Airbase asylum plans: High Court gives permission to councils' challenge

Protesters gathered outside Wethersfield ahead of the court hearing and arrival of the first 46 asylum seekers

A legal bid to challenge the Home Office's decision to use former airbases to house asylum seekers has been approved by the High Court.

Braintree District Council had brought a legal action to challenge the use of Wethersfield Airfield in Essex to house up to 1,700 men.

West Lindsey District Council was challenging similar plans for RAF Scampton in Lincolnshire.

The court has ruled that points made by both councils needed a fresh hearing.

This week's two-day hearing began on Wednesday as the first 46 migrants began arriving at Wethersfield.

The councils made the challenge in conjunction with Gabriel Clarke-Holland, who lives about 80ft from one of Wethersfield's gates.

Reserving judgement until Friday, Mrs Justice Thornton has ruled that two of 15 points made by the authorities and Mr Clarke-Holland could be considered at a further hearing.

"The decision to accommodate asylum seekers on the sites may give rise to strong local opinion," she said, adding that there might also be wider discussions about the welfare of the migrants.

"Those are not, however, matters for the court," the judge added.

Up to 2,000 asylum seekers could be housed at Scampton in Lincolnshire

The judge said one of the issues to be considered at a further hearing was the potential use of "emergency" planning powers by the Home Office.

The High Court previously heard from the government that the planning law which would allow the airfields to be used for housing migrants covered the change of use of the bases to prevent or mitigate an emergency which "threatens serious damage to human welfare".

The two councils and Mr Clarke-Holland have challenged the use of these planning powers, while the Home Office argued their use was justified.

In written submissions made on behalf of the government department, Paul Brown KC said there were "misapprehensions" underpinning claims by both councils and Mr Clarke-Holland.

He said none had raised "any arguable point".

'Warehoused'

The councils previously lost bids for legal injunctions preventing the government using the bases for migrants.

On Wednesday, the Home Office said it planned for Wethersfield to be "fully operational" by the autumn.

West Lindsey District Council said it understood the first asylum seekers would arrive at Scampton in mid-August.

Chief executive of the refugee charity Care4Calais, Steve Smith, said: "Refugees should be treated with dignity and housed in communities, not warehoused in disused barracks and barges.

"Care4Calais witnessed the horrors of poor institutional accommodation at Napier Barracks [in Kent] and we've supported people in their recovery from the aftermath of that scandal."

The government's "rhetoric and demonisation of refugees" was at the heart of plans to house asylum seekers at bases and was "totally unnecessary", he added.

The first migrants arrived at Wethersfield, which is about eight miles north of Braintree, on Wednesday afternoon

Braintree District Council's lawyers told the hearing that the Home Office had failed to take into account issues including access to healthcare and waste water provision.

Following the ruling, Graham Butland, Conservative leader at Braintree, said: "We are grateful to have had another opportunity to put our views and the views of our local community across to the High Court at this initial stage, as we still believe Wethersfield Airfield is not a suitable site for these plans."

The council would continue to work with the Home Office and other partners to minimise the impact on residents while supporting asylum seekers coming to the district, he said.

'Perverse'

West Lindsey District Council wants to use Scampton for aviation, heritage, tourism, education and research, with a deal to develop the site through partners Scampton Holdings Limited announced in March.

Lawyers for the council told the High Court the project would create thousands of skilled jobs, but there were growing concerns that the investors might scrap plans if the government proposals for the site were implemented.

Trevor Young, Liberal Democrat leader at West Lindsey, welcomed the judge's ruling.

Going forward he said the council must "balance our legal process with our duty of care as a local authority, to hold the Home Office to account on their proposals".

"We will continue to raise our concerns with the Home Office so it can put in place mitigating actions. We will also continue to push for open and transparent engagement with our community," he said.

Conservative MP for Gainsborough, Sir Edward Leigh, said he was "absolutely delighted" by the ruling and called the Home Office plans "perverse".

Peter Hewitt of Scampton Holdings said the decision was a "major step forward for common sense".

A Home Office spokesperson said: "As this matter is subject to ongoing litigation it would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage.

"We remain committed to deliver accommodation on surplus military sites which are not only more affordable for taxpayers, helping to reduce the use the £6million daily cost of hotels but are also more manageable for local communities."

Sign up for our morning newsletter and get BBC News in your inbox.