Napier barracks to continue housing asylum seekers after small boat influx
Officials informed parliament in a Home Office document uploaded to parliament's cross-party home affairs committee in March 2025 that 'the Home Office intend to occupy and deliver services at Napier until September 2025, at which point the site will be handed back to the Ministry of Defence'.
Napier has capacity to accommodate 328 male asylum seekers, but in recent months numbers have been winding down to as few as 40 people in preparation for its closure, according to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) working directly with asylum seekers living there.
But now numbers have started to jump again and people are being taken to Napier soon after arriving on the Kent coast in small boats. It is thought that the Home Office is extending its use of Napier owing to the high number of recent small boat arrivals, more than a 50% increase on the same period last year and the increasing pressure the government is coming under from anti-migrant protesters outside asylum hotels.
It follows news that the number of asylum seekers accommodated at Wethersfield, in Essex, the other mass accommodation site used by the Home Office, have increased by more than 50% to about 1,200.
Mass accommodation sites for asylum seekers have proved controversial, with proposals to use RAF Scampton in Lincolnshire and another military base at Linton-on-Ouse never getting off the ground.
It recently emerged that the Home Office lost at least £48m on the Scampton scheme, devised by the previous government, although no asylum seekers were ever accommodated there.
Napier has been marred by controversy since it opened owing to a mass Covid outbreak, decrepit facilities and far-right protests.
Sally Hough, the director of Napier Drop-In Centre, which provides support and activities for asylum seekers housed at the site, said: 'Our funding is due to run out in August to coincide with the closure of the camp so it's hugely disappointing and frustrating to know that the camp will continue without this essential support hub. The impact on the camp residents will be significant; it's only due to NGOs like ours that the camp has become a welcoming supportive environment for vulnerable people.'
Steve Smith, the chief executive of Care4Calais, said: 'These large-scale, militarised sites, like Napier and Wethersfield, have a longstanding physical and mental health impact on those accommodated there. What is currently happening is people are being sent straight to Napier from Manston. The majority arrive with nothing but the clothes on their backs. The level of need is greater and it makes living on these sites much more difficult. It is deeply concerning that the government is not only keeping the site open, but appearing to revert back to a model that caused so much trauma when Napier first opened.'
A Home Office spokesperson said: 'We continue to work closely with stakeholders across the country, including other government departments and local authorities, to fulfil our statutory obligations and deliver on our commitments to reduce the cost of asylum accommodation and end the use of asylum hotels by the end of this parliament. Any updates regarding specific sites will be notified to the relevant stakeholders in the normal way.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
6 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Wrexham MP addresses concerns around asylum seekers
MP for Wrexham I receive communication from constituents about a wide range of issues. One of the concerns expressed is around asylum seekers. This is also a topic which sees substantial disinformation and misinformation across media and social media. Language and terminology is really important and I want to address some of the common questions that I receive on this subject. 'Asylum' means 'protection given by a country to someone fleeing from persecution in their own country' (House of Commons Library). A person seeking asylum is often awaiting refugee status. If they do not qualify for refugee status, they may still be granted leave to remain in the UK for humanitarian or other reasons. 'Why are hotels and luxury apartments being used to house immigrants when there is a housing crisis in the UK?' This is an example of a question I have received from a constituent recently. It is worth noting that there are 3,253 asylum seekers in Wales and 107 in Wrexham according to figures as of March this year. Where hotels are used, the accommodation is dormitory style, all facilities are closed and not available, food is provided but not choice of menu. To be clear, there are no asylum hotels in Wrexham and those seeking asylum are in dispersed accommodation. This means the Home Office gives contracts to the private sector not councils to find accommodation. This accommodation is a flat or room in an HMO for example. Asylum seekers do not have access to the welfare system or any benefits. They receive a weekly subsistence payment rate of £49.18 per person for people living in self-catered accommodation or £8.86 a week for those in full-board accommodation like a hotel. The weekly amount is credited to a pre-paid debit card which can use be to pay for goods or withdraw cash. According to the House of Commons Library, in 2024, asylum seekers and refugees made up around 16% of immigrants to the UK. It is important to understand that most people who migrate to the UK do so legally for work or family reasons. There is a shortage of skilled workers in the UK, as we have seen in the NHS. Work is ongoing to address this. The small boat crossings must be addressed along with the problems in the asylum system where the backlog is unacceptable. The UK Government has recently made an agreement with France and this new pilot scheme will see small boat arrivals being detained and returned to France. An equal number