Places Leisure has detailed improvements at Epsom’s Rainbow Leisure Centre but questions remain over the discovery of substantial dilapidations at the end of the previous operator’s tenure – and who will ultimately meet the cost.

Places Leisure took over the Council-owned centre from Greenwich Leisure Limited (GLL), which trades as Better, on 1 October 2025.

Shortly afterwards, Epsom and Ewell Borough Council authorised potential expenditure of up to £500,000 on works allegedly arising from the condition in which the centre was handed back. The decision was taken under the Council’s urgent-decision procedure and much of the supporting information, including a survey of the building, has remained confidential.

The controversy was intensified by confirmation that no formal condition surveys or inspection records could be found covering much of GLL’s approximately 20-year operation of the centre.

The Council has relied upon “legal professional privilege” and “commercial confidentiality” in declining to disclose the survey and related advice. It has not yet even acknowledged the Epsom and Ewell Times’ latest questions since 3rd September asking whether it has sent GLL a letter before action, begun legal proceedings or asserted any claim for failure to maintain the centre or breach of its contractual obligations.

GLL told the Times on 3 September that it had heard nothing further from the Council since its earlier correspondence and that its position had not changed: “the Council undertook, via specialist contractors, a full survey of the building prior to GLL exiting.  As is normal in all leisure transfers, items that were identified in that survey for GLL were all completed prior to handover and signed off by the specialist contractors on behalf of the Council.  GLL handed the building over to the standard required by the Council and under the contract.”

£4.7 million investment

Places Leisure has now told the Times that it is investing approximately £4.7 million in modernising the centre – £200,000 more than the approximately £4.5 million previously publicised.

Work completed so far includes a full refurbishment of the fitness suite, new equipment and EGYM technology, refurbished group-exercise studios and a new immersive spin studio.

A new health suite, with steam rooms and saunas, is expected to open by the end of November. Further plans include improvements to the café and teaching pool and a new Reformer Pilates studio due to open in the new year.

Places Leisure said the improvements would broaden community activities, encourage healthier lifestyles and generate more than £5 million of “social value” each year.

However, the operator did not provide a breakdown of expenditure on the different elements of the project. Nor did it answer questions about membership numbers, how the investment is being financed or whether any payments or other financial arrangements with the Council have been altered because of the centre’s condition or the closure of facilities.

On the separate dilapidation works, Places Leisure said these fell outside its planned investment programme and were being instructed by the Council.

It said: “Places Leisure is supporting and working with the Council to complete any necessary works quickly and with minimal impact on our customers.”

Membership changes

A centre member told the Times that his monthly payment had risen from £45.50 under GLL to £60 following the change of operator. He said another long-standing member, previously paying closer to £30, had experienced a similar increase.

Places Leisure said existing membership prices remained unchanged until February 2026, when members were transferred to the closest Places Leisure equivalent. For some customers, that change of membership category resulted in a price increase, of which they were informed beforehand.

The present headline monthly rates include:

• Premium membership, covering the gym, swimming and classes: £60.
• Swimming only: £29.
• Premium membership for 16 to 18-year-olds: £30.
• Premium membership for 19 to 25-year-olds: £40.

A £75 Premium+ option, which will include the health suite, is expected to be introduced when that facility reopens. Places Leisure said existing members would not be transferred automatically to the more expensive category.

The member who contacted the Times praised the refurbished gym and fitness studios, describing the work as fresh and modern. He said, however, that he was unaware of significant changes to the pool or sports halls and that the health suite had remained closed.

Complaint reaches standards process

The Rainbow controversy also forms part of the background to a pending preliminary hearing into a councillor conduct complaint made by Councillor Neil Dallen (RA Town Ward) against Councillor Chris Ames (Labour Court).

At a meeting of the Strategy and Resources Committee in January, Cllr Ames pressed Cllr Dallen about the secret urgent decision which Dallen had signed off. From the chair Cllr Dallen stopped his questioning declaring “It’s my meeting”. During a heated exchange, Cllr Ames used the words “cover-up” and “arrogant”.

Cllr Dallen subsequently complained that Cllr Ames had breached the councillors’ Code of Conduct. Cllr Ames maintains that his language arose from a legitimate attempt, as an elected councillor, to establish what had happened and why councillors and the public were being denied the relevant information.

The preliminary hearing will address procedural issues surrounding the determination of the complaint before any final hearing. This follows an expensive external investigation being authorised by the Council into Ames conduct. The meeting is available for all to see on the Council’s YouTube channel. The preliminary hearing will be in Committee troom 1 at the Town Hall and the agenda includes a resolution as to whether the press and public should be excluded. Epsom and Ewell Times has been told that the committee room is not sufficient for any public presence anyway.

A complaint made by Ames against Dallen for his conduct of the meeting was dismissed by the Council’s Monitoring Officer, who advised at the heated meeting, and without an independent investigation.

Residents still do not know precisely what defects were discovered, when they arose, why routine inspection records appear not to exist, whether GLL is considered legally responsible for any of the work or how much of the authorised £500,000 will ultimately be borne by local taxpayers.

Sam Jones – Reporter

.

Image: Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication

Related reports

• Epsom & Ewell Council refuses to explain complaints disparity – 21 August 2026
• Epsom’s scrutiny committee slams Dallen’s urgent £500K Rainbow approval – 17 July 2026
• The Man Who Signed It, Chaired It, and Wouldn’t Explain It: Six Months of Silence Over Rainbow’s £500,000 Bill – 11 July 2026
• Epsom & Ewell Council blocks release of Rainbow Leisure Centre condition papers – 18 June 2026
• Epsom Council Rainbow Centre secrecy row deepens over “pre-election silence” advice – 19 May 2026
• No end to Epsom’s Rainbow Leisure Centre controversy – 18 May 2026

Children aged nine to 11 living in Epsom and Ewell can take part in up to two free sports or creative activities through the return of the borough council’s Young Legends programme.

Bookings are now open, with places allocated on a first-come, first-served basis.

The programme is intended to help children develop skills and confidence, make friends and prepare for the transition to secondary school.

Activities running during November and December include basketball, coding, football, girls’ rugby, judo, musical theatre, scrapbooking, choir and tennis. A dedicated arts and crafts course is available for children with special educational needs.

