Royal Tunbridge Wells to have its own Town Council

On By southboroughnewsLeave a comment

There’s concern that no significant assets are set be given to the brand new Town Council for Tunbridge Wells, so leaving it with little power to enhance the town.

The decision to form the new Town Council was made by Tunbridge Wells Borough Council on 15th July after public consultations.

The Tunbridge Wells Borough will disappear in April 2028 as part of the Labour government’s local government reorganisation, which sees the formation of a vast West Kent Unitary Authority to cover Tunbridge Wells, Sevenoaks, Tonbridge and Maidstone.

Without a Town Council, there would have been no way for people in Tunbridge Wells to have a direct a say over local assets.

Other areas already have this very local tier of representation – examples include Southborough Town Council and Bidborough Parish Council.

The Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Council will be elected in May by voters living in the area shown below:

Stuart Anderson, Chair of the Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Forum, said: “This is an important milestone for Royal Tunbridge Wells.”

Stuart Anderson continued: “As West Kent moves to a new unitary council, it is important that Royal Tunbridge Wells has the same opportunity as other towns across West Kent to develop a strong, effective Town Council that reflects the aspirations of its residents.”

But the decisions so far have deeply disappointed David Scott (pictured below), who’s deputy leader of the Town Forum and was previously deputy leader of the Borough.

David Scott said: “I am appalled by the fact that our local Borough has been more concerned about helping the West Kent Authority than they are worried about our local community in Royal Tunbridge Wells.”

He continued: “This is supposed to be about devolution. But power is moving away from Tunbridge Wells to the West Kent Authority.”

He argued: “Allocating only allotments to Town Council will mean all our key town assets will be controlled by the West Kent Authority. These are assets that people in the town have been contributing to for many years. And many of those assets belonged to Tunbridge Wells town – before the creation of the Borough.”

Assets that could be allocated to the Town Council include the town’s parks as well as community spaces such as the Amelia centre (pictured below) and library which connect to the old town hall, which recently housed adult education.

David Scott points out that two-thirds of the space in the existing Town Hall has become office rental, which is an income producer from an building which was historically one of the town’s assets. That income is now set to flow to the West Kent Authority.

David Scott asked: “Why should a council that’s being abolished automatically transfer all its assets to West Kent rather than the town of Tunbridge Wells?”

David Scott argued that while the Borough Council have said they can’t do anything about it until after West Kent is created, that’s not happening in other places.

David Scott said: “A number of other councils up and down the country are creating “letters of intent” to hand some assets to town councils, which in our case could put the onus on West Kent to explain why they should own the assets and not the town.”

He concluded: “Tunbridge Wells is one of the larger towns in Kent. We should have the financial viability of that status. We should not have less power than any other town in Kent. That’s all we are asking for.”

The influence of Tunbridge Wells councillors on the decisions of the new West Kent Authority would be minimal as the town’s representation would be less than 10% of all the councillors in West Kent.

David Scott argues that controls of assets should be placed where it best serves residents. He uses the example of Sevenoaks Town Council (which has existed since 1974) which he says has proved it was the best council to manage the Stag Theatre and the Bat and Ball regeneration, rather than the larger Sevenoaks District Council.

David Scott also points out the four seats on the body running the Tunbridge Wells and Rusthall commons will all go to the West Kent Authority, not the Town Council.

Work can now begin to establish the new Town Council, including appointing a Town Clerk, putting governance arrangements in place and preparing the council’s first budget.

The Town Forum is concerned that many residents are still unaware that changes are taking place. It says it will soon publish a series of clear briefing papers explaining what the new Town Council is, how it fits into wider local government changes, and the choices that future elected Town Councillors will be able to make.

Gatwick Airport Flights to Double

On By southboroughnewsLeave a comment

Environmental campaigners have said that the climate and the UK economy will suffer as a result of the final approval for a new £2 billion runway at Gatwick Airport.

On Tuesday, the Court of Appeal rejected legal arguments of campaigners trying to block the expansion and refused permission for them to appeal.

Opponents of Gatwick’s new runway say it will worsen noise for residents in West Kent. The airport says night flights will not increase.

The news was celebrated by Labour’s Transport Secretary, Heidi Alexander, who said: “This is a major milestone for Gatwick and for local communities, with expansion unlocking investment and creating thousands of new jobs.”

Ms Alexander (pictured below) continued: “Around 13 million more passengers and 100,000 more flights will give holidaymakers greater choice and strengthen global links to help make the UK one of the most attractive places in the world to invest.”

Ms Alexander concluded: “We’ll back expansion that supports growth and our climate goals. To drive forward sustainable change, we’re also investing over £219m for green fuel production to cut emissions from flying and secure the future of aviation.”

But climate campaigners are dismayed by the prospect of another 100,000 flights every year, amid increasing signs of the damage to the planet’s weather systems from carbon emissions.

Every time a person flies to Greece and back, the plane generates around 0.6 tonnes of carbon emissions per person – that’s about the same as the carbon footprint of what many individuals eat in an entire year. (source: carbon footprint.com)

Sustainable aviation fuel (made from crops rather than oil) currently accounts for only around 0.3% of the total aviation fuel used.

Many economists also dispute the suggestion that more UK citizens travelling abroad more often will boost the UK economy, as spending diverted from UK restaurants and other businesses to foreign holiday destinations actually reduces the size of UK economic output.

In 2024, £46 billion left the UK economy due to more UK tourists going abroad that there were foreign tourists coming to the UK.

Permission for Gatwick expansion was originally rejected by Planning Inspectors due to apparent flaws in the proposal, but that decision was then overruled by the Labour government.

The Chief Executive of London Gatwick, Pierre-Hugues Schmit (pictured below) said: “Today’s Court of Appeal decision to comprehensively reject the legal challenges brought by the two campaign groups opposing London Gatwick’s Northern Runway Project, confirms, yet again, that the September 2025 decision by the Secretary of State for Transport to approve the Northern Runway Project was taken properly and lawfully.”

Pierre-Hugues Schmit continued: “We are also very pleased that this ruling, from senior Court of Appeal Judges, brings to an end an eight-year planning and legal process which has carefully tested and scrutinised every aspect of our expansion plans on multiple occasions.”

