How many asylum seekers are in UK hotels and why are they being housed there?
Here, the PA news agency takes a look at the latest overall data.
– How many asylum seekers are in hotels across the UK?
Police officers stand by barricades at a hotel housing asylum seekers (Jordan Pettitt/PA)
The most recent Home Office data showed there were 32,345 asylum seekers being housed temporarily in UK hotels at the end of March.
This was down 15% from the end of December, when the total was 38,079.
New figures – published among the usual quarterly immigration data release – are expected on Thursday, showing numbers in hotels at the end of June.
Figures for hotels published by the Home Office date back to December 2022 and showed numbers hit a peak at the end of September 2023 when there were 56,042 asylum seekers in hotels.
– How many hotels are in use for asylum seekers?
It is thought there were more than 400 asylum hotels open in summer 2023.
Labour said this has since been reduced to fewer than 210.
– Why are asylum seekers being housed in hotels?
A court ruled asylum seekers should be removed from the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex (Jordan Pettitt/PA)
Asylum seekers and their families can be housed in temporary accommodation, known as contingency accommodation, if they are awaiting assessment of their claim or have had a claim approved and there is not enough longer-term accommodation available.
The Home Office provides accommodation to asylum seekers who have no other way of supporting themselves on a 'no choice' basis, so they cannot choose where they live.
When there is not enough housing, the Home Office can move people to accommodation such as hotels and large sites, like former military bases.
In May, the National Audit Office said those temporarily living in hotels accounted for 35% of all people in asylum accommodation.
– Is this likely to be a permanent arrangement?
Labour has pledged to end the 'costly use of hotels to house asylum seekers in this Parliament' – which would be 2029, if not earlier.
Campaigners and charities have long argued that hotels are not suitable environments to house asylum seekers.
The Refugee Council said they 'cost the taxpayer billions, trap people in limbo and are flashpoints in communities' and urged the Government to 'partner with local councils to provide safe, cost-effective accommodation within communities'.
– What is the Government saying since the legal ruling?
Government minister Dan Jarvis said they are exploring options after the legal ruling (James Manning/PA)
Ministers are 'looking at a range of different contingency options' following Tuesday's ruling, according to security minister Dan Jarvis
In the immediate aftermath of the judgment, border security minister Dame Angela Eagle repeated criticism of the previous Conservative government, saying Labour had 'inherited a broken asylum system'.
She said the Government would 'continue working with local authorities and communities to address legitimate concerns' around asylum hotels.
– What options does the Home Office have now?
The Government scrapped the Bibby Stockholm as a site to house asylum seekers (Matt Keeble/PA)
Last month, amid protests outside the Bell Hotel and more migrants crossing the Channel, an extra 400 spaces were being prepared to house male asylum seekers at RAF Wethersfield in Essex.
The former military site, which has a usual capacity of 800 beds, is expected to house more adult men on a short-term basis.
The Labour Government scrapped the large site of the Bibby Stockholm barge in Portland, Dorset, earlier this year, while Napier Barracks in Folkestone, Kent, is also due to end housing asylum seekers and be returned to the Ministry of Defence in September.
– Why were there protests outside the Bell Hotel?
Counter-protesters have also gathered outside hotels to defend asylum seekers (Jordan Pettitt/PA)
The hotel in Epping has been at the centre of a series of protests in recent weeks after an asylum seeker who was staying there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl – something he has denied and he is due to stand trial later in August.
After the High Court's ruling, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage wrote in the Telegraph calling for Epping protests to inspire further action wherever there are concerns about the 'threat posed by young undocumented males' living in hotels.
But on Tuesday more than 100 women's organisations wrote to ministers warning that vital conversations about violence against women and girls are being 'hijacked by an anti-migrant agenda' that fuels divisions and harms survivors.
The joint statement, including from Rape Crisis England & Wales and Refuge, said: 'We have been alarmed in recent weeks by an increase in unfounded claims made by people in power, and repeated in the media, that hold particular groups as primarily responsible for sexual violence.