Councillor Clive Woodbridge, Chair of Epsom and Ewell Borough Council’s Community and Wellbeing Committee, said positive feedback from the programme’s first year had demonstrated the value of providing such opportunities.

He said: “Through Young Legends, we’re helping children stay active, build confidence and connect with others, while working to make the programme accessible to as many young people as possible.

“Whether you want to continue with an activity you enjoyed last year or try something completely new, I encourage parents, carers and children to explore the activities on offer and give an activity a try.”

Activities and dates

Arts and crafts for children with SEN
Mondays: 9, 16, 23 and 30 November and 7 December, 4.15pm–5.15pm
Epsom Library
Delivered by Creative Minds

Basketball
Tuesdays: 3, 10, 17 and 24 November and 1 and 8 December, 7pm–8pm
Epsom and Ewell High School
Delivered by Cagers Basketball Club

Coding
Thursdays: 5, 12, 19 and 26 November and 3 and 10 December, 5pm–6pm
or Fridays: 6, 13, 20 and 27 November and 4 and 11 December, 5pm–6pm
Church House, St Martin’s Church
Delivered by Code Ninjas

Football
Thursdays: 5, 12, 19 and 26 November and 3 and 10 December, 5pm–6pm
Court Recreation Ground
Delivered by Young Ones United Football Foundation

Girls’ rugby
Wednesdays: 4, 11, 18 and 25 November and 2 and 9 December, 6.30pm–7.30pm
Sutton and Epsom Rugby Club
Delivered by Sutton and Epsom RFC

Judo
Tuesdays: 3, 10, 17 and 24 November and 1 and 8 December
Ages nine to 10: 4pm–5pm
Ages 10 to 11: 5pm–6pm
Rainbow Leisure Centre
Delivered by Westcroft Judo Nork

Musical theatre – song and dance
Mondays: 9, 16, 23 and 30 November and 7 December, 4.30pm–6pm
Laine Theatre Arts
Delivered by Laine Theatre Arts

Scrapbooking
Wednesdays: 4, 11, 18 and 25 November and 2 and 9 December, 5pm–6pm
Epsom Picturehouse
Delivered by Kate McBarron

Sing and Sign Choir
Fridays: 6, 13, 20 and 27 November and 4 and 11 December, 4.30pm–5.30pm
Council Chamber, Epsom Town Hall
Delivered by Include

Tennis
Sundays: 8, 15, 22 and 29 November and 6 and 13 December, 11.30am–12.30pm
Rainbow Leisure Centre
Delivered by Callum Macarty Tennis

Parents and carers can find further information and book through the council’s Young Legends webpage. Application forms can also be completed at Epsom Town Hall during its opening hours.

Up to two activities may be selected for each child.

Questions can be sent to the council’s Community Development team at cdevelopment@epsom-ewell.gov.uk.

The council also offers an Access to Activity Bursary for eligible 12 to 15-year-olds and community football sessions for children and young people aged 10 to 16. Details are available on its Getting Active webpage.

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council

Leading East Surrey councillors are calling on Surrey County Council to publish its plans to reform special educational needs and disability (SEND) support across the county.

The Liberal Democrat-led shadow authority wants the county council to make public its three-year SEND Reform Plan to allow for “wider transparency” over education.

East Surrey Council will assume responsibility for education across the county’s eastern boroughs from next April, when Surrey County Council is abolished along with the 11 district councils.

However, until then, the county council remains responsible for school and SEND support across Surrey. 

Councils across England have been called on to produce SEND Reform Plans to the Department for Education (DfE) – a condition towards getting a 90 percent SEND deficit write-off.

While many councils have made these publicly available already, Surrey is among those keeping their draft plan under wraps until it receives government approval.

But at a meeting of East Surrey shadow authority’s cabinet this week, councillors called for this document to be made publicly available now.

The shadow authority’s children and youth services lead Councillor Ashley Tilling (Liberal Democrats: Walton South & Oatlands) said that while cabinet members have seen the plan, the lack of publication means “there’s no wider transparency of what that reform plan entails.”

He added: “We need to be engaging with schools, we need to be engaging with specialist support, we need to be showing parents that we are transparent in what we’re doing going forward as East Surrey.”

It came as cabinet members discussed Surrey County Council’s Experts at Hand grant – aimed at helping bolster the specialist workforce to further help SEND provision.

East Surrey council leader Councillor Steve Wotton (Liberal Democrats: Horley West, Salfords & Sidlow) agreed that his cabinet should request the plan’s publication by Surrey County Council.

“It would be in alignment with our commitment to be a transparent council from when we take this on,” he said.

These calls were echoed by Liberal Democrat MP for Dorking and Horley Chris Coghlan, who said: “It’s egregious that Surrey haven’t yet published their draft local SEND Reform Plan, despite around 40 other local authorities sharing theirs. 

“This is vital for transparency for countless worried parents and helping tackle the SEND crisis in Surrey.”

Education news outlet Schools Week has reported that 40 draft SEND Reform Plans have been published across England so far. 

However, there is no legal obligation on councils to do so at this stage, and many authorities have opted to wait for DfE approval before making them publicly available.

East Surrey opposition leader Councillor David Lewis (Conservative: Cobham & Oxshott South) told the Local Democracy Reporting Service: “The East Surrey Conservative Group understands that as with many other local authorities, Surrey County Council is currently awaiting feedback from the Department for Education on its SEND reform plans.

“The Conservatives are reassured that the council remains committed to transparency and welcome its commitment to publish the plans as soon as the necessary approval is received from the DfE.

“The East Surrey Conservatives understand that Surrey County Council looks forward to sharing further details with residents and stakeholders at the earliest opportunity.”

A Surrey County Council spokesperson said: “Like many other local authorities, we are currently awaiting feedback from the Department for Education on our SEND reform plans. 

“We remain committed to transparency and will publish our plans as soon as we receive the necessary approval from the DfE. 

“We look forward to sharing further details with residents and stakeholders at the earliest opportunity.” 

James Moules Local Democracy Reporter

Image: East Surrey shadow council meet Ashley Tilling and Epsom and Ewell LibDem Cllr Julian Freeman to his left. Credit Elmbridge Council

Following Surrey County Council’s release reported here Plans for East Surrey Council continue to progress that the new East and West Unitary Councils will work toward adoption of an overarching Foundation Strategic Authority for all of Surrey and a local Charter Trustees body for Epsom and Ewell, Epsom and Ewell Times provides our readers with a summary guide to what Foundation Strategic Authorities are:

Surrey’s proposed new strategic authority: what would it do?

