Sutton Independent Residents

Cllr Tim Crowley had made his decision: after twenty years of public service, the time had come to step back and prepare for retirement from politics. That was until an unexpected approach changed everything.

Following the tragic passing of Pam Marsh, who had been preparing to stand in Beddington ward, fellow independents Cllr Nick Mattey and Cllr Tim Foster asked Cllr Crowley to step forward in her place. He could not say no.

“I had fully intended to retire from politics and was not looking to stand again,” said Cllr Crowley. “When Nick and Tim approached me following Pam’s passing, I reconsidered. Pam was a committed and effective community representative, and continuing that work in Beddington is something I feel I can contribute to.”

Standing as an independent will allow Cllr Crowley to focus exclusively on local issues, with a priority of holding the operator of Beddington’s incinerator to account over repeated emission breaches — a cause he has championed for 16 years.

“Independence means I can speak frankly, work constructively with councillors of all parties, and deliver the scrutiny and accountability Beddington deserves,” he added.

Cllr Crowley paid warm tribute to his Conservative colleagues, whose dedication and hard work have shaped Sutton for the better over many years. He reserved special thanks for Cllr Moira Butt, councillor for Carshalton South and Clockhouse, a close colleague and friend of twenty years. “Moira has been an outstanding colleague and a tireless champion for local residents,” he said. “I owe her a great deal and wish her every success in the elections ahead.”

I looked at this latest effort that arrived recently and found the claims to be more than a little exaggerated.

The minutes of the Public Transport Liaison Group are available for inspection – it is a cross party group with representatives from all groups in Council. Contributions regarding changes to the 154 bus and greater improvements required were made by a Mr Charles King of the East Surrey Transport Committee – not “the Lib Dem Team”.

The improvements to the Wandle at Richmond Green were introduced by the Biodiversity Officer to members of the Beddington Neighbourhood Forum – no Lib Dems there – and you will note from the plans that the architects are the South East Rivers Trust – not the “Lib Dem Team”

Add that funding for the Beddington Park equipment was a collective decision of the Local Committee and none of the “Lib Dem Team” have attended the ward panel with the police – the rest of the claims are really exaggerations to fit the image they are trying to create. Even worse is the comment on illegal e-bikes when our own Cllr Nick Mattey is on record as being dismissed out of hand at Council by the former Chair of the Environment and Sustainable Transport Committee – now Leader of the Council – when Nick has asked questions about e-bikes at Council.

The final – slightly comedic errors come on the reverse of the same leaflet:

It’s the mistakes you make when you to save money producing a generic leaflet and try to pass it off as local.

• Better public Transport – more claims about the 154 – no, that is Charles King at the East Surrey Transport Committee that you should be praising.
• Fighting for our local NHS – Beddington has neither a doctor’s surgery or dentist – that’s local, for residents in Beddington Lane it is two buses to get to the doctors in Wallington
• Action on the Cost of Living – that’ll be the 4.99% increase in Council Tax?
• Protect our Environment – not a single mention of the Beddington incinerator with its regular environmental failures or breaking the 2019 promise to put an HGV ban through Beddington Village?

And the final generic insult to the people of Beddington – that clear choice – let’s just put the true picture out there:

You’ll be getting our leaflets – no exaggerations, just a record of real hard work and achievement for residents – we would like to continue the good work after May 7th – vote Independent.

Here is the official itinerary of the Brendan Hudson Ward Tour:

 STOP 1: Beddington North Ward (2018)

First appearance on the comeback stage.

Dr. Hudson rolls up as the Liberal Democrat candidate, full of former-mayor swagger. He teams up with self-appointed Beddington “champions” Cllr Pat Ali and Cllr Nighat Piracha.

The Lib Dems ran a massive leaflet campaign claiming credit for things they were never involved in—even taking credit for installing pedestrian crossings that had never actually been built.