He argued: “The Northern Runway project will deliver significant business, tourism and trade benefits for the UK, including 14,000 new jobs, a £1bn boost to the economy every year and a comprehensive education, skills and business strategy designed to bring maximum benefits to local people and the Gatwick region.”

The Gatwick chief executive concluded: “This final ruling means that we can now press on with the important job of bringing this exciting project to life and move forward into the design and delivery phase.”

The anti-expansion campaign group, CAGNE, said: “This is a deeply disappointing reflection of a government that is failing to take a balanced approach to airport expansion, particularly where an airport such as Gatwick seeks to export sterling from the UK economy while imposing significant costs on local authorities, communities and the environment.”

CAGNE, which is funded by local residents, continued: “Residents should be immensely proud of what they have achieved in holding Gatwick Airport’s shareholders to account. This proposed new runway will come at a significant cost to both the taxpayer and the planet.”

The environmental group argued: “Today’s Court of Appeal ruling is a deeply disappointing reflection of recent changes to the legal process, rather than of the strength or commitment of our legal team. We firmly believed the judges understood the serious environmental impacts at stake, including the lack of sufficient sewerage treatment capacity to support an additional runway at this leisure airport.”

CAGNE concluded: “The legal process provides only specific routes for challenging a government error in judgement. As a result, we were unable to resubmit all the grounds that led the Planning Inspectorates to recommend refusal of this new runway application through the planning development consent order.”

In an earlier statement, CAGNE argued: “It is fundamentally wrong that taxpayers should be expected to meet the costs of new runway operations while shareholders stand to profit from an additional 101,000 flights a year and 80 million passengers. The public should not be left to pay for the infrastructure, environmental damage and disruption created by private gain.”

The arguments over Gatwick expansion were covered in the WEST KENT TALKING PODCAST back in 2023 with interviews with a local Kent campaigner and a senior Gatwick executive. Listen here:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/36JUZWlaU4nJvuHPmfSxzp?si=50e240a60028458d

ADDED FRI 7 AUGUST:

Some readers in the past few days have queried my headline that refers to a “doubling of flights”. I take their point that the airport is currently promising only an extra 100,000 flights a year. So how many are there at the moment?

It depends where you start from. If we average the figures on flights (or “aircraft movements” in the jargon) at Gatwick over the last four years we have seen 214,000, 253,000, 261,000 and then 259,000 last year. That’s an average of 247,000. So an extra 100,000 flights is an extra 40 per cent.

However, in terms of “passenger flights” – that is people with tickets to fly, Gatwick’s business plan ambition is to have 75 to 80 million passengers by the end of the 2030s. Passenger flights have been 32.8m in 2022, then 40.9m, 42.8m and 43.2m in 2025, so an average of 39.9mn.

75-80 million is indeed approximately a “doubling” of 39.9mn, so I stand by my headline, but am pleased to get feedback and clarify the numbers.

Others have pointed out the new runway won’t initially be used for the bigger planes, but it is a commercial operation and – if it would be profitable for the airport – then having been allowed to build a new runway and then new terminals to go with it, there is now nothing logistically to stand in the way of the airport meeting its own goal of adding more than 100,000 extra flights by the end of the 2030s. The 100,000 is not a legally fixed limit for all time.

The new runway could potentially be extended, according to the information I have if new planning permission was approved.

Another point is that the objections aren’t just about noise which is related to the number of plane take offs. The other objections (like the hit to other people and businesses from increased M25 and local road congestion and need for rail investment by taxpayers) are more a factor of the number of “passenger flight tickets” which indeed is the the number that may – or may not depending on the economy – double in the next 15 years.

REACTIONS ADDED FRI 7 AUGUST:

There’s been a mix of reactions by local people to my article. Of the 3,200 people who viewed my headline on Nextdoor, Marcus from Ramslye said “Love Gatwick, more Spain flights please.” Darren in St James said: “Excellent news.”

Michael from Estcots said: “Consider the number of jobs that will create, can only be a positive move.”

William from Pembury said: “Obviously there is a bit of noise, but also keep in account that planes are getting less noisy, and even cleaner!!”

But Peter from Higham Wood said: “That’s Labour’s net zero out of the window then!”

Jane from Hawkenbury said: “And there was I thinking this government was determined to go green. Ha!”

Steve from East Malling said: “We have an astonishing ability to ignore the evidence of our impending demise in the face of chance for more profit.”

Ken from Speldhurst said: “In Langton Green in the last week we have had on 3 days flights directly over our house about every 2-4 minutes during daytime. We are next to countryside, so the noise impact is more than annoying.”

Over on Facebook, Aimee said: “Absolutely disgusting – there is no hope.” Sara said: “The noise will be awful.”

But James said: “I wonder how many of these complainers fly, for work or pleasure. NIMB but it has to be in somebodies.”

And Michael said: “Fantastic News” while David said: “Love watching the planes fly over my house. Good news for the local economy.”

Abolition of Tunbridge Wells Borough Council Confirmed

On By southboroughnewsLeave a comment

Elections will take place next year for a powerful new West Kent council which will replace four existing local authorities.

The West Kent Unitary Authority will cover the area currently run by Tunbridge Wells Borough Council, Maidstone Borough, Tonbridge and Malling Borough and Sevenoaks District Council.

On Thursday, the Labour government confirmed its plans to abolish all the Borough and District Councils in Kent, as well as Kent County Council and the Medway Unitary Authority.

The smaller existing Parish and Town Councils, such as Southborough Town Council, will remain in place.

The aim is to save money by replacing 14 councils in Kent with just four. The new councils will start delivering services from April 2028.

It’s also hoped that decision making will be more coherent than the current system whereby roads are maintained by Kent County Council, while a different set of councillors and officials in the Borough Council deal with planning and economic development.

The current two-tier arrangement of local government was brought in in 1974 when local urban and rural district councils were abolished.

Earlier it had looked likely that just three new councils would be created in Kent, but splitting the county into four areas had become a more likely prospect after Labour’s other county reorganizations had created slightly smaller councils than the initial suggested guidance for a minimum of half a million population in each unitary.