Surrey’s two new shadow unitary authorities have backed the creation of a county-wide Foundation Strategic Authority, adding another layer to the local government structures due to take effect in April 2027.

The proposed body would bring East Surrey Council and West Surrey Council together to make decisions on matters considered too large or interconnected to be handled effectively by either authority alone.

An analysis published by the Local Government Information Unit describes Foundation Strategic Authorities, or FSAs, as the entry level in the Government’s new system of devolved regional government.

Unlike a Mayoral Strategic Authority, an FSA would not have a directly elected mayor. It would instead be governed collectively by representatives of its constituent councils.

For Surrey, this would mean the two new unitary councils retaining responsibility for everyday services such as social care, waste collection, local planning, housing and environmental health, while working through the FSA on broader county-wide priorities.

What powers would it have?

According to the LGIU, Foundation Strategic Authorities are intended to provide a statutory framework for strategic functions including:

• transport planning;
• adult education and skills;
• economic development;
• infrastructure and investment;
• housing strategy; and
• the preparation of a Spatial Development Strategy.

The last of these could be particularly significant. A county-wide spatial strategy would establish the broad direction for development, housing and infrastructure across Surrey, above the more detailed local plans prepared by East and West Surrey councils.

An FSA could also act as Surrey’s Local Transport Authority, allowing decisions about buses, roads and other transport investment to be planned across the whole county rather than divided between the two new councils.

The Government argues that operating at this larger scale will make it easier for areas to negotiate with Whitehall, attract investment and coordinate services that cross council boundaries.

Not as powerful as a mayoral authority

The LGIU stresses, however, that an FSA occupies the lowest of the Government’s three strategic-authority tiers.

Above it sits a Mayoral Strategic Authority, led by a directly elected mayor, and then an Established Mayoral Strategic Authority. Authorities in the higher tiers can gain greater powers, more influence over government departments and access to broader, longer-term funding arrangements.

A Foundation Strategic Authority would therefore give Surrey a formal seat at the devolution table, but it would not initially receive all the powers or financial freedoms available to areas such as Greater Manchester.

This raises the question of whether an FSA is intended to be a lasting form of government in its own right or principally a “waiting room” on the way to an elected Surrey mayor.

The Government has said that areas may choose a non-mayoral arrangement, but its most substantial devolution offers have generally been attached to mayoral authorities.

A third level of decision-making

From April 2027, Epsom and Ewell Borough Council and Surrey County Council are due to disappear, with their responsibilities passing to East Surrey Council.

The FSA would sit above both East and West Surrey councils for specified strategic functions. Residents would therefore be governed locally by a unitary council and, on county-wide matters, by the strategic authority.

This would not reproduce the present county-and-borough division because the FSA would have a narrower and more strategic role. Nevertheless, its creation means the replacement of Surrey’s current two-tier system will not leave the county with a single level of local decision-making.

Questions remain about how the FSA would be constituted, how its decisions would be scrutinised, how costs and votes would be divided between East and West Surrey and how clearly residents would be able to identify which authority was responsible for a particular policy.

Why Surrey wants one

Surrey County Council has argued that establishing an FSA will unlock further devolution and allow more decisions and funding to be transferred from central government.

The two shadow councils would remain separate unitary authorities, but the strategic body would preserve a mechanism for county-wide coordination after Surrey County Council is abolished.

Its practical importance will depend on the powers and funding ultimately transferred by ministers. Without substantial resources, the FSA could amount mainly to another coordinating committee. With meaningful control over transport, skills, strategic planning and investment, it could become one of the most influential public bodies affecting Epsom and Ewell.

The central issue identified by the LGUI analysis is therefore not simply whether an FSA is created, but whether it is given sufficient authority, money and public accountability to make a noticeable difference.

Sam Jones – Reporter

.

Related reports

• Plans for East Surrey Council continue to progress – 14 September 2026
• Secret Legal Advice that leaves Surrey high and dry? – 10 September 2026
• The shake up of Epsom and Ewell’s local government: was it all a waste of time as Rayner puts pause on LGR elsewhere? – 7 September 2026
• Surrey eyes a share of its own taxes under devolution plans – 7 August 2026
• Epsom Council leader’s delayed response to additional local government layer initiative – 7 July 2026

Plans for the new East Surrey Council continue to move forward as Surrey’s local government reorganisation programme progresses with the full support of both central government and Surrey leaders. Key decisions are helping shape a modern, locally focused council that will deliver high-quality services for residents and communities.

The East Surrey Shadow Executive met on 14 September to continue preparations for the launch of the new authority on 1 April 2027. Councillors reviewed progress on the implementation of local government reorganisation and considered a number of important decisions that will help ensure services continue smoothly from Vesting Day.

A key decision at the meeting was to approve Woodhatch Place in Reigate as East Surrey Council’s main office from 1 April 2027. This short-term arrangement provides a practical and cost-effective base for the new authority, ensuring it can operate safely and lawfully from day one while longer-term property plans are developed.

Access to council services will remain local and convenient for residents. Existing council offices across East Surrey will continue to provide face-to-face support, alongside online and telephone services, giving residents a choice in how they access help and information.

Looking beyond council boundaries, councillors backed proposals for East Surrey and West Surrey to work together on strategic county-wide issues through a proposed Foundational Strategic Authority. Members recognised the potential benefits for transport, housing, economic growth and local funding, while also calling for further details from government on matters including any future visitor levy and Surrey’s devolution arrangements.

The meeting also explored how communities could play a greater role in shaping the future council. An early East Surrey Council Strategy was discussed, setting out a vision for an inclusive and sustainable East Surrey where people feel heard, supported and connected. Councillors also considered community-led neighbourhood governance arrangements that would give residents and local organisations more influence over local priorities and services.

Protecting local identity and civic traditions was another important area of discussion. Councillors supported the creation of Charter Trustees in Elmbridge and Epsom & Ewell from 1 April 2027, and in Reigate & Banstead if a proposed parish council is not established. These bodies help preserve historic traditions, ceremonial events and local heritage during the transition to the new council structure.