'This not only undermines genuine concerns about women's safety, but also reinforces the damaging myth that the greatest risk of gender-based violence comes from strangers.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
2 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
‘Well done to Starmer for making it difficult for girl of 12', blasts Lucy Connolly's husband after riot-tweet mum freed
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) RIOT-tweet mum Lucy Connolly was freed from jail to rejoin her husband and 12-year-old daughter — after more than a year as a victim of 'two-tier justice'. Husband Ray, a Tory on Northampton Town Council said she had coped 'relatively well' with jail, adding: 'The only person who hasn't is our daughter.' Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 6 Lucy Connolly with husband Ray, who says Starmer deserves a 'pat on the back' for 'making it so difficult for a girl of 12' Credit: SWNS 6 Lucy Connolly was caged for stirring up racial hatred after the Southport killings Credit: PA 6 Lucy left HMP Peterborough in a taxi at 10am Credit: picture Stone Ltd 'It will be good to have her home. We are thankful for the support. 'Our focus will be to try to sort out our lives and for my wife to reconnect with our daughter.' Lucy, 42, caged for stirring up racial hatred after the Southport killings, left HMP Peterborough in a taxi at 10am. Her punishment sparked a major debate, with PM Sir Keir Starmer accused of 'two-tier justice'. Thanked public for support Tory councillor Ray added sarcastically: 'Well done to Starmer for making it so difficult for a girl of 12. Let's all give him a pat on the back.' He said the family were delighted Lucy was coming home after more than a year and thanked the public for their support. Ex-childminder Lucy wore pink for her low-key departure from HMP Peterborough — crouching down in a white Skoda estate at 10am. She did not immediately return to the family's £400,000 semi in Northampton and is understood to be staying away from her home. In all she spent over a year behind bars — two months held on remand before she was sentenced at Birmingham crown court. She was freed at the automatic release point, after serving 40 per cent of her term in prison. Lucy Connolly is freed after jail term for racist tweet over Southport attack She will serve the remainder on licence under supervision. Reform deputy leader Richard Tice MP, who visited her in jail, told The Sun: 'I'm delighted that Lucy is finally out of prison. 'She should never have been inside in the first place. 'I understand she is doing OK and am sure it was a very emotional reunion for her. 'The family will now need some time and space to readjust and welcome Lucy home. 6 Lucy was arrested on August 6 and later pleased guilty to stirring up racial hatred 6 Her husband Ray, a Tory on Northampton Town Council, said she had coped 'relatively well' with jail Credit: PA 6 PM Sir Keir Starmer has been accused of 'two-tier justice' Credit: AFP 'We all need to keep the pressure on the Government and Keir Starmer as to why she was prosecuted in the first place. 'Given that, in 2013, while Director of Public Prosecutions he introduced guidelines that would have kept Lucy out of jail he is the biggest hypocrite in the country. 'This case just confirms that we have two-tier justice.' Lucy tweeted on July 29, 2024, hours after Axel Rudakubana killed Bebe King, six, Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, and Alice Da Silva Aguiar, nine, at a dance class. Lucy was charged with stirring up racial hatred — an offence that doesn't even require intent to incite violence. Toy leader Kemi Badenoch Her post called for 'mass deportation now' and urged followers on X to 'set fire' to migrant hotels. It was viewed 310,000 times in the three hours before she deleted it. Lucy was arrested on August 6 and later pleaded guilty to stirring up racial hatred. During her appeal against her sentence in May, the Court of Appeal heard the news of the Southport murders had sparked a resurgence of the anxiety caused by her son Harry's death at the age of 19 months, 14 years earlier. When Sir Keir was DPP in 2013, he introduced guidance saying prosecutors should consider being lenient to suspects who 'swiftly' deleted tweets or showed remorse. Speaking after Lucy's release, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said 'Her punishment was harsher than sentences handed down for bricks thrown at police or actual rioting. 