The other three Unitaries in Kent will cover North (Dartford, Gravesham and Medway), Mid Kent (Swale, Ashford and Folkestone & Hythe) and East (Canterbury, Dover and Thanet).

Under the current system Kent County Council (KCC) delivers some services like education, libraries, social services and roads, while district or borough councils deliver rubbish collection, council housing and planning services.  

In the proposed new system unitary councils would deliver all council services in one area. Medway Council operates in that way today. 

The Reform UK leader of Kent County Council, Linden Kemkaran (pictured below), said this was not the option she had supported. Reform UK proposed just one council covering all of Kent.

Linden Kemkaren stated: “The Government has made its decision and we will now review the detail to understand what it means for Kent.”

Tunbridge Wells Conservative Borough Councillor, Tom Mobbs, (pictured below) said: “From the outset, I have consistently said that if Kent was to be divided, this was the most sensible geography. Our communities have strong economic, transport and service links, and it reflects the way many residents already live and work.”

Tom Mobbs continued: “That said, I remain unconvinced that this model will deliver the financial savings that have been promised.”

Tom Mobbs stated: “As we move towards implementation, I will continue to argue that parish and town councils must have a stronger voice within the new arrangements. With decisions being taken over a much larger geographical area, our parish councils will become even more important in ensuring that local communities continue to be properly represented.”

One Kent MP, Helen Whately (pictured below), who represents Faversham expressed strong criticism of the government, stating: “The Labour Government is clearly determined to destroy Kent. Kent has a history going back over 1,000 years and a proud identity, but they care nothing for that. It’s an abomination.”

Helen Whately continued: “Kent as a county has real clout with Government – it looks like Labour is so scared of Kent they have decided to destroy it. The reorganisation plans say nothing about a Mayor for Kent or strategic authority for the county. We are just to be broken up into four parts with no single voice to represent 1.6 million residents.”

Helen Whately continued: “Meanwhile, other counties and regions are getting Mayors with extra powers, and extra money. Kent risks being overlooked and left behind. Even if a Mayor or strategic authority is on their way, they will come after the Kent-wide infrastructure has been disbanded and absorbed into the four new councils. This is madness. Any savings made from the reorganisation will quickly disappear.”

The current Independent Councillor on Tunbridge Wells Borough Council, David Hayward, (pictured below) said: “Having a quick look I would suggest the new (West Kent) Unitary will, politically, be of no overall control. In my view that is a good thing.”

David Hayard continued: “Independents, like me, will find it very hard to win a seat against the massively funded national parties. One delivering notoriously misleading messaging. Still, I’ll give it a go!”

It is understood that voting will take place next May along existing county election boundaries but with 3 councillors elected in each seat instead of one. Tonbridge Central and Maidstone Central wards would be split to avoid them having to elect 6 councillors in the one seat.

At a point where the Conservatives hit a low in popular support less than a year after their general election defeat, the 28 KCC seats in West Kent in May 2025 were won by Reform 12, Liberal Democrats 8, Conservatives 5 and Green Party 3.

This could suggest a coalition of right of centre parties is likely to control the West Kent Unitary Authority when the vote take place next year.

Stuart Jeffery, Green Party leader of Maidstone Borough Council said: “It marks a new beginning for West Kent. We are committed to working with our partners to shape a council that delivers the very best for our communities.”

Antony Hook (pictured below), Leader of the Liberal Democrat Opposition on Kent County Council commented: “Whether we like it or not, it is clear Local Government is going to be reconfigured.”

Anthony Hook continued: “Reform UK’s madcap plan to merge the whole of Kent and Medway into one huge mega-council that would he hopelessly remote from local communities has been rejected and I am delighted that we have been saved from that.

Anthony Hook stated: “The option selected by government is not my preferred choice but if it is happening we need to put the public first. That means getting council services, like social care, libraries, public health and SEND ready for transfer seamlessly to new councils in just 20 months’ time. We need to make sure those services are ready to go, serving people who need them, under the new councils from day one.”

Anthony Hook concluded: “Reform UK have talked about judicial review (JR) to stop local government reorganisation. That will require a lot of money that will be better spent on services. JR should only be pursued if independent legal counsel advises that it is likely to be won. If the council gets legal advice it should be shared so we can see whether money is being used responsibly or wasted on political grandstanding at taxpayers’ expense.”

Following a government consultation which attracted around 3,000 responses, the Secretary of State Steve Reed, (pictured below) said: “We’re shaking up local government so that people get the services they deserve – cleaner streets, better care, and money spent on what matters most to local people.”

Steve Reed continued: “These reforms create stronger, more efficient councils that lay the foundations for real devolution and the economic growth that will bring new jobs and opportunities to communities right across England.”

The government believes its changes will end unnecessary duplication and create one finance department and one set of senior leaders instead of many.

In a statement, Kent and Medway’s council leaders said: “All of the councils in Kent and Medway have a long history of working closely together to do the very best for the people we serve and that will not change one bit.”

The statement continued: “This is the start of the process of bringing our different teams together with the aim of designing then delivering the best possible services for the people we serve.”

The leaders concluded: “Of course, this change affects the thousands of council staff across the county who work incredibly hard day in and day out. Our focus will be supporting them through this change while helping them to carry on delivering our business-as-usual services seamlessly.”

Meanwhile in East Sussex and Brighton and Hove, 7 councils are being reorganised into 2 unitaries with boundary modifications.

The government decided that Brighton and Hove’s area should be expanded to boost its planning footprint and tax base in order to “tackle housing unaffordability and support growth across connected communities”.

Southborough Votes On Neighbourhood Plan

On By southboroughnewsLeave a comment

People in Southborough and High Brooms were being asked vote “yes” in a vote on the town’s Neighbourhood Development Plan to endorse many years of hard work by local volunteers in putting it together.

The referendum took place on Thursday 18th June 2026 and 1,194 votes were cast in favour and 152 against. The turnout was 15.2%, given a total electorate of 8,897 people.

All towns and parishes are encouraged to adopt such a plan to ensure future housing development is sympathetic to local heritage, to maintain access to the countryside and to improve cycling and walking routes.