Preparations for Vesting Day also included consideration of the legal agreements needed to create the new councils. These agreements will set out how assets, contracts, responsibilities and financial obligations transfer from Surrey County Council and the district and borough councils to East Surrey and West Surrey, while also establishing how the two authorities will work together on shared services and other arrangements after 1 April 2027.
Councillor Steve Wotton, Leader of the East Surrey Shadow Council, said: “The pace of progress demonstrates our determination to make East Surrey Council a success. Each milestone is taking us closer to creating a council that is shaped by local priorities and focused on what matters most to residents.

“We have a real opportunity to create a stronger platform for long-term economic growth, investment and infrastructure improvements across Surrey, this will help us to rethink on how key services, such as SEND, are delivered for people across our communities.

“By combining services at a strategic level and empowering communities to shape local decisions, we can create better outcomes for residents and build a stronger future for East Surrey.”

In the months ahead, shadow councillors will use Section 24 powers to review and approve key financial decisions as Surrey prepares for the creation of East Surrey and West Surrey councils. This will help protect the finances of the new councils by ensuring major spending commitments made before 1 April 2027 are in the long-term interests of residents and support a strong start for the new authorities.

Surrey County Council

The CEO of the newly created West Surrey Council is set to pocket a £236,485 annual salary.

Susan Halliwell, currently oversees Bracknell Forest Council and is expected to take over the top job after beating out nine other applicants.

Her recommendation follows a lengthy national recruitment campaign that was supplemented with an active search by recruiters GatenbySanderson who contacted 147 serving chief executives and those with experience of leading in a unitary or upper tier environments.

A long-list of six candidates were then invited to attend technical interviews led by an experienced unitary council chief executive who had  been through Local Government Reorganisation themselves.

Five candidates were then invited to take part in a comprehensive assessment process on September 3 at Millmead House in Guildford. 

---

Epsom and Ewell Times adds to this LDRS report some comparisons:

Office	Annual salary
UK Prime Minister	£174,039
First Minister of Scotland	£190,284
First Minister of Wales	£174,600
Chief Executive, Surrey County Council	approximately £237,000

---

This was to assess their strategic leadership capability, political awareness, stakeholder engagement skills and readiness to lead West Surrey Council through its establishment and beyond Vesting Day, documents read.

In the end Susan’s experience, leadership approach, and values that aligned with the ambitions of West Surrey, led her to be considered a strong fit.

Susan’s chief executive and senior leadership experience has seen her carry the responsibility for a workforce of more than 2,300 staff and a budget of over £400m.

She is said to have a strong track record of organisational transformation, financial stewardship, service reform and delivery of political priorities.

Interim head of paid service Andy Brown has been overseeing the role out of the new council while a permanent appointment is made.. He will remain in post while transition arrangements are finalised.

Councillor Paul Follows, Leader of the West Surrey Shadow Council, said: “I am delighted that Susan Halliwell has been identified as our preferred candidate for chief executive of West Surrey Council.

“Susan is an outstanding and highly respected local government leader with a proven track record of delivering large-scale transformation and improvement. She has successfully led organisations through significant change while maintaining a relentless focus on improving outcomes for residents and creating positive working environments for staff.

“Subject to full council agreement, I am looking forward to working closely with her to create a council that delivers excellent services, supports thriving communities and provides strong local leadership across West Surrey.

“I would also like to thank Andy Brown for his dedication and leadership as Interim Head of Paid Service for the West Surrey Shadow Council. Andy has played a crucial role in helping us prepare for vesting day and establish strong foundations for the new authority. We are grateful for his continued support until Susan takes up her post.”

Prior to joining Bracknell Forest Council, Susan served as executive director of place at West Berkshire Council and held senior leadership roles at Oxfordshire County Council.

The West Surrey Conservative group has also welcomed the recommendation and wished her success in the new role.

Cllr Jane Austin said: “Conservatives have been closely involved throughout the recruitment process, and know the strength of the field from which this appointment has been made.

“The scale of the task of bringing together six existing councils, several of which face significant challenges, should not be underestimated. 

“We look forward to working with our new chief executive to build a financially sustainable council which delivers excellent services and represents all our communities.”

Chris Caulfield Local Democracy Reporter

.

Sue Halliwell (image SCC)

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

A Grade II* listed site on the edge of the Surrey Hills where a major Hollywood blockbuster was filmed is to be turned into a £200m housing and leisure complex.

Planning permission has been approved to turn the former Legal and General building and surrounding lands into 299 homes, two swimming pools, and office space – with speculation it could be operated by David Lloyd.

The project, led by City and Country Residential, will be constructed in phases, and includes the refurbishment and conversion of the Legal & General House – where the DC hit Wonder Woman starring Gal Gadot and Pedro Pascal spent eight weeks filming.

The site will be split into 122 later living  units and supporting facilities, and up to 177 private homes. Its vast 1,500 capacity car park will be reduced to 709 spaces.

Legal and General House, in St Monicas Road, Kingswood, sits within 19 hectares in the green belt nestled about a kilometre from the boundary of Surrey Hills with the designs following a previously approved 2019 application.

Key changes included more market housing and the leisure facility that will feature playing courts and a sports pavilion available for public use. 

The Wednesday September 9 planning committee at Reigate and Banstead Borough Council heard the development was needed to fund the repairs of the grade 2* listed building and ensure its future occupancy. 

To the disappointment of the committee, the developers said it was unable to provide on-site affordable housing as it would have made the project unaffordable.

Councillor Sam Walsh (Conservative: Banstead Village) said: “I wouldn’t have listed it, if anything, I’d have demolished it. It’s an absolutely awful building.

“Its a dreadful blot on the landscape but actually the application we have in front of us, notwithstanding the points of the viability, bringing more into use and the standalone leisure facility. I think is important for the community.”

He added that the plans “turned  around a pretty revolting design of the excesses of the 80s and 90s to quiet a sophisticated residential development.”

Cllr Michael Blacker (Conservative: Reigate) said: “I think we’ve got to welcome the development and the housing and I’m very pleased to see they were going to put a sports centre in, whether its David Lloyd or not. 

“I think that will be a very good feature and I hope it will be well used.”

Chris Caulfield Local Democracy Reporter

.

Image: Legal and General House, where the DC movie Wonder Woman was filmed, will be turned into housing (image RBBC)

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

A proposed attraction celebrating Ali G in Staines has been rejected by councillors after a petition backing the move gained enough signatures to be put forward for debate.

