Letter: Surrey Police Preferred Me Not To Speak Out on Traveller Encampments

Published on: 20 Aug, 2025
Updated on: 20 Aug, 2025

From Angela Richardson

Former Conservative MP for Guildford

In response to a comment from J Webb on: Caravan Encampment Arrives at Stoke Park – Police ‘Monitoring The Situation’

It’s the Guildford’s Borough Commander at Surrey Police who leads on the issue of Traveller encampments. The Police and Crime Commissioner for Surrey holds the Chief Constable to account on strategic goals set and overall operational delivery of those goals but PCCs do not interfere with or direct police operational decision-making.

Whilst my experience as MP was that Guildford Police articulated a preference that I did not use my public platform to highlight difficulties with Traveller encampments and let them get on with their assessment and monitoring, rightly or wrongly I saw my former role as standing up for local people and their concerns.

The current representatives in charge have a record of being more interested in not upsetting minority groups and willing to overlook the needs and safety and wellbeing of larger, sometimes more vulnerable groups in our society.

Traveller encampments is just one example.

Responses to Letter: Surrey Police Preferred Me Not To Speak Out on Traveller Encampments

Frank Emery Reply

August 22, 2025 at 7:23 pm

Unfortunately the majority of Guildfordians have realised this a long time ago. It’s also very unfortunate that the PCC is a Tory who really doesn’t represent the local community.
Anthony Mallard Reply

August 24, 2025 at 12:07 pm

Ms Richardson’s comment: “Surrey Police Preferred me not to speak out on Traveller Encampments,” poses a serious democratic question. Whom did Ms Richardson represent, Surrey Police or maybe her Conservative colleague, the police and crime commissioner, or is it the interests of those who democratically elected her? I would like to think it was the latter but now I am not so sure.

Perhaps I have misconstrued her point and hopefully Ms Richardson will be kind and clarify exactly why the police wanted her to take this line and set out her current position on this important topic.
- Angela Richardson Reply
  
  August 24, 2025 at 8:10 pm
  
  My point was that I did speak out on behalf of local residents. I was consistent in my time in office that I was not there to represent institutions or public bodies but the concerns of local people.
  
  I found that using my public platform, even if it was uncomfortable for some organisations, prompted a speedier response than if nothing was said.
  
  Angela Richardson is the former Conservative MP for Guildford.
- Frank Emery Reply
  
  August 25, 2025 at 6:58 pm
  
  I think her political calling might answer your question!
Anthony Mallard Reply

August 24, 2025 at 4:26 pm

I should have added I do appreciate that Ms Zoe Franklin is the current MP for the Guildford Constituency. Perhaps she may wish to add her view on the possibility of being hindered by the police in carrying out, if circumstance warrant it, her clear democratic duty.
A W Derbyshire Reply

August 30, 2025 at 11:02 am

As usual the hub of the problem has been ignored. The police and the council should not allow Travellers to camp where they like and when they like. The cost of cleaning up is borne by the residents and that means us just in case Messrs Mallard and Emery have missed the point.

It’s about time that Guildford residents woke up and elected a council that acts for residents and not minorities and insists that the police do what they are supposed to do and stop hiding behind spurious, weak reasons to do nothing.

Guildford’s former MP Angela Richardson did her best.
Anthony Mallard Reply

August 31, 2025 at 11:14 am

I believe A W Derbyshire makes valid points – in a perfect world.

The problem of Travellers’ unauthorised use of public or private land to camp on, whether for a short or extended period, is much more complicated than the simplistic offering he makes. The lack of Travellers sites, legislation and lack of resources are just three examples of existing constraints.

Successive governments have passed legislation to deal with this and similar anti-social behaviour without regard to the need to provide adequate resources to enforce this blizzard of new laws. Largely political, knee-jerk reactions to placate pressure groups.

Yes, we the national and local taxpayers bear the cost of clear-ups and the millions of pounds which, in some cases, is the policing cost, putting aside the lack of local policing whilst manpower is diverted to deal with such incidents.

In this specific case, I am sure there were hygiene and other costs following the departure of the Travellers for which we the local taxpayer pays the penalty. Lessons should be learned and the Borough Council should now plan to prevent such incursions in the future. But will they?