A seven minute interview explaining the referendum is available now on the YouTube Southborough News channel which you can view on computers or watch on most modern TVs. Here is the link:
https://youtu.be/cNV7pOFTLkY

In the interview, the Chair of the Southborough and High Brooms Neighbourhood Development Plan, Nicholas Woollett, explains: “What we are looking for is a nice positive result. Please go out and vote: YES.”

Nicholas Woollett (pictured below) continued: “We now have the power to ensure the Borough Council really takes account of what is in the report.”

Nicholas Woollett paid tribute to all the many people who have put hours of work into the project including an expert consultant, Alison Eardley.

He said the Neighbourhood Development Plans arose from national legislation put forward by the former MP for Tunbridge Wells Greg Clark.

The plan – if endorsed by the referendum – will help protect local heritage buildings and views like the one below of the area known locally as “the south of France” looking at Holden Road.

Another view with extra protection is that down the “Hilly Fields” in Pennington Road – shown below:

The Southborough and High Brooms Neighbourhood Development Plan is available to view on this link:

www.shbndp.com

Liberal Democrats Win Big in Council Vote 2026

On By southboroughnewsLeave a comment

The Liberal Democrats remain in charge of Tunbridge Wells Borough Council with an increased majority.

The Lib Dems have won 11 seats: Culverden, Pantiles, Paddock Wood, Park, Rusthall, Southborough (2), Sherwood (2), St John’s and St James’ all went Lib Dem.

There were no victories for either the Greens or Reform.

The Conservative vote share was 24% – ahead of Reform’s 21%. The Lib Dems were clear winners with a 37% share of votes.

Ben Chapelard leader of the Council (pictured below) said voters had rewarded the Lib Dems for delivering on their promises for improving the town centre, planting a tree for every resident and boosting infrastructure in Paddock Wood.

Cranbrook and Rural Tunbridge Wells were held by the Conservatives. Hawkhurst was held by Tunbridge Wells Alliance.

Labour lost 2 seats they had previously held.

David Hayward held onto his seat in Pembury by just 18 votes. David Hayward is from the Independents for Tunbridge Wells party.

Watch interviews with the key people at the count here:
https://youtu.be/j7oznif9zDg

The Conservatives returned to second place in the 2026 vote share across the Tunbridge Wells. Even so, Conservative Daniel Dzenkowski failed to topple the Lib Dems in Pantiles – he blamed the large Reform vote.

Some Lib Dem leaflets during the campaign had said: “The Conservatives are disappearing”. Yet – when adjusted for the double counting of voters in Sherwood and Southborough – and compared with the County vote last year, the Conservative share rose from 22% to 24%, while Reform fell from 23% to 21%.

The Green Party’s Kate Sergeant said: “I do find it quite difficult that we get into this tactical voting argument that it’s about who you vote for to stop someone else…we should be voting about the things we want to happen in our community.”

Reform’s Tunbridge Wells Chair, Rob Grindlay, said: “we are just going to get stronger as time goes on.”

There’s an update on the RVP development, which is to be funded by a big new debt of up to £68 million taken out by the council. Ellen Neville from the Tunbridge Wells Alliance says she thinks not everything is fixed with the planned demolition of the Friendly Societies’ Hall, which currently houses the snooker hall (shown below).

It was the only council vote in Kent, so regional media were at the count in force. The Kent Current blog came up with this interesting insight in their conversation with Martin Brice, who’s the Lib Dem County Councillor for Tunbridge Wells South and Borough Councillor for Culverden.

Martin Brice said: “Today’s result is a complete wipeout for Reform…Linden Kemkaran, the leader of Kent County Council, turned up in Sherwood about an hour before dark on election day. That’s not how you win elections.”

Martin Brice says that elections were not won in the final hours of polling day, arguing: “Almost half of votes cast in local elections are postal votes, and they are cast well before election day.”

Martin Brice continued: “You don’t really win an election during the campaign. What you do during a campaign is you get your voters to turn out and actually vote for you. You win an election in the year before, showing that you are competent, sensible and doing what people want you to do.”

For more subscribe to the Kent Current website.
https://www.kentcurrent.news/

Overall, the Lib Dems now have 25 of the 39 seats on the council, Conservatives have 7, Labour 3, Tunbridge Wells Alliance 3 and Independents for Tunbridge Wells 1. Compared with two years ago, Lib Dems are up 3, Labour down 2 and TW Alliance down 1.

15 seats were being contested this year – of those Lib Dems won 11, Conservatives 2, Tunbridge Wells Alliance 1 and Independents for TW 1.

The vote share above doesn’t take into account double counting of voters in Sherwood and Southborough as there were two vacant seats there.

There was concern among some voters about the Liberal Democrat plan for a the planned £68 million council debt to revamp the shopping centre which includes a “boutique cinema” and demolition of the Victorian Friendly Societies’ Hall, which houses the snooker club. But the issue didn’t appear to impact on voting intentions.

Thirteen of the 14 wards in the Borough went to the polls – the only area not voting was High Brooms, as it is a small ward with just one councillor, currently Labour’s Dianne Hill. Here’s how the seats went:

Cranbrook – Conservative hold
Culverden – Lib Dem mayor David Osborne held his seat
Hawkhurst – TW Alliance retained its seat

Paddock Wood – Lib Dems retained their seat
Pantiles – Local campaigner Daniel Dzenkowski failed to take from Lib Dems
Park – Lib Dem hold

Pembury – Independents for Tunbridge Wells candidate David Hayward retained his seat from Lib Dem challenge by just 18 votes
Rural T Wells – Conservative hold
Rusthall – Labour seat fell to Lib Dems

Sherwood – Lib Dem took both seats. One from Conservative and one from Labour.
Southborough – Lib Dem held both seats.

St James’ – Lib Dem hold
St John’s – Lib Dem hold


South East Water’s Boss Resigns

On By southboroughnewsLeave a comment

The chief executive of South East Water, David Hinton, has resigned from his job after months of criticism of the firm’s failures in Tunbridge Wells.

South East Water said David Hinton (pictured below) had decided to step down but would remain in post “to allow an orderly transition over the summer period”.

The company said: “He feels his position has become an increasing distraction from South East Water’s most important priority, which is to deliver a resilient water supply for its customers.”

The announcement comes just seven days after the Chair of South East Water, Chris Train, resigned.