The petition, which was signed by more than 300 residents, called for a temporary landmark to tie in with the Sacha Baron Cohen character’s new film.

Staines famously changed its name to Staines-upon-Thames in 2012, which was widely believed to be linked to negative attention brought by the fictional resident’s 2002 hit film.

But speaking before a Spelthorne Borough Council committee, petition organiser Alex Balkan said: “I’m not asking you tonight to approve an Ali G statue. I’m asking you to explore an opportunity for Staines.”

He added: “Beneath the humour is a serious question about our town centre. Can an association Staines already has, be turned into more visitors, more footfall and more spending?”

Mr Balkan believes an Ali G attraction would bring an economic boost to the town, and cited Manchester’s Bee in the City installation from 2018 as a possible model for inspiration.

However, several councillors on the corporate policy and resources committee were dismayed at the proposal, pointing to the character’s divisive legacy in Staines.

Councillor Howard Williams (Independent Spelthorne Group: Staines) said: “Every resident I have spoken to has given me very clear guidance that they do not support anything that promotes Ali G in this borough.”

He added: “Ali G has consistently belittled every location he’s ever visited. My view on this is it’s a strong – no, no, no.”

The petition also calls on the council to approach actor Sacha Baron Cohen to ask for his support on the potential project – and makes clear that it does not want the statue to be funded by residents’ council tax.

While others praised Mr Balkan for taking time to organise a petition and inspiring the debate, many councillors felt the negative impression of Staines left by the original film made it hard to support an attraction.

However, some members of the committee were a little more positive about the proposals, and took Mr Balkan’s point that Ali G had helped put Staines on the map.

Councillor Darren Clarke (Conservative: Laleham and Shepperton Green) told the committee: “There’s something about a confident person being able to laugh at themselves. 

“And this is a really important thing. If you are confident, you can laugh at yourself.”

He added: “We have a real lack of confidence within Spelthorne, and this young man [Mr Balkan] is looking at ways of how we can build confidence. How can we make the high street a better place to be?”

But ultimately, committee members overwhelmingly voted against pursuing a temporary Ali G attraction as suggested by the petition.

Following the decision, Mr Balkan told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS): “What’s clear is that no matter how strong the economic case, no matter how many local businesses supported it, none of that mattered to the majority of councillors – Ali G hurt their feelings. 

“Spelthorne Council could not, after over 20 years, take the joke and allow the high street to benefit.”

He added: “I hope we can push something that helps the high street next time which does have the council’s support, and is less controversial. 

“But life is a choice of what is right and what is easy – sometimes doing the right thing will upset people.”

A Spelthorne Borough Council spokesperson said: “The petition was formally received and debated by the committee in line with the established process. 

“After considering the proposal, the committee decided not to support it at this time, recognising the need to focus on other priorities – particularly protecting and delivering essential local services and preparing for the ongoing local government reorganisation.”

James Moules Local Democracy Reporter

Related report:

Staines Ali G fans hope for Massiv support for statue

The legal advice that forced the nationwide cancellation of local government reorganisation, with the single exception of Surrey because it was too far down the track, will be kept private, the secretary of state said.

It has led to fears the county has been ‘thrown under the bus’ with Surrey County Council and its 11 boroughs and districts set to dissolve and be merged into two mega authorities under shadowy legal circumstances.

Last year the county was selected to be fast-tracked to undergo generational reorganising. Councils that had stood for more than half a century would be closed down and their services merged – with residents told it would save money.

It was then to be rolled out across the country but this week came the shock announcement the entire process, save for Surrey where elections had already taken place , would be put on ice.

Those who called to see the legal advice that caused the seismic u-turn were told it wasn’t government policy to divulge such information.

West Surrey leader Councillor Paul Follows, writing to Angela Rayner, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities, and Local Government, said: “The change in approach to local government reorganisation (LGR) set out in your ministerial statement…has raised several questions about the process undertake in Surrey.

“Your statement referred to legal advice that has informed the position of the present administration of national government, to the effect that the LGR process to date was not sufficiently robust or legally sound.”

He said understood Surrey’s position, that legislation to create the East and West Surrey Councils had been passed and elections held, but called for the new legal position to be shared so Surrey could best understand its new landscape.

He added: “If that decision making process has been deemed legally faulty or otherwise unsound I would like to ask for the opportunity for my officer to asses the potential impact on West Surrey, and in particular the crucial matters of finance and inherited debt.

“Would it be possible to have a copy of the legal advice on which the government has based its decision to pause the next tranches of LGR.

“I ask this solely to help correct or  compensate for any deficiencies now identified by your department and to ensure the residents of West Surrey are not adversely impacted.”

Speaking in the House of Commons, Guildford MP Zoe Franklin echoed the call for the legal advice’s publication so communities could understand what went wrong with the original process.

She added: “In my own area of Surrey, councils were forced down a reorganisation route that now appears to be effectively abandoned by the Government and questionable on a legal basis. 

“Will the Secretary of State commit to meeting Surrey MPs and the new authority leaders to discuss how our county can avoid the risks and uncertainty that the Government say have prompted this decision elsewhere?”

MP Monica Harding, said: “My constituents in Esher and Walton, in Surrey, are left wondering whether they have been thrown under the bus by a Government who failed to be secure in the legal advice and the costs from the very beginning. 

“This is incompetent. 

“Will the Government release the legal advice? What are the legal implications for Surrey? 

“What extra support will she give Surrey regarding the cost implications?”

Surrey Heath MP Al Pinkerton said: “One of the potential unintended consequences of today’s announcement is to leave Surrey in the slightly discomfiting position of being in an experimental cohort with a sample size of one, the one county being reorganised under this legislation.

He added: “Do the legal concerns that the Secretary of State has expressed today also relate to Surrey?

“If Surrey is affected by those legal concerns, what faith should my residents have that this experiment is not going to come fully off the rails before April 1, 2027?”

The Secretary of State said she understood the strength of feeling but told the commons: “I considered the legal advice provided as part of the judicial review process, and the decision to withdraw the decision reflected updated legal clarity.

“It is a long-standing principle that the Government do not publish or comment on legal advice.

“I have been clear that I want to be able to review these decisions to ensure, as the new Secretary of State, that they are the right ones. 

