PM's Spokesperson Defends Barracks Asylum Housing Plan Amidst Protests
The UK government has reaffirmed its commitment to housing asylum seekers in disused military barracks despite widespread criticism and protests from local communities, refugee organizations, and politicians. The plan, which aims to house over 10,000 asylum seekers on military sites, has been met with skepticism, with many accusing the government of being "fanciful" and "too expensive."
The decision to use barracks instead of hotels has sparked concerns about public confidence in the housing arrangement, particularly among local communities. According to Downing Street, quelling public disquiet is worth any extra cost associated with the plan.
However, refugee organizations and politicians argue that accommodating asylum seekers in barracks has failed in the past and poses significant logistical challenges. The Refugee Council's chief executive, Enver Solomon, described the plans as "too expensive" and "logistically difficult."
The Conservative government had initially planned to save public money by moving asylum seekers into former RAF bases. However, an assessment by Whitehall's spending watchdog found that plans to place hundreds of asylum seekers in the former RAF base at Scampton would have cost Β£45.1m more than hotels.
Inverness Council has accused the UK government of failing to consider the local impact of moving hundreds of asylum seekers to barracks in the centre of Inverness, citing concerns about community cohesion and the potential disruption to the local community.
Meanwhile, immigration enforcement visits have reached their highest level since comparable data began in 2011, with a total of 21,858 visits recorded in the 12 months to September this year.
The controversy highlights the ongoing debate over asylum seekers' accommodation, with many questioning the government's approach and its potential impact on local communities.
The UK government has reaffirmed its commitment to housing asylum seekers in disused military barracks despite widespread criticism and protests from local communities, refugee organizations, and politicians. The plan, which aims to house over 10,000 asylum seekers on military sites, has been met with skepticism, with many accusing the government of being "fanciful" and "too expensive."
The decision to use barracks instead of hotels has sparked concerns about public confidence in the housing arrangement, particularly among local communities. According to Downing Street, quelling public disquiet is worth any extra cost associated with the plan.
However, refugee organizations and politicians argue that accommodating asylum seekers in barracks has failed in the past and poses significant logistical challenges. The Refugee Council's chief executive, Enver Solomon, described the plans as "too expensive" and "logistically difficult."
The Conservative government had initially planned to save public money by moving asylum seekers into former RAF bases. However, an assessment by Whitehall's spending watchdog found that plans to place hundreds of asylum seekers in the former RAF base at Scampton would have cost Β£45.1m more than hotels.
Inverness Council has accused the UK government of failing to consider the local impact of moving hundreds of asylum seekers to barracks in the centre of Inverness, citing concerns about community cohesion and the potential disruption to the local community.
Meanwhile, immigration enforcement visits have reached their highest level since comparable data began in 2011, with a total of 21,858 visits recorded in the 12 months to September this year.
The controversy highlights the ongoing debate over asylum seekers' accommodation, with many questioning the government's approach and its potential impact on local communities.