'After Southport, Keir Starmer branded all protesters 'far-right' and called for fast-track prosecutions. "Days later, Lucy was charged with stirring up racial hatred — an offence that doesn't even require intent to incite violence. "Why exactly did the Attorney General think that was in the public interest? Meanwhile, former Labour councillor Ricky Jones called for protestors to have their throats slit. 'Law itself is broken' 'Charged with encouraging violent disorder, he pleaded not guilty and was acquitted by a jury who saw his words as a disgusting remark made in the heat of the moment, not a call to action. 'Juries are a cornerstone of justice, but we shouldn't have to rely on them to protect basic freedoms. 'Protecting people from words should not be given greater weight in law than public safety. 'If the law does this, then the law itself is broken and it's time Parliament looked again at the Public Order Act.' Sir Keir defended Lucy's sentence in May saying: 'I am strongly in favour of free speech. 'But I am equally against incitement to violence against others. I will always support the action taken by our police and courts to keep our streets and people safe.' Lucy was one of around a dozen lags freed from 1,200-inmate all-female HMP Peterborough yesterday. She had been put on a 'basic regime' after refusing to return to her cell. It meant she had £5.50 a week to spend in the canteen. Mr Tice claimed she was bruised after being manhandled by guards. Yesterday ex-prison governor Ian Acheson suggested Lucy could sue, which would mean jail logs would be disclosable to her lawyers. He added: 'I've no idea whether this will happen, but features of her treatment alleged in media were so perverse it's a real possibility. Interesting times ahead.' LOCKED UP FOR ONE TWEET IS SCANDAL By Lord Toby Young, from The Free Speech Union I was glad to see Lucy Connolly finally walk free today, but the fact that she has spent more than a year in prison for a single tweet -- quickly deleted and apologised for -- is a national scandal, particularly when Labour MPs, councillors and anti-racism campaigners who have said and done much worse have avoided jail. The same latitude they enjoyed should have been granted to Lucy. Sir Keir Starmer said in May that Lucy's sentence was justified because her tweet was 'incitement to violence against other people'. But was it? The test we employ when deciding whether to prosecute someone for supposedly inciting violence should be the same as it is in the United States, namely, was it intended to cause violence and was it likely to? I don't think Lucy's tweet met either limb of that test (and for speech not to be protected by the First Amendment in America it has to meet both). Had she urged her followers to burn down a particular asylum hotel, maybe it would have failed those tests. But she did not and she added the words 'for all I care', suggesting she was indifferent as to whether asylum hotels in general were burnt down and not inciting people to set fire to them. Had she pleaded not guilty, she might well have been acquitted by a jury, just as the ex-Royal Marine Jamie Michael was after being charged with the same offence. The Free Speech Union, the organisation I run, paid for Jamie's defence and we offered to pay for Lucy's. But unlike Ricky Jones, the Labour councillor who urged people to cut the throats of anti-immigration protestors, she was not granted bail and worried that if she pleaded not guilty she would have to spend longer in prison awaiting trial than if she pleaded guilty. As it turned out, she was wrong about that, but then she was not expecting to be sentenced to more than two-and-half years, which is longer than some members of grooming gangs have received after pleading guilty to child rape. What Lucy has suffered at the hands of the British state is a clear case of injustice. She has become Exhibit A for those of us raising the alarm about the assault on free speech in Starmer's Britain. And if it's any consolation to her, that alarm is now being heard across the world, from the White House to Quinta de Olivos in Argentina. Let's hope the people of Britain wake up to this attack on their right to freedom of expression before they lose it entirely. Lord Young is the founder and director of the Free Speech Union.