“We will consider the programme in the round in the light of the Government’s priorities, as set out in “Rewiring the State”, and Ministers will meet with Members of this House and will set out decisions at our earliest opportunity.”

Asked after the debate whether it would publish the advice, the department reiterated the ministerial statements raised in the commons.

Chris Caulfield Local Democracy Reporter

.

Related report:

The shake up of Epsom and Ewell’s local government: was it all a waste of time as Rayner puts pause on LGR elsewhere?

Epsom & Ewell Borough Council is inviting residents to share messages of encouragement and support as part of the Messages of Hope campaign, marking World Suicide Prevention Day on 10 September.

Part of the council’s Health and Wellbeing Strategy, the initiative aims to help people feel connected, reduce the stigma around mental health, raise awareness of local support services and resources, and provide messages of hope to people who may be facing mental health challenges or affected by the loss of someone to suicide.

Messages of Hope display boards will be located at several locations across the borough. Residents are invited to write a message of hope for others and read or take a message that resonates with them. Information about local mental health support services and resources will be available at each location.

From 10 to 17 September, residents can write a message of hope and pin it to one of the boards located at:

• Ashley Centre, Epsom
• Bourne Hall Library, Ewell
• Epsom Library
• Epsom Picturehouse
• St John’s Church, Stoneleigh

Chief Executive of Epsom & Ewell Borough Council, Jackie King, Chair of the Community & Wellbeing Committee, Councillor Clive Woodbridge, and the Mayor of Epsom & Ewell, Councillor Lucie McIntyre, will add their own messages to the board at the Ashley Centre on 10 September.

Epsom Picturehouse will host a free Letters of Hope workshop in its café area on 10 September from 2pm to 4pm, led by local facilitator Kate McBarron. Participants will be guided through letter-writing techniques and prompts to help them create messages of hope, with time afterwards to continue writing. To book a place, email epsom.marketing@picturehouses.co.uk or call 07841 724938.

Councillor Clive Woodbridge, Chair of the Community and Wellbeing Committee said: “Mental health challenges can affect anyone, and they can have a profound impact on individuals, families and friends.

“World Suicide Prevention Day is an opportunity to raise awareness, encourage conversations and remind people that small acts of kindness can make a real difference. Through Messages of Hope, we want to show that Epsom & Ewell is a community that cares, where people look out for one another and where nobody has to face difficult times alone.”

“I would encourage anyone who is experiencing mental health difficulties, or who is concerned about someone they know, to reach out for help. One life lost is too much.”

Information about local mental health support and resources can be found here: Mental Health Support and Resources | Epsom and Ewell Borough Council  

About the EEBC Messages of Hope campaign

The Message of Hope campaign aims to create moments of human connection, reduce stigma around emotional wellbeing, and provide accessible messages of hope to anyone who may be struggling. This campaign does not replace professional support; it complements existing suicide prevention efforts by creating opportunities for compassion, conversation, and hope across the borough.

About Epsom’s Picturehouse free letter-writing technique workshop, supported by EEBC

Epsom’s Picturehouse cinema in Epsom Square will be opening its café space for a free Letters of Hope workshop on September 10th, led by local facilitator Kate McBarron. Kate will lead an hour of guided letter-writing techniques, prompts and inspiration from 2pm, followed by time for participants to continue writing and use the resources provided.

About the EEBC Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2025-2028

The strategy supports all residents, with particular attention given to children and young people, older adults, individuals whose health is affected by broader social and economic factors and those whose personal circumstances may disproportionately increase their vulnerability to poor health and wellbeing. The strategy also includes specific references to those who are disproportionately impacted by isolation, disability, digital exclusion and people with long-term health conditions. (Public Pack) Agenda Document for Community and Wellbeing Committee, 08/07/2025 19:30

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council

Woodhatch Place in Reigate has been recommended as the preferred location for East Surrey Council’s main office building from 1 April 2027.

If approved by the East Surrey Shadow Executive on 14 September, this essential, short-term decision will help ensure the new council can operate effectively and maintain continuity of services for residents from the day it is established, as well as providing a flexible workspace for staff

The recommendation is intended to give East Surrey Council a suitable base from day one, while allowing time to develop longer-term plans for its offices and buildings across the area.

Continued access to local council services

Residents will continue to be able to visit existing local council offices across East Surrey to enquire about council services and seek support. Online and telephone services will also continue to be available, ensuring residents can access information and support in the way that works for them.

The proposal of Woodhatch as East Surrey’s initial headquarters, will not affect how residents access council services in their local communities.

Councillor Steve Wotton, Leader, East Surrey Shadow Council said: “This recommendation is about making sure East Surrey Council has the right facilities in place to operate effectively from day one and continue delivering services for residents without disruption. Woodhatch Place offers a practical and cost-effective base for the new council’s administrative functions, while giving us time to consider longer-term arrangements for council buildings across East Surrey. Importantly, residents will continue to be able to access services locally through existing council offices, as well as online and by telephone.”

How was the recommendation made?

A range of council-owned buildings across East Surrey were assessed against several criteria, including accessibility, transport links, office and council chamber capacity, value for money, IT infrastructure and parking provision.

The assessment identified Woodhatch Place as the location best able to meet the operational requirements of the new authority from 1 April 2027.

The recommendation does not determine future staffing structures or individual employee work locations. Any workforce changes will be considered separately after 1 April 2027 and would include staff engagement and consultation where required.

A report detailing proposals for civic functions will be considered at a later date and will include information about proposed meeting locations and times.

Surrey County Council

---

Epsom and Ewell Times adds:

East Surrey’s new council HQ: where is it and how do Epsom residents reach it?

Surrey County Council has confirmed that Woodhatch Place in Reigate will become the headquarters of the new East Surrey Council when the authority takes over local services on 1 April 2027.

The announcement did not, however, include the building’s full postal address. It is:

Woodhatch Place
11 Cockshot Hill
Reigate
Surrey
RH2 8EF

Woodhatch Place is not a new council building. Originally constructed as the headquarters of Canon UK, it was purchased by Surrey County Council in 2020 and became the County Council’s principal administrative base in 2021. East Surrey Council will therefore inherit an established public-sector headquarters rather than commission a new one.