of migrants will then be able to come to the UK from France through a new legal route. Those coming into the UK must be fully documented and go through a stringent security check as opposed to uncontrolled entry such as small boats. In addition to the asylum process, the UK has operated various routes for people seeking humanitarian protection in the past. The three recent examples of this are the Afghan, Syrian and Ukrainian resettlement programmes. Like other countries, the UK follows the 1951 Refugee Convention that a refugee should not be returned to a country where they face serious threats to their life or freedom and that there are minimum standards for how refugees should be treated including a right to housing, work and education. As ever, if you have any queries or concerns or you have an issue that you would like me to try and assist you with, please do not hesitate to contact me on 01978 788854 or
Telegraph
6 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The Royal Navy needs to develop a completely new idea of what a warship is
For many decades, the Royal Navy's thinking and therefore its shipbuilding has remained unchanged. We have had capital ships: aircraft carriers, helicopter carriers and amphibious platforms. We've also had frigates and destroyers (the backbone) to hunt submarines and provide area air defence – but more often than not to look like a warship and do warship type influence operations. Then there were an array of smaller ships for charting and patrolling the oceans and hunting both mines and maritime crooks such as fish thieves. Finally there are two types of nuclear powered submarines: attack boats and the strategic deterrent. But when you look at what we want from our navy now and the resources that are available to do it, no matter how much of a traditionalist you are, it is impossible to see how this model is sustainable. For navies to function across the huge range of tasks they need to undertake they need both balance and mass. The current Royal Navy has good balance from diplomacy to fighting but is woefully short on mass. You don't need to be a maritime historian to know how that ends when the shooting starts. I will leave the Royal Fleet Auxiliary out of it for this article as I've written about them recently. Focusing on surface vessels, there are three broad types of ships that we now need to consider adding to the traditional mix outlined above. Actually, we don't need to consider it, we need to do it. These are ships taken up from trade, medium sized low- or un-crewed vessels and autonomous small craft and weapons. Ships taken up from trade include vessels like HMS Stirling Castle (mine warfare), RFA Proteus and HMS Scott (surveillance) and HMS Protector (ice patrol). These are ships built to a commercial specification that the Navy then leases or buys for use on operations. They are not fighting ships; their lack of self-defence systems, watertight integrity and machinery plants do not permit it, but that doesn't mean they don't have tremendous utility. It's a truism of navies that they spend more of their time setting the conditions to avoid fighting than actually fighting – this is where these ships sit. And given how hard it is to fund and sustain the high end stuff, we need to get better at buying and running them. Autonomous vessels can be split into two: those that are large enough to operate on their own and those that need support from a mother ship. I'm going to focus on the former although one only needs a cursory knowledge of this subject to know that for both, the rate at which we are progressing in this field, and the rate at which we need to, are wildly different. As is so often the case, enter the US and their recently announced Modular Attack Surface Craft (MASC) programme. This is a fascinating programme that is set to move from concept to prototype to delivery in less than two years, the kind of pace that would make traditional ship manufacturers weep. It is still some way short of Ukraine's ability to build new systems but it's fast for a peacetime programme. The three models have been outlined with how many containers they can carry seemingly determining their size. The largest will take 'four or more' ISO containers, the middle one takes two of the same and the smallest, one half-size container. Endurance for the larger one is around the 60 day mark 'without crew intervention'. Here I have a query because in a ship roughly 60m long and with a 3m draft, unless you're going everywhere at two knots, then this is a stretch but I'll leave it for now. The larger two also have optional crewing options. In the real world they'll probably have people aboard a lot of the time, as security guards if nothing else, but the people will tend to get off once the risk level goes up. What these low- or un-crewed MASC ships will be used for is less clear at this stage, but from the work the US is doing on containerised weapons systems, and the way one of the models has its drive train configured, it looks as though they will be focussed on anti-air capabilities (traditionally conducted by destroyers) and anti-submarine (frigate). On this subject, I do find myself disagreeing with doctrine purists who always want to see ships being built in response to a carefully crafted master strategy. In reality, the things you are going to want your ships to do haven't changed at either the soft or hard power end of the continuum for a long time. Diplomacy, disaster relief, freedom of navigation, littoral operations, strike, anti-submarine and air operations remain constant no matter how potential adversaries develop methods to try to deny them. This is the eternal cat and mouse of weapons development with the only certainty being that if you wait too long for the perfect kit, or because your system is slow, or because you don't have any cash, you will fall behind. In other words, just