many of us are very concerned that the number of permits allowed per household has been reduced from two to one.

This was done without consultation or informing us of the change, and we only found out about it by chance.

Not only is the new limit on permits a major concern – a resident who recently moved to the street said that being eligible for only one parking permit made them reconsider buying their house – but we share the problem raised by local residents in your article about insufficient parking.

Visitor parking often means residents have to park an increasing distance from their homes. We agree there is a strong argument for more residents-only parking in Zone A.

In my exchange with Surrey County Council, when questioning its refusal to issue a second permit, I was told that Zone A residents had only been permitted one permit since the permit system came into place in 2012.

We know that the limit was changed from two permits to one in early 2026 and want the original policy – and consequently the pre-change value and saleability of our homes – restored.

Concerned residents,

Wykeham Road,

Farnham

I was concerned to read your report suggesting that West Surrey Council is “set to fight” the proposed expansion of Farnborough Airport.

The article reports comments made by Cllr Paul Follows at Waverley Borough Council, where he said: “It is also my intention to establish West Surrey’s opposition to this sort of development as well”, adding that he was sure there would be support across West Surrey.

Whatever individual councillors’ views on the expansion, this statement is a concerning affront to democratic process. West Surrey Shadow Authority has not debated or taken any position on Farnborough Airport.

The new West Surrey has 90 councillors representing nearly 700,000 residents. Policy decisions should be made through proper democratic process, with councillors fully informed, proposals properly debated and decisions taken by a vote.

I was at the Waverley meeting, where Cllr Follows also spoke about his proposed future structure for West Surrey’s planning committees – something not yet discussed or decided by West Surrey.

Councillors should not be learning about plans for their own authority through announcements at another council. Must West Surrey councillors really tune in to Waverley meetings to find out what is being proposed for their authority?

The Leader is, of course, entitled to express his own views. But there is an important distinction between saying “this is what I believe West Surrey should do” and presenting an intention as though it is already the position of the council.

Cllr Jane Austin,

Leader of the Opposition, West Surrey Shadow Authority,

Leader, Waverley Conservative Council group