Epsom and Ewell will form part of the new East Surrey unitary authority. The location of its headquarters will consequently matter to residents, councillors, council employees and anyone required to attend a meeting or appointment in person.

Getting there from Epsom

The most straightforward public-transport journey from Epsom High Street is by bus.

Metrobus route 460 runs from Epsom Clock Tower through Tattenham Corner, Tadworth, Walton-on-the-Hill and Lower Kingswood to Reigate. During the main part of a weekday, buses generally leave Epsom hourly.

For example, the current published weekday timetable includes a 460 leaving Epsom Clock Tower at 9.18am and reaching Reigate, Bancroft Road at 10.07am – a scheduled journey of 49 minutes. Other daytime departures are shown at 10.18am, 11.18am, 12.18pm and then hourly through much of the afternoon. Metrobus route 460 timetable

Woodhatch Place is south of Reigate town centre, rather than beside Reigate railway station or the principal town-centre bus stops. A passenger therefore has two main choices after reaching Reigate:

• Walk from the town centre to Woodhatch Place. The distance is approximately one to one-and-a-quarter miles and is likely to take around 20 to 25 minutes, depending upon the precise stopping point and the walker’s pace.
• Change in Reigate to a local 430 or 435 bus serving South Park and Woodhatch. One example using the current timetable would be the 9.18am bus from Epsom, arriving at Bancroft Road at 10.07am, followed by a 435 at approximately 10.21am towards South Park and Woodhatch. It reaches the Hornbeam Road area at about 10.31am, followed by a short walk to Woodhatch Place. Metrobus routes 430 and 435

Allowing for the connection and final walk, a public-transport journey from Epsom High Street to the new headquarters is likely to take about one hour and 15 minutes to one hour and 30 minutes. Traffic through Tadworth, Reigate and surrounding roads can lengthen the journey.

A rail journey is possible but much less direct. Epsom and Reigate are not joined by a simple direct train service, so travelling by rail ordinarily involves changes and, depending upon the route chosen, a further bus or walk from Reigate station. For most passengers starting in Epsom town centre, the 460 is therefore likely to be the more practical option.

Residents should check a journey planner or the operator’s live timetable before travelling, particularly once East Surrey Council begins operating, as routes and departure times may change before April 2027.

Although digital and telephone contact will undoubtedly account for most dealings with the new authority, the Reigate headquarters raises a practical question for Epsom and Ewell residents: whether a journey of potentially 90 minutes each way constitutes sufficiently convenient access to the administrative centre of their new council.

Surrey’s political leaders insist the replacement of the county’s 12 councils by two large unitary authorities remains on schedule. But a government review of local government reorganisation elsewhere in England has reopened questions about whether Surrey was right to proceed so quickly with its own costly transformation.

A major retreat by the Government over the restructuring of English local government has inevitably reopened the argument over whether Surrey was right to rush ahead with its own reorganisation.

Housing, Communities and Local Government Secretary Angela Rayner has announced a national review following what her department described as “updated and privileged legal advice”.

Decisions affecting Essex, Hampshire, Norfolk and Suffolk have been withdrawn. Plans for a further 14 areas have been paused, along with reorganisation proposals for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough and West Sussex which had not yet been settled.

Existing councils in those areas will now hold elections in May 2027 on their current boundaries.

The change is highly significant. Only months ago ministers were presenting the abolition of county and district councils across England as an essential part of creating simpler and more economical local government.

Ms Rayner said she wanted to be satisfied that the correct process was in place, that it complied with the law and that the proposals remained consistent with the priorities of a new Prime Minister and administration.

The precise legal advice has not been disclosed because the Government says it is privileged. It follows a succession of threatened or commenced judicial reviews challenging ministers’ selection of boundaries for the new councils.

In Essex, the county council began legal proceedings after former Communities Secretary Steve Reed selected a five-unitary arrangement rather than an option for fewer and larger authorities which was reportedly preferred by departmental officials. Challenges were also launched or contemplated in Hampshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, Portsmouth and Kent.

The Government’s wider retreat has been described by the Local Government Information Unit as threatening to turn the programme into a “colossal white elephant”, consuming thousands of hours of council officers’ and councillors’ time.

Surrey says it remains on course

Surrey’s councils responded quickly to the national announcement by reaffirming their commitment to creating East Surrey Council and West Surrey Council on 1 April 2027.

In a joint release issued through Surrey County Council, they said the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government had confirmed that Surrey would not be affected by the review.

The councils said significant work had already been undertaken to develop the proposals, consult partners and communities and prepare for the transfer of services. They maintained that the new structure would simplify local government, strengthen accountability and improve services.

Councillor Steve Wotton, Leader of the shadow East Surrey Council, which includes Epsom and Ewell, said: “Government has been clear that Surrey’s local government reorganisation programme remains on track.

“Councils across Surrey have worked at pace to develop robust proposals that will deliver long-term benefits for residents, businesses and communities. We remain confident that reorganisation will create stronger, more sustainable local government and help us deliver better outcomes for local people.”

Councillor Paul Follows, Leader of West Surrey Council, said significant progress had already been made and that partners were continuing to work constructively together.

“We remain committed to delivering reorganisation successfully and ensuring that residents, colleagues and partners are supported throughout the transition,” he said.

Residents have been assured that existing councils will continue delivering services normally until the transfer takes place.

The Surrey statement addresses the immediate practical question: the national review will not delay Surrey’s changeover. It does not, however, resolve the wider question raised by the Government’s change of course: whether the original national programme, including the accelerated Surrey process, was soundly conceived.

Why Surrey is different

Surrey has progressed considerably further than the areas placed under review.

The Government decided in October 2025 that Surrey County Council and the county’s 11 district and borough councils should be replaced by two authorities.

East Surrey will encompass Epsom and Ewell, Elmbridge, Mole Valley, Reigate and Banstead and Tandridge. West Surrey will cover Guildford, Runnymede, Spelthorne, Surrey Heath, Waverley and Woking.

The Surrey (Structural Changes) Order 2026 was approved by Parliament, made on 9 March and brought into force on 10 March. Elections for both new councils took place in May.

East and West Surrey now exist as shadow authorities. They are preparing budgets, staffing structures, constitutions and service arrangements before assuming full responsibility on 1 April 2027.

On that date Surrey County Council, Epsom and Ewell Borough Council and the other ten borough and district councils will be abolished.

