A Surrey council is now turning to hiring a senior lawyer after a fiery debate over the future of a hotel which is set to house exclusively single male asylum seekers. 

Spelthorne Borough Council voted unanimously to explore all legal avenues to address residents’ safety concerns but the chaotic debate exposed constraints over procedure and powers. 

Council leader Joanne Sexton said the council will explore “all avenues” to find a solution. “Stanwell just isn’t a suitable place for single male asylum seekers,” she told the council at an extraordinary meeting on September 4.

The Home Office said the government was working to reduce the use of hotels as part of a “complete overhaul” of the asylum system.

Most councillors backed a motion to hire a senior barrister to look at all ways to block the hotel’s use. The move came as a reaction to a Court of Appeal decision allowing asylum seekers to be housed at The Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex – a case now set for a Supreme Court Appeal.

Cllr Med Buck said: “The residents of Stanwell, and indeed across Spelthorne, have spoken. They are worried about the community’s safety.” He added: “What I hear is not prejudices. It’s fear. ” Cllr Buck explained residents fear crime, safety of the children and pressure on local services.

Opponents raised concerns about the costs, the timing and whether hiring a senior barrister would achieve anything- with one councillor labelling it as potentially wasteful. 

Cllr Darren Clarke, told the meeting: “What the nation is doing at the moment is entering the court of public opinion and saying, ‘up with it, we will not put, we are not happy’.'” He said people are starting to realise they have power and they will not be silenced.

Residents have been lobbying the council for months over concerns about the hotel, which they describe as causing disruption and safety issues in the local area. Councillors stressed the importance of listening to those concerns while staying within the law.

During the meeting, councillors repeatedly stressed the need for clarity on legal limits before taking action. Officers said the council needs to tread carefully to avoid pre-determining outcomes which could leave the council open to a judicial review.

Councillor Buck urged colleagues to “stand tall” and act decisively for the community, while others emphasised that the council must balance residents’ concerns with procedural and legal obligations. For Stanwell, the outcome is clear: the council will now pursue all available options, but under the watchful eye of legal experts to avoid missteps.

The next steps are expected to involve detailed legal advice on licensing, planning, and potential court actions.