Spelthorne councillors refused every ask in the 332-name Ali G petition on 8 September. The decision sheet gives no reasons, and the film lands on 23 October.
Spelthorne Borough Council has turned down the petition asking it to mark the town’s Ali G connection around the release of the new film.
The Corporate Policy and Resources Committee took item 9 on Tuesday 8 September. Its decision, published in the council’s printed decisions sheet, is one sentence:
The Committee resolved not to take the action requested for reasons put forward in the debate.
That refuses all six of the petition’s asks, not part of them. The petition had 332 signatures: 232 on the council’s e-petition page, and 100 more signed on paper by people who work in Staines, according to its organiser, Alex Balkan. The paper signatures do not show on the council’s online petition page.
What the petition wanted
The e-petition ran on the council’s own website from 26 July to 24 August. It asked the council to:
- set up a time-limited partnership with Visit Staines BID, residents, businesses and community organisations
- approach Sacha Baron Cohen, his representatives and the rights holders early, inviting him to help shape and potentially fund it
- explore a temporary licensed attraction, event or photo opportunity while the film is being promoted
- develop a permanent statue, sculpture or landmark only if external funding was secured for its design, installation and upkeep
- include a donation facility for affordable sport, arts and leisure activities for children and young people in Staines
- make sure the whole thing met the council’s legal, financial, planning, safety and ethical requirements
It was explicit about the money. “The petition does not ask the Council to immediately purchase a statue using Council Tax,” it reads. We set out the full text and the timing when the petition reached the committee’s agenda.
Why 332 names was enough to get a hearing, and no more
This is the part that decided how far the petition could travel, and it turns on a table in the council’s own petition scheme.
Spelthorne sets its response by the number of signatures, and it uses two columns: one for a single ward issue, one for an issue affecting two or more wards.
| Single ward issue | Two or more wards | What the council does |
|---|---|---|
| Fewer than 30 | Fewer than 30 | Answered by an officer as ordinary correspondence |
| At least 200 | At least 300 | Referred to the relevant service committee |
| At least 300 | At least 400 | Staff can be called to give evidence at that committee |
| At least 1,000 | At least 4,500 | Debated at a meeting of full Council |
The organiser’s target was more than 300, the threshold for a committee to consider a petition on an issue affecting two or more wards. At 332, the petition cleared it by 32 signatures. That is the only reason it was heard by councillors at all.
It fell 68 short of the 400 that would have let the petitioners require council staff to give evidence, and 4,168 short of the 4,500 that would have forced a debate at full Council. Under the scheme the lead petitioner gets three minutes to present at the committee, and councillors then discuss it.
Corrected 17 September: this section first gave the petition 232 signatures and measured it against the single ward column. The organiser tells us 100 paper signatures take the total to 332, and that the 300 threshold applied.
The council has published the decision, not the reasons
The decisions sheet says the committee acted “for reasons put forward in the debate”. It does not say what those reasons were, and no officer report or recommendation was published for item 9 in the first place. The agenda simply asked the committee “to consider a petition”.
The draft minutes of the 8 September meeting have not been published. On this council’s usual pattern they appear in the papers for the next meeting of the same committee, which means the reasons are unlikely to be public for several weeks.
One further detail is on the decisions sheet itself. Item 9 is marked with an asterisk, and the notes printed underneath say the asterisk identifies matters to which the call-in procedure does not apply. For most decisions, three councillors from two or more political groups can ask for a review within three working days. Not this one.
The clock the petition was working to
The petition was built around a date. Sacha Baron Cohen’s film Ali G: Who Iz I? is released on 23 October 2026, according to the petition text, which is the reason it asked for a “time-limited” partnership and a temporary attraction “during the new film’s promotional period”.
The film is real and close. The British Board of Film Classification has already classified two cinema trailers for it, on 27 August and 4 September 2026, both distributed by Columbia Pictures Corporation Ltd, and its record lists Sacha Baron Cohen as director. It is the character’s first film since Ali G Indahouse in 2002, whose plot has Ali G campaigning to save a community leisure centre. The petition leaned on that, asking for money to go to activities for local children and young people.
The decision on 8 September leaves roughly six weeks between the council saying no and the film arriving. Nothing in the decision stops the Visit Staines BID, a business or a resident doing something independently. It only settles what the council itself will do, which is nothing.
What it means for you
- The petition is finished. It closed to signatures on 24 August and was refused on 8 September. There is no further stage in the scheme for it.
- You will not find the reasons yet. They were given in debate and are not in the published decision. Watch for the draft minutes in the next Corporate Policy and Resources agenda.
- The decision cannot be called in. The council’s own notes mark item 9 as outside the call-in procedure.
- A new petition is possible, and the number that matters is 200 or 300. Anyone who lives, works or studies in Spelthorne can start one, on paper or through the council’s e-petitions page. Thirty signatures brings the formal scheme into play; 200 for a single ward issue, or 300 for one affecting two or more wards, gets it in front of a committee; 1,000 or 4,500 forces a debate at full Council. Paper signatures count alongside online ones.
Related
- Ali G statue petition reaches Staines councillors: the full petition text and how it got on the agenda.
- Memorial Gardens games area dropped.
- Staines masterplan consultation: the council’s own plan for the town centre.
- Things to do in Staines-upon-Thames.
Sources
- Spelthorne Borough Council, Corporate Policy and Resources Committee, agenda and decisions, 8 September 2026, and the printed decisions PDF from the same page, for the item 9 decision, the asterisk and the call-in notes.
- Spelthorne Borough Council, ePetition: Celebrate Ali G in Staines-upon-Thames with a film-release attraction, community fundraising and a potential permanent landmark, for the six asks, the dates it ran, the 232 online signatures and the 23 October release date it cites.
- Spelthorne Borough Council, information about petitions, for the 30, 200, 300, 400, 1,000 and 4,500 thresholds and the three minutes given to a lead petitioner.
- Alex Balkan, the petition’s organiser, for the 100 paper signatures, the 332 total and the 300 target.
- British Board of Film Classification, Ali G: Who Iz I?, for the title, the director and the two trailers classified on 27 August and 4 September 2026.
Have your say