• The Result: It failed miserably. Ali and Piracha lost their seats entirely, and Dr. Hudson was pushed into an embarrassing 6th place with just 713 votes 
• Irony Level: Expert.

Undeterred! One ward down, plenty more to fail in. Pack the yellow rosette, we’re off!

 STOP 2: Carshalton South & Clockhouse Ward (2022)

Moving up the Stafford Road (because why change your postcode when you can just change your constituency?).

Fresh from his Beddington thumping, our intrepid explorer tried his luck again.

• The Result: 1,523 votes. Still not elected. The seats went to two Conservatives and one other Lib Dem who somehow managed to out-poll him.
• The £20,000 Insult: The Liberal Democrat who was elected, Amy Haldane, quickly decided she didn’t actually like the work involved with being a councillor and stopped turning up to the Council. This forced a by-election that cost local taxpayers £20,000.

 STOP 3: Hackbridge (2026)

Now he’s gone full east, because apparently, Sutton’s wards form a perfect escape route.

After two spectacular failures and more than a decade since he last held a seat, Brendan Hudson is back on the leaflet trail. He is now the Liberal Democrat candidate for Hackbridge, promising whatever former mayors promise when they’re door-knocking in a brand-new neighbourhood.

The Hackbridge Reality Check

This is where the political tourism stops being funny and starts being insulting.

Dr. Hudson is a medical doctor. Yet, he is lured back by the “joy of politics” to represent a Lib Dem party that built a primary school just 700 metres from the Beddington incinerator. How did his party justify this? By using a flawed air quality assessment that practically pretended the massive, toxic incinerator next door didn’t exist.

Irony Level: Off the charts.

The Longest Game of Musical Chairs in London

Dr. Brendan Hudson: former Mayor, former Councillor, current professional ward tourist.

His political strategy appears to be:

1. Lose badly.
2. Move a couple of miles.
3. Repeat until a seat accidentally falls into his lap or retirement finally catches up.

It’s not just politics anymore. It’s performance art. It’s the longest, slowest, most polite game of electoral musical chairs in London history.

Hackbridge deserves a dedicated local champion—not a politician looking for a consolation prize.

As we look to the Local Elections in May 2026, we can only reflect on an inefficient and wasteful administration overseen by a Liberal Democrat “majority” which has relied on two Councillors turned MP who will forsake their Parliamentary duties at the drop of a hat to bolster the Lib Dems in the Council chamber.

Quite why we have to have leaflets and social media posts from Bobby Dean with photographs posed with fellow Lib Dems.

But then Luke Taylor Councillor (?) for Sutton West and East Cheam, part time MP for Sutton and Cheam, posts enthusiastically on social media about his efforts and progress for the Lib Dems in Southwark – is he moving again?

It is what happens when voters vote for a party rather than who represents them you hope to be served by your Councillors but what you get is politics – it is why Nick Mattey, Jillian Green and Tim Foster as Independents have served Beddington residents so well over the past eight years. 

We are not Pound Shop Politicians following the herd to collect inflated allowances, we work for residents fighting their corner and holding the Council and their myriad of wholly owned companies to account.

Our residents are represented on many committees – Strategy & Resource, Licensing, Environment and Sustainable Transport, People, Local Committee and Planning  – we fight your corner with Viridor on the Community Liaison Group, fight Council inertia on the Beddington Farmlands and served the Highview Community on the Residents’ Liaison Group. We promised to put residents first and that is exactly what we have done and what we will continue to do, with your support.

BUT WHEN YOU COME TO VOTE – DON’T SPLIT YOUR OPTIONS – TO KEEP THE COMMITTEE REPRESENTATION IT NEEDS THREE OF US!

