Asylum seekers should be distributed across the “entire nation”, a senior UK cabinet minister has said, as residents of an Oxfordshire village campaign against plans to accommodate 1,256 male asylum seekers at a former military site.
Jonathan Reynolds, Business and Trade Secretary, defended the proposed accommodation at the site near Piddington, arguing that the government had few alternatives as it sought to move asylum seekers away from hotels.
“Where in the UK would want more of this? We’ve got to share this throughout the entire nation,” Reynolds said.
His comments come as residents of Piddington prepare for an unofficial referendum over the plans. The vote was backed by 96 per cent of participating residents and is scheduled for July 4, the anniversary of the US Declaration of Independence.
An open letter signed by 133 women in the village has been sent to all 266 female MPs at Westminster. The residents described the situation as a “crisis” and raised concerns about their “safety, security and freedoms”.
Reynolds acknowledged the political sensitivity of the proposal, saying there was “no imaginary place these people can go” while also accepting that “none of this is pleasant”.
He argued that the former military facility would be preferable to placing asylum seekers in hotels in city and town centres.
“A former military site is a far more suitable location,” he said, adding that “you can more easily see who’s coming and going from a site like that”.
The government’s approach marks a sharp departure from the previous Conservative government’s Rwanda policy. Former prime minister Sir Keir Starmer declared the scheme “dead and buried” after taking office.
Reynolds argued that Rwanda had failed to address the underlying pressures on the asylum system.
“None of this was being dealt with because there was this imaginary proposition that somehow people were going to be sent to Rwanda,” he said.
The proposed development has also raised questions over local planning powers. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood could bypass local planning authorities if ministers invoke the Urgent Crown Development Process.
For residents, however, the dispute is increasingly about the effect on a small community.
Heidi Meakin, 61, who has met MPs from several political parties to raise her concerns, told the Press Association she would no longer feel safe if the plans proceed.
“I wouldn’t leave my front door unlocked like I do,” she said.
Gloria Brown, 69, who has lived in the village for 23 years, said the proposals would leave her feeling “imprisoned”.
“I’ve felt very emotional about it just lately, and it’s just not correct, and it’s totally unfair,” she said.
The confrontation illustrates the central dilemma facing the government: how to spread the cost and disruption of the asylum system more evenly without intensifying opposition in communities asked to accommodate new arrivals.
Leave a Comment