Jonathan Hawker (pictured below) who’s the Chair of the Tunbridge Wells residents group, Dry Wells Action said: “About time.”

Jonathan Hawker continued: “Dry Wells Action will continue to press SEW for investment in the infrastructure serving our town. Sadly, not enough progress has been made since the January outage. And communication from the company continues to be inadequate.”

Interim Chair of South East Water Lisa Clement said: “The board acknowledges and thanks Dave for his many years of loyal dedication and service to South East Water.”

Cinema Plan is Top Election Issue

On By southboroughnewsLeave a comment

The Liberal Democrat plan to take on a council debt of £68 million to finance town centre development work appears to have turned into the major local election issue for voters who make their choice tomorrow (Thursday 7th).

The Conservative candidate in Sherwood, Christian Atwood, told Southborough News today: “A lot of people are against the proposed cinema ‘Vanity Project 2.0’ – as I’m calling it.”

Sherwood is being targeted by both Reform UK and the Greens as both parties attempt to win their first seats on Tunbridge Wells Borough Council.

Christian Atwood of the Conservatives continued: “Honestly I can’t wrap my head around it. You’ve got a council that only has one year left in its existence before we move into a unitary authority. The new cinema is going to be in competition with Trinity and the Knight’s Park cinema. Financially, my mind boggles as to why they thought it up.”

Christian Atwood said on Wednesday that he believed his chances of being re-elected in Sherwood were “tentatively good” and he is “quietly hopeful”. He said: “I’ve not found much support for the Green Party on the doorstep…our feeling is that it is between Conservatives and Reform at the moment.”

Christian Atwood is a sitting councillor and works as a full time chef and so was unavailable for a round of video interviews conducted by Southborough News over the weekend. You can see the arguments of the Green, Reform and Labour candidates in Sherwood here:

During the interview, Oliver Kinkade of Reform said he was definitely against the cinema project. He called it a “huge risk” and asked: “When do these projects ever go well?”

Oliver Kinkade said: “The momentum we’ve got now is massive. I think it will be close for us (in Sherwood).”

Kate Sergeant (pictured below), who’s one of of the Green Party candidates, explained that the Green Party was targeting Sherwood to try to gain its first foothold on Tunbridge Wells Borough Council. Greens already have strong representation in Tonbridge and Tunbridge Wells.

Kate Sergeant argued that: “It does look like it could be between Green and Reform.” She said she was “pretty sceptical” about the Lib Dem plans for the cinema and that providing “social housing” might be a better way of investing any council borrowings.

The Labour candidate in Sherwood, Tina Kesterton, was more neutral on the £68 million debt, arguing: “I would want to see the plans, the budget and then make an informed decision.”

Tina Kesterton said she was the best person to serve the people of Sherwood, as she was “a local person with great local knowledge.”

The Liberal Democrats have declined to be interviewed in recent weeks, but the deputy leader of the council, Justine Rutland, set out her case for the redevelopment plans for the Royal Victoria Place shopping centre in this interview recorded at the start of April, which you can watch on this link:
https://youtu.be/C-jPzKdYzzI

The Liberal Democrat MP for Tunbridge Wells, Mike Martin, said recently: “The Liberal Democrats and I were elected with a mandate to revitalise the Tunbridge Wells town centre, and that’s exactly what we’re doing.”

Mike Martin continued: “I’m delighted with the Borough Council’s plans to deliver brand new purpose-built retail, hospitality and leisure units, while also maintaining the town centre’s heritage and historic facade on Camden Road.”

The council have now issued an order to try to prevent the historic Friendly Societies’ Hall (pictured below) from being listed.

The Tunbridge Wells Civic Society has applied for an emergency listing to try to save the Hall from demolition. The Liberal Democrat council scheme involves keeping just the facade of the building, arguing the Hall needs to make way for the new cinema.

Southborough News published a piece on 10th April as opposition to the scheme was voiced from several directions.

David Hayward (pictured below) from the Independents for Tunbridge Wells Party in Pembury called the Lib Dem plans “a ridiculous construct which will place the council in debt and destroy heritage assets.”

David Hayward said: “This proposal is ignoring the whole borough’s needs without proper scrutiny as to whether these plans are value for money.”

And Nick Pope, who is a candidate for the Tunbridge Wells Alliance Party in Park ward, stated his opposition to the cinema plan. He said: “The architects should be given a lower cost brief that keeps the existing buildings, bringing them back into use, and makes Ely Court a much more welcoming space for customers and small businesses.”

In Pantiles ward, the only candidate available for interview was the Conservative Daniel Dzenkowski (pictured below), who stated his opposition to the Cinema scheme and demanded more scrutiny of house building schemes in the south of Tunbridge Wells.

Daniel Dzenkowski said: “I think rather than focus on new big projects, maybe we should focus on the basics and what we have here and what makes the town special.” Watch his interview here: https://youtube.com/shorts/fc2In4uYWb8

In the Southborough and Bidborough ward, there are two seats available but the Labour Party failed to find any party member to stand. So the front runners are the Liberal Democrats who currently hold all 3 seats, with an expected challenge from the Conservatives who came second in 2024 in an area where they’ve traditionally polled strongly.

There is no voting in High Brooms ward, which elects just one councillor, who was voted in two years ago.

The Southborough and Bidborough candidates chasing two seats are:
2 Liberal Democrats (Kimberley Johnson & Ash Shukla),
2 Conservatives (Richard Long & Jack Bradley),
2 Reform UK (Stephen Humphreys & Robert Mayall),
2 Green (Maria Gavin & Iqbal Sidhu),
1 English Democrats (Aaron Brand)

Aaron Brand explained that he was standing for the right wing English Democrats party to “Push the council to celebrate English heritage” and “to make sure any housing built is in keeping with the local area, aesthetically pleasing and is prioritised towards young people. Any social housing should be for people from the area.”

Aaron continued: “I will push back and stop the housing of migrants in the area, as they pose a constant danger, especially towards women and girls. I will make sure the red brick paving is restored and not botched with tarmac, as it is part of our town’s heritage.”