It is always worthwhile looking back over the past couple of years at how we have represented local people:

• Acting when residents of Willoughby Avenue/Nicholas Road /Bedlow Way were dealing with threats to their green space.
• Ongoing support for residents of Mellor Close
• Chairing the residents’ liaison group on the build of the controversial school on the Highview Playing Fields
• Chairing the Conservation and Management Committee on the Farmlands
• Supporting resident opposition to convert the Bandon Hill Lodge into an HMO
• Supporting residents in Upper Road on opposition to the Council’s indifference to the proliferation of HMO’s and getting an Article 4 Direction adopted.
• Simple caring projects like the bench on the Plough Broadway
• Continuing support for SEN parents with Cognus and Social Services
• Holding the Council to account on HGV traffic, events in Beddington Park, environmental issues, their casual attitude to pedestrian safety regarding Forest Bikes. moving the Carew Academy out of Carew Manor to the inappropriate site on Highview saying that Carew Manor was not suitable for SEN education – and moving in pupils from Sherwood Park School.
• Fought the Environment Agency on behalf of Bridle Path Residents to have full title to their garden space when the Council and local MP could not help

Most importantly, reacting immediately that a resident contacts us with any issue. Sutton Independent Residents have “punched above their weight” for the past 8 years, representing residents and hope to be able to continue to serve for the next 4!

Just a few highlights of waste to remember when you set up the direct debit for your Council Tax.

• Life Centre reopens with fanfare about Orchard Hill SEN facility and in house café “saving” £180,000 a year when it has racked up accumulated losses of £4.5 million after its initial £8 million cost
• Comparative unit cost of housing between Beech Tree Place, Chalk Gardens (ex B&Q) and Elm Grove
• £26 million to acquire the lease of the St Nicholas Centre with grand plans to relocate the Civic Centre only to find the conversion cost prohibitive
• Rehousing Sutton College in a prestige development at the Northern Gateway with the Council paying our £13.9 million of the £19 + million cost with no hope of a financial return for Council Tax payers!
• Farmlands – this Council would not enforce Planning Law on Viridor and in September finally issued an enforcement order on Valencia – gave the 18 months to remedy – remember, Valancia remain the only source of heat to SDEN. Valencia have a planning application awaiting presentation to the Planning Committee – dare the Lib Dems look at it before the election?
• And they want to lend another £1 million to SDEN to expand the system – different customer, different terms proposed – still it isn’t the Council officers’ money – it’s yours!
• Sutton Living have their hands out for help on the construction costs of converting the Grove in Carshalton – 10 apartments (not one affordable unit) and the Council has “lent” them another £1 million (yes, an additional £100,000 cost per apartment) to finish the job

Remember, we are Independent of politics, we are here to serve residents and get a fair deal for all. May seems a long way off, but it isn’t, contact us anytime

nickmattey@me.com:

timfoster53@gmail.com

jilliann1953@gmail.com

When you consider what this behemoth represents, you may want to express your concerns to the Planning Inspectorate who are due to hear an appeal by SUEZ. Sadly with options like a full Public Hearing, SUEZ and the Council have agreed with a process that is “an exchange of statements”. Given that our Council recommended approval of this plan we feel it is important that if you have not already put your objections in, then you need to do so by 15th October. If you registered your objections with Sutton’s Planning Department, the Planning Inspector will have your concerns – if you haven’t, please do so now – details of how to do so are below.

In those tanks in the picture there are proposed tonnes of methane, 556,100 litres of Caustic Soda and 1,617,930 litres of sludge. All this is to bring 100,000 tonnes of food waste a year to process – why on earth did the Lib Dems vote for it as Sutton produces only about 5,000 tonnes which means trucks will be bringing in some 95,000 tonnes from all over London through Hackbridge and Beddington

Safe as houses they try to tell us – never mind the potential smell, rodents and traffic – look what happened in Oxfordshire when lightning struck a similar plant:

Just so you know, there are an estimated 300,000 ground strikes by lightning per annum – the majority in metropolitan areas. Never mind twice, we don’t want to risk it striking once in Beddington.

To register your objections go to www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/appeals/online/comment,

The reference for the case is APP/P5870/W/25/3371477 and you must lodge your concerns by 15th October.

