Attending the meeting were Councilor Francis Barden, Leader of the council, Geoff Woodger and Phillip Hammond MP. The meeting was led by a local resident who is helping organise opposition to the Silverlands development.

The government is proposing moving Wolvercote Paedophile rehabilitation clinic (operated by the Home Office and Probation Service) from Epson to Silverlands (opposite St Peters Hospital) in Chertsey. The reason for the move is the sale (already completed) of the site at Wolvercote for housing development by the Health Department. The lease at Epson terminates on the 9^th January 2002. The Home Office stated to PH that they had made a study and no other suitable site in England existed. However, given the skilled staff at Epson and that moving them a great distance would be difficult it is obviously easier to move locally than do a thorough study. It was also stated by the leader of the council that the Surrey police were supportive of Wolvercote and therefore moving away poses more difficulties than staying in Surrey.

This move only came to light in the last week after investigation by Francis Barden and local newspapers. Subsequently it has been discovered that a decision to do this was made by senior minister on or before 11^th May 2001. It was also made clear that Tim Williams CEO of Runnymede Council, senior councilors and planning officers knew of this proposal but were reminded of their confidentiality responsibility by “others”. To date no public consultation has taken place.

Wolvercote has 25 beds. Patients are in the main family and relationship offenders NOT “predatory offenders”. 280 patients have been treated, each goes to Wolvercote for a 1 year programme. Many go to Wolvercote on license from the probation service some are voluntary, however many who go on license have their licenses expire during the year they are there. Wolvercote is “lock-in” from 10pm to 8am and is not a walled establishment. Patients are allowed out under escort (NOT Police) as part of their programme. PH and GW were told in briefings that of the 280 patients 6 had absconded (this is only a count of the ones on license, of those not on license how many who have left is not known). 14% (40 individuals) have re-offended. Once patients have finished their year they are free to go (unless still under license). The Home Office has stated that they will be returned to the districts they came from. A number of people including PH felt that this is not what a patient would want to do, as they would be known for their crimes in their district and it would be a distinct possibility that they would stay in Runnymede. It was asked and nobody was sure if Runnymede had a legal responsibility to house them.

Silverlands itself is a Grade II listed building and is subject to both listed building and planning consent. Both of these have been applied for by the Home Office, however building work has already started with the erection of double (inner and outer) NATO standard barbed wire topped walls. This suggests a couple of things; first it is believed that the standard required for these walls needs 8 months approval from the EEC. Therefore the Home Office has planning this for a considerable time. Secondly why are double walls required at Silverlands when none were required at Wolvercote. This is probably because the Home Office is intending to house “predatory” patients posing a much higher risk than currently at Wolvercote. Under current regulations no change of use will be made of Silverlands, however it is clear that the current works are breaking the rules both on planning permissions and listed buildings, for which on listed buildings a criminal prosecution is possible. It was also stated that community concern was not a reason in itself to turn down planning applications.

PH has asked the Home Office to withdraw the planning request and stop work until the current re-review is complete and he has not yet received an answer. However, he was told the re-review would be complete and on the minister’s (Blunkett’s) desk within 10 days.

The Home Office and Probation Service have clearly moved from having decided to make this move to thinking about it (having a process review). They have two primary considerations, firstly that any decision they make or have made may be found to be unsafe and overturned on “Judicial Review”, and secondly the political and public affects of any decision they make vis-a vis the public at large. They are also clearly under time pressure as the current site has been sold and as of 9^th January 2002 they will have no site for this clinic.

It is also clear from the remarks from the councilors and PH that the Government has used every device possible including confidentiality threats to keep this matter under wraps for as long as possible.