The Liberal Democrats currently hold a overall majority on Tunbridge Wells Borough Council with 21 seats out of 39. Conservatives have 8, Labour 4, Tunbridge Wells Alliance 3 and Independents for Tunbridge Wells one seat. There are 2 vacancies.

Only 15 seats are being contested tomorrow (Thursday) as the system in Tunbridge Wells is that a third of seats are voted on in each year, plus any vacancies. This means that the Liberal Democrats are bound to remain the biggest party, although their absolute grip on decision making could be loosened.

63 candidates are standing in total in the 7th May local elections, with Conservatives, Lib Dems, Reform and Greens each contributing 13 candidates, Labour 6, Tunbridge Wells Alliance 3, Independents for Tunbridge Wells Party 1, plus one Independent & one English Democrats candidate.

These are the individual wards:
Cranbrook, Sissinghurst & Frittenden: 4 candidates (Reform, Cons, Green, LibDem)
Culverden: 6 candidates (Independent, Cons, Lab, Green, LibDem, Reform)
Hawkhurst, Sandhurst & Benenden: 4 candidates (LibDem, Alliance, Reform, Cons)

Paddock Wood: 4 candidates (Green, LibDem, Reform, Cons)
Pantiles: 5 candidates (Cons, Green, Reform, Lab, LibDem)
Park: 6 candidates (LibDem, Lab, Green, Reform, Alliance, Cons)

Pembury & Capel: 5 candidates (Reform, Independents for Tun Wells, Cons, Green, LibDem)
Rural Tunbridge Wells: 5 candidates (Reform, LibDem, Cons, Lab, Green)
Rusthall & Speldhurst: 6 candidates (Green, Reform, Alliance, Lab, LibDem, Cons)

Sherwood: 9 candidates for 2 seats (Cons 2, Reform 2, Lab, Green 2, LibDem 2)
Southborough & Bidborough: 9 candidates for 2 seats (Cons 2, English Democrats, Green 2, Reform 2, LibDem 2)

For more information on the Cinema issues see:
https://southborough-news.com/2026/04/10/opposition-builds-to-lib-dem-plan-for-68-million-council-debt/

Heritage Group Tries to Save Historic Snooker Hall

Counting of votes will begin at around 10am on Friday morning, with results announced by early afternoon.

SE Water Failures were “Forseeable and Preventable”

On By southboroughnews1 Comment

A new expert report has said that South East Water was wrong to blame its failures in Tunbridge Wells at the end of last year on a bad batch of chemicals and unusual fresh water supplies.

A detailed report by the government agency, the Drinking Water Inspectorate or DWI, into the collapse of the supply to 60,000 customers says there is no evidence for either theory.

The DWI instead has concluded that South East Water’s failures were “foreseeable and preventable” and the company has now been placed into a so-called “transformation programme”.

The DWI explained: “A transformation programme is one of the most significant steps the Inspectorate can take. It is used when a water company has shown a pattern of serious or repeated failures that cannot be addressed through individual enforcement actions alone.”

The DWI statement issued on Tuesday continued: “Under a transformation programme, the Inspectorate works with the company to identify the root causes of poor performance and formalise these programmes into legal instruments, to deliver the changes needed to ensure consumers receive the reliable water supply they are entitled to expect.”

Local water industry expert, Charles Hedges (pictured below), told Southborough News: “A lack of maintenance, jar testing and recording of pH as well as undersized equipment highlights the lack of investments at Pembury – investments that should have occurred 30 years ago.”

Charles Hedges continued: “In its 2024 report, OFWAT records a series of failures by SE Water that go back to 2018. The DWI report of 2026 provides evidence of continued failures that reflect poorly on the technical leadership within the company.”

The DWI said the December disruption (mainly affecting the area shown above) originated at Pembury Water Treatment Works, where South East Water did not have sufficiently reliable systems in place to detect and respond to emerging issues in real time.

The DWI report states that: “The site had experienced earlier signs of instability that, if appropriately investigated and acted upon, would have prevented the works failure and subsequent loss of supply and impact on consumers.”

It continues: “Analysis of five years of raw water data demonstrated that raw water conditions prior to and during the event were within normal historic operating ranges. There is no evidence of a sudden change in raw water quality which would explain a sudden treatment failure.”

The DWI states: “Raw water monitoring at Pembury was insufficient for effective process optimisation with no continuous temperature monitoring at the works inlet and pH and alkalinity sampling alone insufficient for short-term or real-time decision making without constant review. Regular jar testing to confirm optimal coagulant dose had not been performed despite this being a requirement under a regulatory notice.”

The report continues: “The company pursued a batch chemical (coagulant) batch theory during the early stages of the loss of supply event. The theory has since been disproven with the chemical being confirmed within specification. The focus on a bad batch theory also meant operational resource distracted from identifying the need and attempt to optimise the current coagulant and process. The reactive jar testing which was completed onsite was delayed by a day due to staff availability.”

The DWI concludes that the supply interruption and boil water notice “arose not from exceptional raw water conditions but from longstanding weaknesses in operational management, treatment optimisation, monitoring, maintenance and organisational preparedness at Pembury water treatment works. Taken together, the findings point to systemic and repeated failings across both operational control and emergency management arrangements, resulting in serious consumer impact.”

The full DWI report is found here:
https://www.dwi.gov.uk/drinking-water-inspectorate-south-east-water-tunbridge-wells-investigation-conclusion-november-2025/

The chief executive of South East Water, Dave Hinton (pictured below), remains in his job despite the scathing report from the regulator.

The Environment Secretary Emma Reynolds said she had already “hauled in the CEO and Chair of South East Water to my office to ask them why we’re seeing repeated failures in leadership and service to customers, and I took the extraordinary step to ask Ofwat to investigate its licence conditions. I have demanded a serious recovery plan and swift action to prevent an incident like this happening again.”

Emma Reynolds continued: “This government has already banned unfair water boss bonuses, and our once-in-a-generation reforms will establish a new, single regulator with more teeth and greater powers to drive transparency including new MOT-style checks.”

Meanwhile the local MP Mike Martin said on Wednesday that a compensation fund for local businesses is set to be increased. Mike Martin met with the chief executive of the Water regulator OFWAT, Chris Walter, in Tunbridge Wells last Friday (see below).