build them, the rest will follow. From a UK perspective there are at least four uses for ships like this that are blindingly obvious. There will be others. Missile defence is one and would work equally well in far blue water or around the UK. It would be far better to have a dozen of these ships with containerised SM-6 interceptors (this has been trialled by the US) than hugely expensive systems ashore that can only do one job – or just one or two exquisite destroyers with large crews in 15 or 20 years' time. The containerised data links and ability to transmit a radar picture to these vessels exist now. If we insist on full-fat destroyers with 100+ missile tubes they will cost billions apiece and we will never have enough. We should instead conceive our destroyers as flotilla leaders for MASC-type vessels with containerised weapons to bulk up our firepower. Likewise with anti-submarine warfare (ASW) in the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap and beyond, low- or un-crewed ships with containerised kit could be vital. Anyone who has spent a life at sea gets nervous when tech companies start talking about deploying small short-range systems from mother ships for ASW because it is so often conducted in conditions where just walking around the ship is a challenge, much less deploying and recovering smaller craft. These larger MASC vessels avoid that problem. Another solution would be to deploy one-shot small systems: we already do this with sonobuoys. If it's cheap and numerous enough, this will work. A flotilla of medium autonomous ships with an exquisite Type 26 frigate somewhere in the vicinity running the show starts sounding a lot like balance and mass. A single Type 26, no matter how lovely, does not. And there are companies like Ocean Infinity who have already built medium sized autonomous ships. Defence should allocate resources to allow the Royal Navy to buy them now. Caveats do come to mind on unmanned ships: enemies will probably be much more willing to attack or sink them than manned ones, or even board and seize them. Certainly the bigger types need to be optionally crewed. It will probably often be worthwhile to have a highly skilled maintenance troubleshooter or two aboard, or an experienced bridge watchstander for crowded waters. But they won't always be needed, and there will certainly be no need for the large numbers of semi-skilled maintainers, sensor and weapon operators, cooks, administrators etc that make up most of today's warship crews. There is also of course the risk that unmanned ships might be hacked – though this is also becoming a risk with manned systems. Very little of this discussion is new: the Strategic Defence Review refers to much of it and Naval plans talk about uncrewed sloops (the Type 92) but that's the point – they're being discussed. We need to take a leaf out of the US playbook and just buy it. The Royal Navy has some excellent kit and people but is so short on both that its deterrent effect has been eroded. This is a quick and relatively cheap way out of this hole. Let's see if the US, whose macro fleet issues are similar – albeit much scaled up – can do any better.
BBC News
6 minutes ago
- BBC News
Norfolk and Suffolk Police merger not on cards says commissioner
A police and crime and commissioner said she doubted two forces would be merged - as she announced her job was coming to an Sarah Taylor – who won the election to become Norfolk's commissioner last year – said the role's responsibilities would be transferred to a new mayor's office in the planned mayor responsible for Norfolk and Suffolk, there has been speculation that the county's two police forces could be Taylor said her understanding was that a merger was "not on the cards at all". Last month, Conservative MP Nick Timothy said he believed a merger would take place and it would be a "disaster". Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) are elected officials responsible for setting the priorities of a constabulary, appointing a chief constable and holding them to an election is set to take place in May 2026 to choose the first mayor to run a new combined authority for the the government confirmed it wanted the PCC roles to be absorbed into the work of mayors, the West Suffolk MP Timothy said he thought that would lead to one force covering two counties."It would take decision-making and accountability even further away from where people live.""We need the police really focused on local crimes, on burglaries, on street crime, and that means we need local accountability." Whilst the two forces are separate they do currently work together on some operations such as roads policing and armed said she had asked the Home Office if a merger was a said: "My understanding is that is not on the cards at all, and certainly if it is, they're not talking with us about that transition period.""As to whether that should happen I'm fairly agnostic about it. "I know that would give us a similar level of population of somewhere like North Yorkshire, or Devon and Cornwall – and certainly they seem to work well in that setup. "I don't see a particular reason why that would be detrimental to the service within Norfolk."PCCs serve four year terms in office, but with major changes being made to local government, Taylor said her's would end on 1 April 2027 – less than three years after she was elected."This will mean that I'm not only Labour's first Police and Crime Commissioner for Norfolk, but I will also be Norfolk's shortest serving Police and Crime Commissioner."She added that her "primary focus" was to make sure services were not affected whilst work took place transferring the role's responsibility to a mayor."I think it's fair to say the nuts and bolts of this will need to be worked through," she Home Office has been asked for comment. Follow Norfolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
