People living in the small Oxfordshire village of Piddington, now caught up in the national row over illegal immigration and asylum accommodation, say they are worried that a proposed migrant camp nearby could end up being far larger than first indicated.
Documents that have recently come to light suggest as many as 3,510 asylum seekers could be placed at a military barracks on the edge of the village — a figure well above the 1,256 people listed in the official planning application.
The Home Office, however, has pushed back against those concerns, saying the risk assessment containing the higher number was only an early draft, even though the document is dated March this year.
The assessment, which describes asylum seekers as “service users”, remains publicly available online and does not appear to have been updated or amended.
The revelation has intensified tensions in Piddington, a village of just 350 residents, including 46 children, where locals have been mounting a lengthy campaign against the planned asylum seeker accommodation site.
On September 15, the village will vote in a symbolic referendum on leaving the UK as part of their protests.
Tim McNally, 60, chair of Piddington Parish Council, said his village ‘deserves the truth’ about the number of asylum seekers who will be housed at the camp.
Tim McNally, 60, chair of Piddington Parish Council, said his village ‘deserves the truth’ about the number of asylum seekers who will be housed at the camp
Locals are infuriated by proposals to house a number of males at a migrant camp near the tiny Oxfordshire village of Piddington
‘Although the proposal states 1,256 single males between the ages of 18 and 65, the service users focuses on 3,510,’ he said.
‘That is ten times the size of the village of Piddington. Now if that is an error, correct it.
‘This is more than alarming. It is either deception at the greatest level or incompetence at the highest.’
Residents of Piddington, which does not have a pub or even a shop, have cried foul that the plans for the camp are ‘completely inappropriate’ and ‘impractical’.
Melise Witkin, 59, a resident of Piddington, previously told the Mail: ‘This is not about being rich or poor, this is about safety.
‘People have worked really hard throughout their lives to live in this village.
‘It is not such a rich or poor village. I just don’t think that is a conversation to be had. This is about safety.
‘We are 356 people in the village with 46 children and 1,250 men turning up is a recipe for disaster. People walk their dogs, children play, I just think it is madness.
‘This is about safety, nothing more. Even for them [the asylum seekers], along that road there is no pavement, there are no street lights. We just have to be realistic.
Husband and wife Karen and Derek Joy. Karen said villagers feel like they have been ignored and Mr Burnham has ‘finally picked up on us’ after they had made ‘noise for quite some time’
Signs in protest of the migrant camp are littered around the quaint village
The tiny Oxfordshire village has a population of just 350 people. The new migrant camp is being proposed at the nearby Bicester barracks
ALSO READ: Darius Slayton’s Giants Tenure Fell Short of Stardom but Delivered Lasting Value
‘They talk about bringing them out of hotels because it is going to be cheaper. This is going to cost millions.
‘So I feel people have chosen for their children to live here, to have that community and village life and I think that will be ripped away from us. You shouldn’t have to feel unsafe in your own home.
‘For me, this isn’t about politics, it is just about safety and the fact that there are vulnerable people in the village. We don’t have a pub, we don’t have a shop, what are the asylum seekers going to do here.’
Karen Joy, lives in Piddington with her husband Derek. ‘We feel we have been ignored,’ she said.
‘We are a very small village and there is nothing for the people in the asylum camp to do. Our worry is that they will wander into our village and the security is nil.’
‘We feel scared. That is all I feel, to be honest. We have a very safe and lovely community.
‘We won’t feel safe anymore if they can walk down the road and there is nothing to do. Who knows what is going to happen.’
Graham Burchell, who has been farming in Piddington since 1970, said: ‘I agree that everybody should take their share of asylum seekers but our share has become too much.
‘We already have a prison down here, and when we sit outside in the nice summer air, all we can hear is foul language coming from the prison.
‘And not only do we have that to put up with, but there has also recently been a traveller camp set up and they have ignored all the planning regulations.’
The Grade II-listed St Nicholas Church in the pretty village of Piddington, which dates back to the 13th century
Last month, Andy Burnham sparked criticism by saying middle-class areas should also have to house their share of asylum seekers.
He said he would make sure arrivals were not only placed in the ‘poorest communities’ and ‘all parts of the country need to play their part’.
An analysis by the Daily Mail revealed that there are 17 local authorities with no taxpayer-supported asylum seekers.
Home Office figures showing the number of supported asylum seekers per local authority at the end of March reveal the areas that currently house no migrants are overwhelmingly rural beauty spots.
These include the Cotswolds, Derbyshire Dales, Malvern Hills, the New Forest and the Scottish Highlands.
Others include Mid Devon, East Hertfordshire, Ceredigion (a scenic county in west Wales) and Hart, a 118-square-mile local authority taking in major towns, rural parishes and villages in Hampshire.
The Gloucestershire market town of Tewkesbury is also on the list, as are the Isle of Wight, Isles of Scilly, Orkney Islands, Shetland Islands, Mid and East Antrim and Mid Ulster, and Na h-Eileanan Siar – an island chain off the west coast of Scotland.
A Home Office spokesman said: ‘It is categorically untrue to suggest we are seeking to house 3,510 people at MOD Bicester.
‘As our planning application clearly states, we are considering the site to accommodate up to 1,256 asylum seekers.
‘The concerns of communities are central to our immigration reforms. That is why we are closing every asylum hotel and moving asylum seekers into alternative accommodation, including former military sites.’