Surrey therefore cannot simply be added to the list of paused areas through an administrative announcement. Reversing course would require ministers and Parliament to undo an order already in force, deal with two elected shadow authorities and decide whether the councils marked for abolition should instead be preserved.

The existence of that legal and democratic machinery probably explains why ministers have chosen to let Surrey continue. It does not necessarily amount to a fresh examination or endorsement of the merits of the two-unitary model.

Nor does it establish that the legal difficulties identified elsewhere could never have affected the earlier Surrey process. Ministers have not published the new advice or explained in detail why it applies to later decisions but not to Surrey.

The cost before the savings

Surrey’s own published figures show that reorganisation is not a cost-free exercise.

The May 2026 implementation plan estimates that setting up the two new councils before April 2027 will cost £35.3 million.

Surrey County Council is expected to provide £28.24 million. The remaining 20 per cent is being divided among the borough and district councils according to their council tax bases.

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council’s allocated contribution is £454,094.

That £35.3 million covers work before the new councils take over. The implementation plan expressly states that costs incurred after April 2027 will have to be funded by East and West Surrey themselves. The eventual total may therefore be higher.

There are also costs which are harder to place on a balance sheet: senior officers and specialist staff diverted from ordinary council work, consultants and legal advisers, harmonising computer systems and employment terms, splitting Surrey County Council’s budget and assets, rewriting contracts and policies and deciding what happens to hundreds of council-owned properties.

Council tax levels and services which currently differ between boroughs must also eventually be reconciled.

Supporters argue that these are one-off investments which will produce larger recurring savings. The Surrey business case forecast that savings could begin in the first year and increase substantially from year three. Later financial papers quoted a projected saving of about £23 million a year by year five, after allowing for continuing implementation costs.

If those savings are achieved and sustained, a £35.3 million initial expenditure would not by itself prove waste. It could be recovered within a comparatively short period once the full annual savings materialise.

The more difficult question is whether the promised savings will survive the practical complexities of combining 12 councils.

Two councils, but very different financial inheritances

The two new authorities will begin with markedly different financial problems.

Every existing Surrey council is forecasting a medium-term budget gap. West Surrey must also absorb the consequences of Woking Borough Council’s financial collapse and Spelthorne Borough Council’s debt and investment difficulties.

The Government has announced exceptional assistance for Woking, but reorganising boundaries does not make underlying borrowing disappear. Debt, assets, liabilities and interest costs still have to be allocated or supported.

East Surrey avoids Woking’s particular difficulties but will inherit its share of Surrey County Council’s pressures in adult social care, children’s services, special educational needs and school transport. These are among the most expensive and rapidly growing areas of council expenditure.

Unitary status may make it easier to coordinate housing, social care, roads, waste, planning and public health. It does not remove the demographic and financial pressures driving those services.

The Government’s original case for the Surrey changes promised fewer senior managers and councillors, reduced duplication, clearer accountability and more joined-up services.

It suggested, for example, that families needing help with education, social care and housing would no longer have to navigate separate county and borough organisations.

Those are plausible benefits, but they remain promises rather than demonstrated results.

What Epsom and Ewell loses

For Epsom and Ewell, the question is not only financial.

The borough, with its own civic identity and relatively small geographical area, will become one part of an authority stretching from Elmbridge in the west to Tandridge in the east. Decisions presently taken at Epsom Town Hall will ultimately be made by a much larger council serving around half of Surrey.

The number of councils may be reduced, but the distance between residents and the principal decision-making body will increase. Planning, licensing, parks, refuse collection, homelessness and other distinctly local services will be transferred to East Surrey.

That sits uneasily with the claim in the councils’ latest statement that reorganisation will strengthen local accountability.

Area committees, community boards or similar arrangements may be established to maintain a connection with individual towns and communities. Epsom and Ewell’s proposed Charter Trustees could preserve the mayoralty and some civic traditions, but would not replace the borough council’s service-delivery or decision-making powers.

If funded through an additional local precept, the Charter Trustees would also create a modest new layer of cost beneath the new unitary authority.

The tension is clear: reorganisation seeks savings through scale while simultaneously having to devise new structures to restore some of the local connection which that scale removes.

Was it all a waste?

The Government’s pause does not, by itself, prove that Surrey’s reorganisation has been a waste of time and money.

Surrey’s two councils have been established in law, their councillors have been elected and implementation is well under way. Stopping now could waste more of the work and expenditure already committed while creating legal and administrative confusion.

Surrey leaders are also entitled to point to the amount of preparation already undertaken and the need to give certainty to residents, council employees, contractors and voluntary organisations.

Nevertheless, the national reversal seriously weakens the confidence with which the programme was sold.

The policy was announced in the December 2024 English Devolution White Paper and was not contained in Labour’s 2024 general election manifesto, as recorded in the House of Commons Library’s July 2026 briefing.

Surrey was placed on an accelerated timetable, submitting proposals in May 2025 while most other areas were given until the autumn.

Residents were asked to accept postponed elections, hurried consultation and a fundamental alteration of local democracy on the basis that the national direction was settled and the financial case compelling.

Less than two years later, ministers are checking whether much of that programme was lawful, procedurally robust or even consistent with the new administration’s priorities.

Surrey appears to have crossed the bridge just before the Government closed it for a structural inspection.

Whether that makes Surrey fortunate or merely the first county irrevocably committed to a questionable experiment will not be answered by ministerial assurances or council press releases.

It will depend on measurable results after April 2027: the final transition bill, actual rather than forecast savings, council tax levels, the quality of services and whether residents still feel that local decisions are being made locally.

For now, the fairest conclusion is that Surrey’s reorganisation is too advanced to be treated as abandoned expenditure, but nowhere near advanced enough to be declared money well spent.

Lionel Blackman

.

Image: Angela Rayner Official Cabinet Portrait, July 2024

Related reports

• How two became one became three – how “unitary” means “trinity” – 25 August 2026
• Tiers not shed for local government in Surrey after all…? – 25 August 2026
• Epsom and Ewell Council votes for continuing a local Mayoralty after its abolition, for a small fee – 22 July 2026
• Big spending must be approved by new Councils from now – 9 July 2026
• East Surrey Unitary lack of devolution detail – 16 April 2026
• Tiers to be shed if Epsom and Ewell loses its Borough Council – 23 December 2024