Prime Minister Andy Burnham is preparing to address opposition to plans for an asylum seeker accommodation site at Piddington in Oxfordshire after a local petition calling for the scheme to be withdrawn approached 20,000 signatures.
The petition, titled “Stop plans to use MoD sites for asylum seekers without full local consultation”, had attracted 19,003 signatures by the latest count.
Published on August 19, it passed the 10,000-signature threshold three days later, triggering a requirement for the government to provide a formal response.
The proposed Piddington site would accommodate up to 1,250 asylum seekers on military land in the village.
Piddington has a population of about 314. If the plans proceed at the proposed capacity, the number of asylum seekers housed at the site would be almost four times the size of the local population.
The petition has drawn significant support from surrounding constituencies. The highest concentration of signatures came from the Bicester and Woodstock constituency, where Piddington is located, with 2,721 signatories.
Mid Buckinghamshire, which borders Bicester and Woodstock, recorded the second-highest number at 1,379.
South West Norfolk and Wetherby and Easingwold also recorded relatively high numbers of signatures, with the government having proposed asylum accommodation sites in both areas.
Burnham has previously said he was beginning to engage with concerns raised by residents.
Last month, he told GB News that he had “begun to become aware of the campaign in Piddington”, following representations including letters from local children to the prime minister objecting to the proposed accommodation.
He said: “I have begun to become aware of the campaign from Piddington and I will listen to what people are saying and respond to the concerns that they are putting forward.
“I don’t know the issue yet in detail, but in some ways, as I understand it, it is about creating secure space and not have the HMO issues that you were talking about earlier.
“It’s obviously going to be challenging, but I am prepared always to listen to people, to work with people and to pick up legitimate concerns, and I will address those concerns.”
The strength of local opposition was underlined by a symbolic independence referendum held in Piddington on July 4, with organisers seeking to force the government to reconsider the asylum accommodation plans.
Some 98 per cent of those voting backed independence from the UK.
A second vote is scheduled for September 15, with campaigners supporting independence hoping that US president Donald Trump will recognise their claimed sovereignty.
The dispute comes as the government seeks to expand the use of military and other state-owned sites as alternatives to the expensive hotel accommodation currently used to house asylum seekers.
The Home Office announced on June 26 that it intended to seek planning permission to develop Ministry of Defence land off the B3011, towards Piddington and Bullingdon Prison.
Burnham has previously acknowledged the wider political challenge posed by the distribution of asylum seekers across the country, arguing that poorer areas should not bear a disproportionate share of the burden.
“I do have to say we cannot have a situation where it’s only the poorest communities in the country that receive all of the dispersal of refugees and asylum seekers.
“I do believe all parts of the country need to work, to play their part. It’s a challenging issue.
“We’re working at it, we understand people’s concerns, and I will look into the issues raised by the good people of Piddington.”
The planning dispute has been complicated by a recent transfer of powers from Cherwell District Council to the government’s planning inspectorate for major planning applications in the area.
Separately, the Home Office has sought permission to more than double the capacity of Campsfield immigration detention centre, located a short distance from Piddington.
The application is being pursued through a Crown planning route that bypasses the district council.
A recent government letter suggested construction work had already begun at the site, although the Home Office said discussions over the Oxfordshire proposal remained at an early stage.
A Home Office spokesperson said the proposals were still subject to planning permission, feasibility assessments and due diligence, including engagement with local communities.
The spokesperson added that “no decisions” had yet been made.
The Piddington proposal forms part of a broader government programme to repurpose military sites for asylum accommodation.
Barracks in Barnham, Crowborough, Linton-on-Ouse and Wethersfield have also been identified as potential sites.
The Home Office has argued that using government-owned land and existing facilities could save the taxpayer hundreds of millions of pounds by reducing reliance on commercial hotels.
The cost of asylum accommodation reached £2.1bn for taxpayers last year, according to the government.
The dispute over Piddington nevertheless illustrates the political and planning challenges facing ministers as they seek to replace the hotel-based asylum system with large-scale sites capable of accommodating substantial numbers of people.
For Burnham, the growing petition and highly organised local opposition will put renewed emphasis on whether the government’s cost-saving strategy can be reconciled with its pledge to consult affected communities and distribute asylum accommodation more evenly across the UK.
Leave a Comment