Council LOSES court bid to stop the Home Office housing up to 1,700 asylum seekers on old airfield 

A council today lost a High Court bid to prevent the Government housing up to 1,700 asylum seekers at an airfield for up to 180 days each.

Braintree District Council had brought legal action against the Home Office over the proposed use of former RAF base Wethersfield Airfield in Essex for asylum seekers.

Lawyers for the local authority asked for an injunction preventing the use of the site to house asylum seekers and opposed the Home Office’s argument that the need to accommodate more asylum seekers was an ’emergency’ under planning law.

But, giving a ruling in London today, Mr Justice Waksman concluded that the court did not have the legal power to grant the council’s application for an injunction, and therefore ruled in favour of the Government.

Wayne Beglan, for the council, had told the court that the plans would be a breach of planning control and the provision that would be used by the Government is designed to address emergencies.

A group of protesters hold up signs outside Wethersfield Airfield in Essex on April 1

An aerial view of the Ministry of Defence-owned Wethersfield Airfield in Essex on March 29

The Ministry of Defence-owned land was one of the sites identified when immigration minister Robert Jenrick unveiled plans last month to house asylum seekers in disused military bases to reduce reliance on hotels.

Mr Jenrick previously said the sites are ‘undoubtedly in the national interest’ and said only ‘single adult males’ will be put into the barracks, as he seeks to reduce a hotel bill he put at £2.3billion a year.

The court was told the planning provision – known as Class Q – covers the change of use of some government land by the Crown to prevent or mitigate an emergency which ‘threatens serious damage to human welfare’.

Barrister Mr Beglan later referenced the use of Napier Barracks near Folkestone in Kent, which was loaned to the Home Office in 2020, later arguing the Home Office’s duties to accommodate larger numbers of asylum seekers are not new.

A large banner saying Stop The Asylum Centre in fields near the former air base on April 1

Members of security staff stand by the main gate at Wethersfield Airfield in Essex on April 1

Paul Brown KC, for the Home Office, said in written submissions that, as of last month, it was estimated that the department was accommodating over 109,000 asylum seekers, 48,000 of them in hotels, at a total cost of over £6.2million per day.

‘Significantly, the number needing support is predicted to grow still further: Home Office operational plans are based on scenarios of up to 56,000 small boat arrivals in 2023. That would take the supported population to between 120,000 and 140,000,’ the barrister said.

Mr Brown said a number of factors had contributed to issues around accommodating asylum seekers, including the impact of the Covid pandemic, the Afghanistan relocation scheme and war in Ukraine.

‘All of those pressures have built to what is a record number of asylum seekers at the moment, significantly higher than there has been,’ he told the court.

An aerial view of the Ministry of Defence-owned Wethersfield Airfield in Essex on March 29

Accommodation blocks on the former air base in Wethersfield, Essex, are pictured on April 1

‘It’s a situation which, if it’s not dealt with, if there’s not a response to it, threatens homelessness.’

The barrister denied there would be a breach of planning control, telling the court there is an ‘overwhelming argument that it is authorised’ under the provision.

He continued in written submissions: ‘The proposed development is development by or on behalf of the Crown, on Crown land which falls squarely within Class Q.’

Mr Brown also argued whether something is an emergency ‘is solely a matter for the government department’ exercising the development right.

The barrister later said ‘there can be no sensible dispute’ the plans involved actions related to an emergency and that ‘the reasons why there is an emergency’ have been explained to the council.