LET’S STOP THEM MAKING BEDDINGTON AND HACKBRIDGE THE WASTEBIN OF SOUTH LONDON

Hurrah!! Orchard Hill are developing a SEN Education unit to go into the Life Centre and that will save £180,000. 

But it was a Liberal Democrat administration that invested £8 million originally on this white elephant that has cost an approximate accumulated loss of some £4.5 million in its lifetime.

THE NUMBER OF TIMES THEY EXCEEDED PERMITTED LEVELS IN 18 MONTHS – 916!!

What price the Liberal Democrat Green Credentials now?

For now, let’s look at how the Liberal Democrats deal with the “housing crisis” – some residents complain about the “Croydonisation” of Sutton with developments of high rise blocks of flats – with limited space and burgeoning populations, all London Councils are pushed by Central Government and the London Mayor with eye watering targets.  But the control of Sutton’s budgets remains in the hands of the administration – doesn’t it?

Consider three developments – Beech Tree Place, Elm Grove, and Chalk Gardens (the old B&Q site). 

Beech Tree Place – the 93 flats are costing £485,000 each

Elm Grove – the developer is selling the Council 141 units at an average cost of £354,000 each

Chalk Gardens – the Council is buying 217 units off plan at £340,000 – £350,000 per unit.

With no land cost, aside from the acquisition of a single property, why is the cost of Beech Tree Place so high.  Perhaps it was the false start when the Urgency Committee’s two Liberal Democrat majority members approved a budget increase in August 2022,  from £30 million to £44.2 million in spite of concerns voiced at Committee about the due diligence carried out on the contractor.

Independent Councillors sought to requisition the decision to Council but were blocked from doing so and within 6 months the project was mothballed when the contractor failed.

It is Council taxes that provide the foundation of all these investments and it is a shock that Councillors in the Ruling Liberal Democrats vote on block supporting their political leanings rather than fight for their residents – and those voting include our two local MP’s who continue to “act” as Councillors.

Sutton has been under the yoke of Liberal Democrats since 1986 – nearly four decades and under the reigns of no less than 10 Prime Ministers – Labour, Conservative and including one administration that was a Lib Dem coalition – but whenever they stand up at Council, any issues are the fault of Central Government – never the fault of politically motivated actions by the Lib Dems in Sutton Council!

Think carefully when you visit the ballot box next May – all in the garden is less rosy than is painted and residents need to use their voice and, most importantly use their vote!

On April 2nd this year, the Planning Committee voted to reject the planning application for French waste conglomerate, SUEZ, to build an anaerobic digester to take 100,000 tonnes of food waste from all over London and turn it into methane gas. That rejection was in spite of the support of three Liberal Democrat members of the committee including the Chair and Deputy Chair and the endorsement of the plan by the Council’s Planning Department.

SUEZ have appealed against the decision and the matter is going before the Planning Inspectorate so let’s compare SUEZ’s consultative position with reality.

1. Tokenistic Consultation

• SUEZ report that they leafleted 1,583 properties and hosted two drop-in sessions, but only 25 people attended and just six responses were received in total.
• In contrast, there are around 12,000 homes within a two-mile radius of the proposed plant. The consultation “zone” deliberately excluded the majority of residents likely to be affected.
• This selective targeting ensured the response rate appeared minimal, allowing SUEZ to claim a lack of opposition. In reality, it was a deliberately shrunken consultation catchment.

---

2. Real Community Engagement Told a Different Story

• When  Independent councillors  themselves circulated 4,000 leaflets spelling out the dangers of the digester, there were 360 objections lodged, including six from local doctors concerned about health impacts.
• That is a 60-fold increase in objections compared with SUEZ’s entire consultation process, demonstrating that when the public were given factual information, they reacted strongly against the plan.
• This shows SUEZ’s consultation was not about informing the public, but withholding critical facts to dampen opposition.