South East Water’s compensation fund is currently only £600,000 despite evidence of an £18 million hit to the local economy.

Mike Martin MP said: “South East Water has now conceded what we’ve been saying for months – their paltry sum to local businesses barely touches the sides of the true financial damage inflicted on our local economy because of their water outage.”

Claims must be submitted to Wedlake Bell LLP, who are administering the process, using email sew@wedlakebell.com

After submitting a claim, businesses are being encouraged to let Mike Martin know using this link: https://mike-martin.co.uk/business-compensation

South East Water’s Chief executive, David Hinton, said on Tuesday he was not taking any bonus for the 2025/2026 year. 

David Hinton said: “We are focused on delivering our long-term business plan, the most ambitious we have ever produced, designed to improve operational resilience while keeping customer bills affordable. Customers can be assured that we are working at pace to complete our full programme of works.”

In its latest update on Pembury Water Treatment Works on 9th April, South East Water stated: “Two new filters were installed to improve treatment processes, reduce the risk of water quality issues and increase the capacity of water that can be provided into the Tunbridge Wells system. These filters will allow South East Water to support the Pembury network from the Bewl water treatment works, providing an additional source of water to the Tunbridge Wells system, if needed. Additional operational improvements include revised site maintenance schedules, updated testing guidance for operators, and a revised inventory of critical spare equipment.”

Opposition Builds to Lib Dem Plan for £68 million Council Debt

On By southboroughnewsLeave a comment

The Liberal Democrat Borough Council plans for a new “boutique” cinema and more shops in the RVP Shopping centre is set to be a big local issue in the May elections.

Leading figures from a range of political parties have spoken to Southborough News stating their outright opposition to the scale of the new council funded building (shown below).

The plans would involve the council taking on a debt of £ 68 million, which would mean an additional £5 million a year in debt servicing costs – on top of the council’s existing spending of around £ 20 million a year.

A leading Conservative councillor said the plans needed “further scrutiny”, while a Tunbridge Wells Alliance party candidate called for the architects to be given a “lower cost brief.”

Meanwhile, a councillor from the Independents for Tunbridge Wells Party in Pembury, David Hayward, called the Lib Dem plans “a ridiculous construct.”

The deputy leader of the council, Justine Rutland of the Liberal Democrats told Southborough News last week that the council was committed to the spending in order to boost the attractiveness of the RVP and provide “experience venues” particularly for young people.

You can watch a new 3 minute version of her interview here on this link:
https://youtu.be/C-jPzKdYzzI

David Hayward, (pictured below) who is standing for re-election in May, reacted to the video by saying: “It is ridiculous that the lessons of the Calverley Square debacle have not been learned.”

David Hayward continued: “The RVP purchase was instigated by the need to stop the alternative, which was effectively asset stripping. I know, I was in the inner sanctum at the time.”

“The work done, across parties and with the officers to secure the deal was amazing. The decision to use the consultants that were brought on board was a success. Maintaining Fenwicks and bringing in Primark was nothing to do with, as claimed, the LibDem administration, it was all part of the original scheme.”

David Hayward then argued: “But now, this boutique cinema expansion for Royal Victoria Place is a ridiculous construct which will place the council in debt and destroy heritage assets. This proposal is ignoring the whole borough’s needs without proper scrutiny as to whether these plans are value for money.”

David Hayward of the Independents for Tunbridge Wells party is one of 5 candidates in the Pembury and Capel ward in the May election. He concluded: “A cynic might suggest that securing the LibDem vote in the town centre is far more important than the needs of the residents outside of the LibDem strongholds.”

Meanwhile, Thomas Mobbs, (pictured below) who’s a Conservative Councillor for Rural Tunbridge Wells said: “Further scrutiny is needed to ensure these plans are value for money and back local businesses.’’

Thomas Mobbs argued: “The decision to expand Royal Victoria Place comes with huge financial implications for council tax payers in Tunbridge Wells. It will plunge the council into debt after many years as a debt free council.”

Thomas Mobbs stated: “Although we supported initial proposals, we have growing concerns about the long-term financial sustainability of the plans ahead of local government reorganisation and do not believe residents and local businesses have been consulted enough throughout the process.”

And a former councillor from the Tunbridge Wells Alliance Party, who is a candidate this time in Park Ward, Nick Pope (pictured below) also called for a rethink.

Nick Pope said: “I have always been surprised that Tunbridge Wells Borough Council allowed the corner buildings on Camden Road and Calverley Road to fall into such a terrible state of disrepair with leaking roofs. The council owns these buildings and has failed to maintain them.”

Nick Pope continued: “It has taken several decades of neglect for them to end up in this sorry state on the busiest shopping street in Royal Tunbridge Wells. A charity bookshop had to vacate one unit around 8 to 10 years ago because of the terrible damp and mould on the walls due to a leaking roof. The buildings could be restored and turned into commercial units with flats above.”

The corner buildings on Camden Road and Calverley Road, where the “boutique” cinema is due to be built are shown below thriving in 2012 when occupied by the White Stuff chain before the area was allowed to become derelict.

Nick Pope of the Tunbridge Wells Alliance Party continued: “As for Ely Court, a relatively small amount of money could turn the space into a fantastic space for a group of small businesses with a relatively small investment. Currently, it is an unwelcoming space for customers with the wind cutting through the passageway making it cold and unwelcoming, even on sunny days, so few customers linger and many of the small businesses fail to attract business and close within a few months.”

Nick Pope stated: “The loss of the Camden Centre is a mistake. It is the community hall for the town centre. Again, this building has not been well maintained and has a leaking roof. It was only opened about 35 years ago.”

Nick Pope argued: “Personally, I think it is the wrong time to invest in a major redevelopment of this corner of Royal Victoria Place. The borough council is about to be disbanded, and a smaller investment could revitalise the existing unloved buildings owned by the council and create a hub for small businesses on the corner of Royal Victoria Place.”

Nick Pope concluded: “The architects should be given a lower cost brief that keeps the existing buildings, bringing them back into use, and makes Ely Court a much more welcoming space for customers and small businesses.”

