MALVERN Hills Trust has claimed 'misinformation' is behind campaigners' concerns that plans to give itself a general power could lead to solar farms on the hills.

In a consultation on plans to modernise the trust's governance through a private bill, nearly half of the respondents disagreed with the proposal for the trust to have a restricted general power. 

Campaigners against the bill raised concerns a general power would provide the trust with the opportunity to do anything it wants without constraint, including putting solar farms, shops, or even allowing residential developments on the hills. 

But at a special board meeting on Thursday (September 19), the trust moved to reassure people this was not the case as it voted to retain the mooted general power for its draft parliamentary bill. 

READ MORE- James McAvoy new movie with Hollyoaks star on Malvern Hills

READ MORE- New homes on former QinetiQ site still stand empty

After the meeting, Katharine Harris, from the Malvern Environment Protection Group, said she couldn't believe the general power had been voted through, adding she felt people's concerns had been ignored. 

Meeting papers claimed there had been 'misinformation' circulating on social media about the general power during the consultation period. 

At the meeting, the trust's governance change officer, Sue Satchell said the general power could only be used to further the trust's charitable objects.

"People have suggested the power could be used for solar farms, shops, business or residential development on the hills, or that it would allow the trust to sell off land.

"This just cannot happen because they are contrary to the trust's charitable objects, the trust can't run a commercial enterprise. 

"This is intended to cover the unforeseen and the unexpected and not used as a way of getting around restrictions that are in the bill."

Trustee Richard Bartholomew said: "One of the fears people have and certainly I have is although it is a charity it uses a lot of taxpayers' money, 

"I give to charities and if they do something with their general power that I don't agree with or don't like I can stop my payments to them but levy payers don't have that option."

Chair John Michael said: "Any general power that the trust may want to enact has to be ratified by the board, so there is some protection against something that doesn't meet the objects of the trust."

In total, 43 per cent of respondents disagreed strongly with the trust having a restricted general power, while 4 per cent slightly disagreed.

By contrast, 31 per cent strongly agreed with the proposal and 14 per cent slightly agreed.