---

3. Minimisation of Concerns

• Residents who did engage raised consistent issues: odour, traffic, air pollution, site safety, and the fairness of Beddington being used for other areas’ waste.
• SUEZ dismissed the risk of explosion even with a similar plant near Oxford being hit by lightning in 2023 in rural isolation, when this plant would be located close to houses and two schools
• SUEZ dismissed or downplayed each concern with generic technical assurances (e.g., odour will “disperse quickly”; traffic will only increase by “less than 3%”).
• This kind of response treats objections as a problem to be managed, not evidence to guide decision-making.

---

4. Financial Incentives Driving the Process

• The plant would generate an estimated £1 million a year in business rates for Sutton Council.
• SUEZ made early, detailed presentations to council officers before residents were approached, suggesting the priority was winning council support rather than genuine community dialogue.
• For a council under acute financial pressure, the rates income looms far larger than residents’ health or environmental concerns.

---

5. Consultation as Public Relations

• SUEZ arranged media placements in  Local Guardian and trade journals, reinforcing that this was primarily a PR exercise to build a positive narrative, not a neutral consultation.
• Their “Statement of Community Involvement” repeatedly describes engagement as “meaningful,” yet the facts — a tiny official response rate versus hundreds of objections when residents organised independently — expose it as window-dressing for the planning application.

---

Conclusion

The SUEZ consultation process was a sham exercise designed to appear compliant with planning requirements, while in practice excluding the majority of affected households and downplaying the risks.

The real test of opinion came only when residents distributed their own information: 4,000 leaflets produced 360 objections (including medical professionals), compared to SUEZ’s six responses.

Taken together, this shows:

• Residents are ignored and under-informed.
• The Council is financially motivated by the £1m annual business rates and a flawed South London Waste Plan
• The whole SUEZ consultation process was crafted to manage perception, not to listen yet was enthusiastically endorsed by the Liberal Democrats.

In spite of initially endorsing the project, the Council’s Planning Department will defend the decision – it will be interesting to see how democratic the Liberal Democrat Councillors and MP’s prove to be in their choice between public health and corporate greed.

Beddington’s Independent Councillors will keep you informed and where you can voice your opinions to the Planning Inspectorate.

It was nearly a month ago that politicians and the media were filling us with details of VE Day, asking what it meant to people and interviewing old men and women who had served in a variety of ways and of course those who had stayed back and kept the home fires burning.

Anybody thought of all that since – truly?

I have to say on a personal level I have. For two reasons, my Dad, who served in World War II. and a Grandad who was part of what the Kaiser referred to as the “Contemptible Little Army”, the British Expeditionary Force of 1914 having been a boy soldier since the age of 16.

I am surrounded by their images not as the Grandads they became but rather the young men they were – my Grandfather in the Royal Horse Artillery photographed at Olympia with the Life Guards in 1906 and with his battery in Bangalore in 1907 all proud in dress uniform, then a rather more dour picture from France in September 1915.

I was prompted by the two local by-elections that took place in the Borough around the time of VE Day – it is not the results that appal me, it is the turnout of the electorate.  Even at the last local election the turnout for the London Borough of Sutton was 40% – and I’m afraid modern politicians play on that – small margins make a difference on low turnout so overt support to a special interest groups will pay dividends.

As those By-elections advanced, I saw lots of people calling “Vote Reform” – anyone who does not realise that our political system and, by natural progression, society needs change, is living in a fool’s paradise.  But change doesn’t come from soundbite politics, it comes from a solid, sustainable and moral template with terms of reference that you can set policy by.

Every one of our main political party websites (including Reform) don’t lead with ideals – the dominant feature on all their websites is called the DONATE button – we have seen the insidious influence of very rich donors on the American political system and we don’t need it here.

If you want to know how low it has got – the name calling and shouting on Question Time is mirrored in local politics at Council in Sutton’s Civic Centre – real change will come when the next generation of heroes step up, just like my Dad and Grandad did, and make the change that needs to happen.

