UK Government Defends Higher Costs for Housing Asylum Seekers in Military Barracks
Table of Contents
Amid growing public concern, Downing Street is defending a plan to perhaps spend more to house asylum seekers in disused military sites – including barracks – rather than hotels, arguing that addressing public disquiet justifies the increased expense.The move comes as plans to accommodate tens of thousands of individuals in former military facilities are facing criticism from refugee organizations and local politicians.
New Military Sites Announced
The Home Office announced plans to begin using two military sites – RAF Wethersfield in Essex and HMS Inskip in lancashire – starting next month. Officials indicated these sites represent the initial phase of a broader effort to accommodate as many as 10,000 people on Ministry of Defense land.
Public Concerns and Rising Costs
The government’s decision follows widespread protests this summer regarding the use of hotels to house asylum seekers, occurring in cities across England – including Bristol, Liverpool, and London – as well as in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. A spokesperson for the Prime Minister stated that the issue of accommodation has become “an issue of public confidence,” adding, “We know that communities don’t want asylum seekers housed in hotels, and neither does the government.”
The government aims to close all hotels currently used for asylum seeker accommodation, potentially saving taxpayers billions of pounds. Though, past attempts to reduce costs through alternative accommodations have yielded mixed results. An assessment last year revealed that plans to house hundreds of asylum seekers at the former RAF base in Scampton, Lincolnshire, would have cost £45.1 million more than utilizing hotels. Conversely,using RAF Wethersfield in Essex was projected to save £500,000.
Criticism from Advocacy Groups and Local Leaders
The proposed shift to military barracks is drawing sharp criticism. Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, described the plans as “fanciful, too expensive and too logistically difficult,” pointing to the failure of similar initiatives under previous administrations. he suggested a one-off scheme offering limited-period permission to stay, subject to security checks, for individuals from countries likely to be granted refugee status as a more viable solution.
Steve Smith, chief executive of Care4Calais, accused the Labor party of breaking a promise to end the use of barracks, warning that the move would exacerbate costs and re-traumatize vulnerable individuals who have already endured significant hardship. “Opening more camps will only serve to re-traumatise more people who have already survived horrors such as war and torture,” he said.
Local opposition is also mounting. Nus Ghani, Conservative MP for Sussex Weald, whose constituency includes the Crowborough site, called the plans “wholly inappropriate,” noting that the site was previously rejected due to layout issues and anticipated high adaptation costs. she has launched a petition to halt the scheme.
Regional Concerns and Escalating Financial Burden
Concerns extend to Scotland, where Shaun Fraser, Labour’s Scottish parliament candidate for Inverness and Nairn, labeled the proposal to use Cameron Barracks as “bizarre” given its 19th-century origins.Highland Council has formally accused the UK government of failing to adequately consider the local impact of housing hundreds of asylum seekers in inverness, citing potential disruptions to community cohesion.
The financial implications of accommodating asylum seekers are considerable and growing. As of June, approximately 32,000 asylum seekers where housed in hotels – a decrease from a peak of over 56,000 in 2023, but still 2,500 higher than the same period last year. The projected costs for Home Office accommodation contracts between 2019 and 2029 have more than tripled, soaring from £4.5 billion to £15.3 billion, a dramatic increase attributed to rising demand, according to the Commons home affairs committee.
The government’s willingness to absorb potentially higher costs for military barracks underscores the political pressure to address public anxieties surrounding asylum seeker accommodation, even as the long-term financial and logistical challenges remain significant.