62 candidates are standing in total in the 7th May local elections, with Conservatives, Lib Dems and Reform each contributing 13 candidates, the Green Party 12, Labour 6, Tunbridge Wells Alliance 3, Independents for Tunbridge Wells Party 1, plus one independent candidate.

These are the individual wards:
Cranbrook, Sissinghurst & Frittenden: 4 candidates (Reform, Cons, Green, LibDem)
Culverden: 6 candidates (Independent, Cons, Lab, Green, LibDem, Reform)
Hawkhurst, Sandhurst & Benenden: 4 candidates (LibDem, Alliance, Reform, Cons)

Paddock Wood: 4 candidates (Green, LibDem, Reform, Cons)
Pantiles: 5 candidates (Cons, Green, Reform, Lab, LibDem)
Park: 6 candidates (LibDem, Lab, Green, Reform, Alliance, Cons)

Pembury & Capel: 5 candidates (Reform, Independents for Tun Wells, Cons, Green, LibDem)
Rural Tunbridge Wells: 5 candidates (Reform, LibDem, Cons, Lab, Green)
Rusthall & Speldhurst: 6 candidates (Green, Reform, Alliance, Lab, LibDem, Cons)

Sherwood: 9 candidates for 2 seats (Cons 2, Reform 2, Lab, Green 2, LibDem 2)
Southborough & Bidborough: 8 candidates for 2 seats (Cons 2, English Democrats, Green, Reform 2, LibDem 2)

There is no voting in High Brooms ward, which elects just one councillor, who was voted in two years ago.

The current state of the parties is: LibDem 21, Cons 8, Labour 4, Tunbridge Wells Alliance 3, Independents for Tunbridge Wells 1, Vacant 2 Total=39

The candidates for the local elections are available to view on the Borough Council website:
https://tunbridgewells.gov.uk/council/voting-and-elections/elections/thursday-7-may-2026/statements-of-persons-nominated?root_node_selection=510839&search_page_508814_submit_button=View+statement


This is a full transcript of Justine Rutland’s 24 minute interview explaining the reasons for the Lib Dem scheme:

Transcript Justine Rutland 2Apr26Download

Lib Dems Push For Big Council Debt to Boost Shopping Centre

On By southboroughnewsLeave a comment

The Liberal Democrats who run Tunbridge Wells Borough Council say a major investment in the town’s RVP shopping centre is “really crucial” despite criticism of the proposed council debt of up to £68 million needed to fund the project.

In an extended interview with Southborough News, the deputy leader of the council, Justine Rutland (pictured below) spoke about the need to regenerate the areas of the RVP which were “underutilised” and “could be housing a lot more activity than it is.”

Justine Rutland said: “Retailers are very fussy. They will want to see that their shops are successful and if they are not, they will go, so onward investment in the shopping centre is really crucial to make sure that it keeps delivering…and we make the town a better place to live.”

She continued: “It was always the idea that the shopping centre should become, more of a mix of experiences. So not just shopping… People definitely still want to go and buy things…but they also want leisure. They want to meet up with people.”

The council’s plan is for a modern “boutique” cinema to be built on the corner of Camden Road and Calverley Road that used to be occupied by White Stuff in the Victorian shops. (see below)

Justine Rutland explained: “The idea is to bring people into the centre, not just to, you know, buy some shampoo and a pair of trousers, whatever, but to have experiences and to have more of a day out, and then hopefully with a cinema, a day out – slash afternoon out – an evening out, and to start to rebuild that nighttime economy that will then support all the hospitality venues that we have.”

When asked about the estimated £ 5 million ANNUAL cost to the council of paying back the debt involved in funding the building of a new cinema and new leisure retail and space, Justine Rutland said: “The idea is that it would pay for itself eventually.”

The scheme is controversial as it involves demolishing the Friendly Societies’ Hall, which was visited to great excitement by one of Queen Victoria’s daughters in 1877 and currently is home to a thriving snooker centre (see below)

The Tunbridge Wells Civic Society has applied to the government for the Friendly Societies Hall to be listed to prevent its demolition.

Justine Rutland wouldn’t be drawn on the current income from the RVP shopping centre, which the council took full ownership of in 2023. The last published income figure from 2019 referred only to annual income of less than £1 million a year, but the council says updated figures are “confidential.”

Asked how the extra income generated by the new investment could possibly bring in as much as £5 million a year to cover the council’s debt servicing costs on its £68 million loan, Justine Rutland said: “We have plenty of data and economic studies to show that the recommended scheme is viable with economic activity growing.”

But she continued: “Well, of course, we will be looking continually at the data, and we will get updated economic impact assessments. And if we decide nearer the time that we need to make the big decisions, that it doesn’t work anymore, then we won’t proceed, but we are doing the groundwork to prepare for a scheme. We’re confident, we’ve got operator interest, and we’re confident that the wider benefits will make it a viable scheme.”

You can watch her answers on the Southborough News YouTube channel on this link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E4wsVk0bRs&t=229s

Justine Rutland rejected a comparison with the Conservatives’ proposed £100 million Calverley Square project to build a new theatre, which collapsed when councillors decided the costs would have been a huge burden on council taxpayers. She said: “This is a very different scheme to Calverley Square. I think everyone has looked on at that scheme and is determined not to make the same mistakes.”

Justine Rutland was also asked about the petition signed by 5,000 people opposing the destruction of the Friendly Societies Hall housing the snooker club. And she was asked about the impact on the takings at the Trinity, which currently offers cinema three nights a week. Her answers are on the YouTube video or West Kent Talking podcast.

The interview has been watched by several hundred people already. One viewer said: “We need fewer councillors, lower council tax, and a council that lives within its means — not one taking on huge debts for speculative developments.”

Another sceptic said: “I’m afraid Justine Rutland’s responses give me no confidence that the scheme has been properly thought or could be partly financed by developing some of the excess space at RVP for housing.”

But there is still clearly interest in a new three screen cinema, with one resident commenting on the Nextdoor site: “I would love to see a cinema here. Trips to luxury and boutique cinemas (Everyman, Curzon etc) have doubled in two years. I love the cinema in Hawkhurst.”

More information about the council scheme is at:
https://rvpfuture.com/

The petition to save the snooker hall is at:
https://c.org/wDcWGyb9Hv