Mainline politicians think they know better – they don’t, they follow trends rather lead and without clear  moral compasses  their opinions are as changeable as the weather.

The only person who can change the future for you and your family, is you!

Next month it will be seven years since I was first elected as an Independent Councillor in spite of the then Leader of the Council, Ruth Dombey, saying “Independents don’t win in Sutton”. Tim Foster, Nick Mattey and I put that myth to bed and there may only be three of us but we have fought for the residents of Beddington as hard as we can for fairness, justice and transparency.

Most recently, Cllr Nick Mattey led the residents to protest the planned 100,000 tonne anaerobic digester by waste giant SUEZ. Online news media, Inside Sutton, headlined it as “Beddington survives its own Suez crisis at ‘explosive’ meeting” and included this photo:

The three of us agree It has been a privilege to represent the residents of the ward and we have tried our best to solve the many problems that have appeared in our inboxes but, sadly, there are always some that prove difficult to resolve.

The reason I am writing is to remind residents in Sutton Central ward is a by-election being held on this Thursday 10 April. This has come about because one of the Liberal Democrat Councillors failed to attend any meetings for six months. Under the rules of the Constitution it means they are dismissed from their post

Would you vote for a party where one of their Councillors couldn’t be bothered to represent you? I know I wouldn’t.

Pamela Marsh will be standing as the Independent candidate and for those of you who follow Council and Local Committee meetings will know that Pam asks questions, challenges the answers and works extremely hard for local communities. As Independent Councillors we have one thing going for us that other parties do not have and that is we do not have to “play politics”.

I have repeatedly asked at Council meetings why we cannot have cross party working to fully represent the residents of Sutton, especially when it comes to setting the budget and Council Tax each year. With more Independent Councillors this could become a reality and would be a huge benefit to all residents of Sutton but especially those in Sutton Central who are about to have over a thousand new flats thrust upon them with no parking or increase in services like doctors, dentists and schools.

Our mantra as Sutton Independent Residents is “residents first, always” and this we have done to the best of our ability. Pamela Marsh is the ideal candidate to do this, she is reliable, hard working and really cares about residents which is all one can ask of an elected representative.

VOTE PAMELA MARSH ON THURSDAY 10 APRIL

Last weekend, I was delivering leaflets in Sutton on behalf of Independent candidate, Pamela Marsh.

What shocked me was the presence of some of those orange signs proclaiming “Liberal Democrats Winning Here”.

Why is there a by-election costing the Council Tax Payer £20,000? It is because an elected Liberal Democrat Councillor failed to represent their residents for 6 months and was dismissed by law.

So why would voters follow that to elect the Liberal Democrat?

Support leaseholders?

When leaseholders in Thicket Crescent (that is in Sutton Central) were faced with unsolicited and substantial costs for improvements where in normal Sutton Council fashion, the costs had risen from £3.364m to £4.887m, it was Conservative and Independent Councillors who stood up for the leaseholders – who had been sold down the river by the Liberal Democrat led Housing Economy and Business Committee – chaired by your “missing” Lib Dem Councillor.

And when you look at HMO’s – the recent adoption of an Article 4 Direction which will begin to properly manage HMO’s was derived from a Beddington petition supported by an Independent Councillor.

Just this week, waste giant SUEZ, sought Planning permission for another polluting and dangerous plant on Beddington Lane.

Recommended by Sutton Council and endorsed by the Liberal Democrats, the people of Sutton were facing the prospect of 100,000 tonnes of rotting food being transported into the Borough. 240 objections had been received including from 6 doctors and local Independent Councillor Nick Mattey campaigned vigorously and, largely through his efforts, the plan was voted down by Opposition members of the Planning Committee.

Our logo says it all – Residents First, Always. While others want to play politics and for you to see no change. stay at home or vote for a banner or slogan from one of the main parties.

If you want a Councillor who will fight your corner and make a genuine difference – give your vote to Pam Marsh – she will put you first!