Women from the Oxfordshire village of Piddington have taken their opposition to a proposed asylum accommodation site directly to Parliament, urging politicians to listen to their concerns about community safety and the future of their village.
The group travelled to the House of Commons on Wednesday as MPs debated plans to accommodate 1,256 male asylum seekers at a former Ministry of Defence (MoD) site in Bicester, close to the village, which has a population of around 400.
Their visit marked another stage in a campaign that has included a symbolic referendum in which residents voted to leave the United Kingdom in protest against the Home Office proposal.
Although the Government has submitted a planning application for the site, ministers have stressed that no final decision has been made.
Women Bring Their Concerns Directly to MPs
The campaigners attended the parliamentary debate alongside Conservative shadow minister Joy Morrissey, who highlighted their presence while criticising the Government’s handling of the proposal.
Morrissey accused Labour MPs of failing to engage directly with the women affected by the plans, arguing that the opposition had brought their concerns to Westminster because ministers had not adequately addressed them.
She urged MPs to support the Conservative motion, which condemned the proposed accommodation site and called for the UK to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to make it easier to deport people living in the country illegally.
Morrissey also raised concerns about crimes committed by men, arguing that those responsible for serious offences should be deported where legally possible.
Her remarks formed part of a broader Conservative attack on the Government’s immigration policies, with the party accusing Labour of placing ideological considerations ahead of the safety of local communities.
Piddington Residents Raise Fears About Women’s Safety
Louise Brooker, a Piddington resident involved in the campaign, said the women had travelled to Parliament to demonstrate their opposition to the Home Office proposal.
Speaking to GB News ahead of the debate, Brooker said residents were concerned about their own safety and that of their families.
She argued that the issue extended beyond Piddington, describing immigration management as a national concern and calling on the Government to take greater control of the country’s borders.
The campaign has focused heavily on the potential impact of accommodating more than 1,200 men close to a small village. Residents have questioned whether the location is appropriate and whether the proposed arrangements would adequately address their concerns.
However, concerns raised by residents about the proposed site do not establish that the asylum seekers who might be accommodated there pose a threat to the community.
Local MP Calls Bicester Site Unsuitable
Calum Miller, the Liberal Democrat MP for Bicester and Woodstock, whose constituency includes both Piddington and the proposed accommodation site, also opposed the plans.
Miller described the proposal as wrong for local communities, asylum seekers and taxpayers, arguing that the former military site was not an appropriate location for the intended accommodation.
He acknowledged the concerns expressed by Piddington residents, particularly regarding the safety of women and girls.
Miller said a proposal to house more than 1,200 men beside small villages would understandably raise questions about security and the ability of public services to respond to concerns.
However, he also criticised the Conservatives and Reform UK for attempting to turn the debate into a racial issue.
Miller argued that violence against women and girls should be addressed through better policing and court resources, rather than through political arguments designed to divide communities. He also pointed out that most assaults against women are committed by men known to their victims.
The MP further opposed the Conservative push for withdrawal from the ECHR, accusing political opponents of seeking division rather than a constructive solution to the asylum accommodation debate.
Home Office Says No Final Decision Has Been Made
Home Office minister Anna Turley defended the Government’s wider approach to asylum accommodation, acknowledging that the existing system had created problems for both taxpayers and communities.
She said billions of pounds had been spent housing asylum seekers in hotels, many of which had become prominent symbols of public frustration with the immigration system.
Turley argued that some areas with lower housing costs and fewer economic opportunities had been required to accommodate a disproportionate share of asylum seekers.
The Government, she said, was working towards a fairer distribution of accommodation across the country while reducing its reliance on hotels.
Addressing the Bicester proposal specifically, Turley confirmed that the Home Office had submitted a planning application but emphasised that the process had not reached a final decision.
She also praised the Piddington campaigners for mounting what she described as an imaginative and forceful campaign, despite the disagreement over the proposed site.
Government Defends Use of Former Military Sites
A Home Office spokesperson said the Government intended to close asylum hotels and move people into alternative forms of accommodation, including former military facilities.
The department said it had saved more than £1 billion in costs since the election through its approach to asylum accommodation.
According to the spokesperson, proposed sites would be designed as self-contained facilities, with round-the-clock security and CCTV intended to reduce their impact on surrounding communities.
The department added that, should the Bicester site proceed, it would work with local authorities and police forces to maintain safety and security in the surrounding area.
The assurances have not ended opposition in Piddington, where residents continue to question whether the location is suitable for such a large accommodation facility.
MPs Reject Conservative Motion on Immigration Plans
The parliamentary debate ended with MPs voting against the Conservative motion by 309 votes to 113, a majority of 196.
The motion had condemned the proposed MoD Bicester accommodation plans and called for the UK to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights.
The vote represented a parliamentary setback for the Conservatives’ attempt to link opposition to the proposed site with a wider change in Britain’s human rights arrangements.
It did not, however, amount to a final decision on the future of the Bicester site, which remains subject to the Government’s planning process.
Campaign Continues as Village Awaits Government Decision
The dispute highlights the wider challenges facing the Government as it seeks to reduce the cost of asylum accommodation, close hotels and find alternative locations for people awaiting decisions on their claims.
For Piddington residents, the immediate concern remains the possibility of a large accommodation facility opening close to their village.
Campaigners want ministers to reconsider the location and address their questions about security, while the Government maintains that no final decision has been taken.
Until the planning process advances, the future of the former military site remains uncertain, leaving residents, local representatives and asylum accommodation officials waiting for the next stage of the decision-making process.
