No-one would want a migrant base in their constituency, Foreign Secretary says

James Cleverly said the illegal migration bill would mean there would be less need for such large-scale camps in the future

Border force officials escorted 100 migrants into Dover on Tuesday
Border force officials escorted 100 migrants into Dover on Tuesday Credit: LNP/LNP

Foreign Secretary James Cleverly has publicly defended his opposition to his own Government plans to turn a former RAF base in his constituency into a camp for 1,700 asylum seekers.

The MP for Braintree said “no-one” would want such a facility in their constituency but he maintained the Government’s illegal migration bill to tackle the small boats crisis would mean there would be less need for such large-scale asylum camps in the future.

His comments come just days after a local resident lodged an application for a judicial review seeking to block the plans to convert RAF Wethersfield in Mr Cleverly’s Braintree constituency into an asylum centre for 1,700 single male adult migrants.

Last month his local authority - Braintree district council - failed to secure a high court injunction blocking the scheme after the Government argued that it could legally use powers to override local planning rules because the asylum crisis is a “national emergency”.

Mr Cleverly told Sky News: "Of course, no one would want a facility like that in their constituency... but the point I'm saying is that the legislation we are putting through is to reduce the need for facilities like that."

On Wethersfield, he added: "I have concerns about the remoteness of the site and the road network around that.

"The bottom line is if the decision is made that that is where this site needs to be - and it's not a decision for me to make exclusively - but if that is the decision that's made, I want to make sure it works effectively, properly and our wider immigration system is fit for purpose."

Judicial review

The application by the local resident to the high court claims the move to house 1,700 asylum seekers at RAF Wethersfield breaches planning laws because ministers failed to consult the local council and has ignored the environmental risks and impact of the scheme.

It has been lodged by Gabriel Clarke-Holland, an accounts administrator and local Braintree resident, against the plan by the Home Secretary Suella Braverman and a “screening” decision by Levelling Up Secretary Michael Gove that it would have “no significant effects” on the environment.

His action has received more than 300 individual pledges of donations - totalling £16,016 so far - towards a target of £35,000 to fund the judicial review. It is being masterminded by a team of planning lawyers.

A local council in Lincolnshire is mounting a similar judicial review over plans to turn RAF Scampton - the former Dambusters’ and Red Arrows’ base - into a camp for 2,000 asylum seekers.

In documents filed on Friday in the high court, West Lindsey District Council claimed Mrs Braverman had acted unlawfully by failing to take into account its £300 million plan to preserve the base’s historic runway as an aerospace hub and new national heritage site, which will collapse as a result.

They are the first moves to test the legality of the Government’s plans to transfer asylum seekers to bigger sites in order to reduce the current cost of £6 million a day of housing 51,000 migrants in hotels.

Sally Grindrod-Smith, director of planning at West Lindsey District Council, said: “The council does not take lightly this application for judicial review. However, given the impact of the Home Office plans on our £300 million investment, we have been left with no choice.”

The council said Mrs Braverman had acted unlawfully by “failing properly to take account of key material considerations” at the site, notably the £300 regeneration plans. It also claimed it would be breaching planning rules by using the former RAF base beyond the 12 months legally allowed for temporary development rights.

Ms Grindrod-Smith said: “The council considers the Home Office has not adequately assessed local factors in determining to use RAF Scampton for asylum accommodation.

“In particular the local planning context should have been a material consideration in any site selection exercise and we have received no assurance that this has been the case.”

“We do not believe it is appropriate to rely upon temporary permitted development rights when it is clear that the site would be used for longer than any temporary permission would allow.”

License this content