Daily Mail
3 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Aggressive job cuts fuelled by Reeves £25bn NI tax raid: Employers cut staff for 11 months in a row
Britain's private sector employers have been cutting jobs for 11 months in a row in the latest evidence of the damaging impact of Labour's £25billion employer national insurance raid. A closely-watched business survey by financial firm S&P Global showed job numbers were being reduced 'at an aggressive rate' in August. 'Employment was again a weak spot as total workforce numbers decreased for the 11th month running and at a marked pace,' the report said. Separate data showed the number of new job postings fell in July after firms 'took a kicking' from last autumn's Budget. Businesses are still counting the cost of the rate of employer National Insurance (NI) rising from 13.8p per cent to 15 per cent and the cut in salary threshold for paying it from £9,100 to £5,000. The move has sharply raised the cost of hiring staff and particularly damaged sectors such as retail and hospitality that are more reliant on lower-paid and part-time workers. It has been largely blamed for the sharp rise in unemployment since the general election, with more than 200,000 people joining the dole queue. S&P's findings were revealed as part of a wider purchasing managers' index (PMI) survey of the private sector which showed business activity growing at the fastest pace in a year. The findings will be welcomed by Rachel Reeves as she hopes for a turnaround after a growth slowdown in the second quarter. But they showed a contrast between accelerating growth in the services sector, which ranges from bars and hotels to accountants and solicitors, and contraction for manufacturers battered by tariff uncertainty. The report also outlined the continuing pain being caused by the Chancellor's NI hike. It resulted in 'another robust rise in prices charged by private sector firms' this month – with inflation at an 18-month high. 'Payroll numbers... continue to be cut at an aggressive rate by historical standards as firms cite weak order books and concerns over rising staff costs due to the policies announced in the autumn Budget,' said Chris Williamson, the chief business economist at S&P Global. Separately, the Recruitment and Employment Confederation, said a 'summer slowdown' had hit new job postings which fell 9.2 per cent last month compared to June, to 652,733. Chief executive Neil Carberry said: 'Business optimism took a kicking after last autumn's Budget, with spring tax rises in particular weighing on employers thinking. 'The fear of further costs, worries about the impact of the Employment Rights Bill and new tax rules are all on employers' minds. 'If ministers want growth, they must deliver stability and backing for businesses.' On a brighter note, a monthly consumer confidence reading published by market research firm GfK ticked higher following this month's Bank of England interest rate cut. Neil Bellamy, consumer insights director at GfK, said: 'The improved sentiment on personal finances is welcome, but there are many clouds on the horizon in the form of inflation and rising unemployment. 'There's no shortage of speculation, too, about what the autumn Budget will bring in terms of tax rises.'
The Sun
3 minutes ago
- The Sun
Lucy Connolly has suffered at hands of the British state – let's hope Brits wake up to this attack on their free speech
I WAS glad to see Lucy Connolly finally walk free today, but the fact that she has spent more than a year in prison for a single tweet -- quickly deleted and apologised for -- is a national scandal, particularly when Labour MPs, councillors and anti-racism campaigners who have said and done much worse have avoided jail. The same latitude they enjoyed should have been granted to Lucy. Sir Keir Starmer said in May that Lucy's sentence was justified because her tweet was 'incitement to violence against other people'. But was it? The test we employ when deciding whether to prosecute someone for supposedly inciting violence should be the same as it is in the United States, namely, was it intended to cause violence and was it likely to? I don't think Lucy's tweet met either limb of that test (and for speech not to be protected by the First Amendment in America it has to meet both). Had she urged her followers to burn down a particular asylum hotel, maybe it would have failed those tests. But she did not and she added the words 'for all I care', suggesting she was indifferent as to whether asylum hotels in general were burnt down and not inciting people to set fire to them. Had she pleaded not guilty, she might well have been acquitted by a jury, just as the ex-Royal Marine Jamie Michael was after being charged with the same offence. The Free Speech Union, the organisation I run, paid for Jamie's defence and we offered to pay for Lucy's. But unlike Ricky Jones, the Labour councillor who urged people to cut the throats of anti-immigration protestors, she was not granted bail and worried that if she pleaded not guilty she would have to spend longer in prison awaiting trial than if she pleaded guilty. As it turned out, she was wrong about that, but then she was not expecting to be sentenced to more than two-and-half years, which is longer than some members of grooming gangs have received after pleading guilty to child rape. What Lucy has suffered at the hands of the British state is a clear case of injustice. She has become Exhibit A for those of us raising the alarm about the assault on free speech in Starmer's Britain. Lucy Connolly is freed after jail term for racist tweet over Southport attack And if it's any consolation to her, that alarm is now being heard across the world, from the White House to Quinta de Olivos in Argentina. Let's hope the people of Britain wake up to this attack on their right to freedom of expression before they lose it entirely. Lord Young is the founder and director of the Free Speech Union. 3
