Andy Burnham sent a shiver through Middle England when he said last week that more affluent areas of the UK must ‘play their part’ in accepting asylum seekers.
Now a Mail on Sunday poll shows the extent of that local opposition, with 57 per cent of voters saying that they do not want any more migrants in their area. Just 15 per cent are happy with the idea.
The survey, by Find Out Now, also picks up one of the tensions at the heart of the policy.
Many voters in the wealthier areas regard themselves as politically liberal and agree with the principle of sharing the problem of migrant accommodation more equally across the country – unless it is a bit too close to home.
A majority of those surveyed, 51 per cent, said that asylum seekers should be housed evenly across all areas of the country, while only 26 per cent disagreed.
What all voters are agreed on, however, is that the immigration problem should be tackled at root – 82 per cent think that the Government should do more to stop people entering the country illegally on small boats, with just 5 per cent disagreeing.
The poll – which used a huge 10,000-plus sample size – also reveals which areas are most opposed to accepting migrants, with Lincolnshire top on 57 per cent, followed by Worcestershire, Shropshire and County Durham.
The most accepting area was Wiltshire, with just 21 per cent opposed, followed by East Sussex, Merseyside and Nottinghamshire.
Earlier this week a ‘mega-dinghy’ carrying a record 230 migrants made the journey across the Channel
The figures come as disused military sites are being converted into asylum accommodation, including a base near the village of Piddington in Oxfordshire where the population of 314 is set to be dwarfed by a new camp housing 1,250 migrants.
The plan has so infuriated the chairman of the parish council that he proposed a symbolic referendum on leaving the United Kingdom.
There have also been protests in Crowborough, East Sussex, where the Government plans to use a former military base to house migrants until 2030.
They are entitled to free bus travel, which many use to visit the genteel spa town of Tunbridge Wells, which is 20 minutes away.
Despite Home Office guidance that asylum accommodation should not be near nurseries or schools, up to 1,200 male asylum seekers may move into a former flight training school in Linton-on-Ouse, North Yorkshire – creating a ratio of six men to each woman in the village of 600.
A primary school, nursery and play area lie less than a mile away from the proposed centre.
Plans to convert RAF Barnham, near Thetford in west Suffolk, into accommodation for up to 1,250 asylum seekers have also caused some parents to consider removing their children from Barnham School.
Prime Minister Andy Burnham said more affluent areas must ‘play their part’ in hosting asylum seekers
The base under consideration near Piddington is adjacent to a play area.
Anna Turley, the minister for border security and asylum, has defended the Piddington proposal by saying: ‘They’re not going to be in the village. Everything they need will be on that site.’
Ministers triggered fury by using a fast-track planning application for the project directly to Angela Rayner, the housing secretary, rather than through the local planning authorities.
The Home Office said: ‘We are seeking to fairly house asylum seekers across the country, working closely with local authorities to reduce the impact on communities.
‘This means closing every asylum hotel while moving asylum seekers into alternative accommodation, including former military sites.
‘It also means reducing the number in asylum accommodation. The number receiving support is now falling, and asylum costs are down by £1 billion since the General Election.’
Find Out Now surveyed 10,549 adults. The final sample has been weighted to be representative by age group and gender.
I was only joking about brothels, insists Edwina as she faces backlash
Edwina Currie has stood by her controversial suggestion that asylum seekers set to be housed near an Oxfordshire village need ‘a brothel’.
But the outspoken former Tory health minister made clear she was being deliberately provocative to show that keeping hundreds of asylum seekers in camps was no way to deter illegal migration. Instead, she said the only solution was to stop migrants coming here and to expel those that did ‘within maybe a week or ten days’.
Speaking on Times Radio last week about the proposed new migrants’ camp near Piddington, Oxfordshire, Ms Currie said: ‘The obvious thing that 1,200 young men are going to need in the middle of a village like little Piddington is a brothel. I don’t think they are going to provide that.’
A Border Command boat brought migrants into Dover after they were rescued from the Channel
Reform UK home affairs spokesman Zia Yusuf said that to hear ‘a former Tory minister joking about brothels being made available to the military-aged men they allowed to break into Britain illegally’ was ‘sick’.
Feminist campaigner Julie Bindel accused Ms Currie of making ‘an outrageous suggestion’ that would be ‘a recipe for disaster’.
However, on Friday, Ms Currie joked: ‘I have managed to annoy both Reform and some of the radical feminists – two lots of my absolutely favourite people.’
But she added that the brothel quip was designed to make the point that keeping large groups of migrants in any particular part of the country was not the answer. She said on Times Radio: ‘The answer is to make sure people don’t arrive in the first place, or if they do – and some will always get through – just send them home.’



You must be logged in to post a comment Login