The city council will not be seeking to stop hotels here being used to house asylum seekers, its deputy leader said today.
Epping Council secured a temporary injunction from the High Court on Tuesday, blocking the use of the Essex town’s Bell Hotel as accommodation for asylum seekers on planning grounds.
This prompted Kemi Badenoch has called for more Conservative councils to launch legal challenges over asylum hotels as the Government faces a potential revolt from its own local authorities.
The most recent government figures show 65 asylum seekers are being housed in Brighton and Hove hotels, down 10 from March this year.
In 2023, Brighton and Hove City Council was one of a handful of local authorities to successfully take the then-Tory government to court to end the placement of lone asylum seeker children in hotels here.
But it said that ending the use of hotels to house adults and families was not something it was seeking to do.
Deputy leader Jacob Taylor said: “As a proud city of sanctuary we will always play our role in housing asylum seekers and providing a welcome and support to those fleeing persecution and horrific circumstances which many of us can thankfully only imagine.
“We will not comment on the location of hotels being used by the Home Office to provide temporary accommodation to people seeking asylum.
“I believe to do so in the current climate is irresponsible and risks causing division and unrest in our communities at a time when more than ever we need to bring people together.”
The council claims a severe housing shortage in the city yet continues to promote policies that attract more people. Their responses fail to address the core issue. The government is not tackling illegal immigration effectively, allowing numbers to rise unchecked. Many arrivals lack documentation, making it impossible to assess potential risks. If Reform and Conservative-led councils can now legally transfer asylum seekers to other councils, our city will soon face even greater strain, with more people competing for limited housing, worsening congestion, and raising safety concerns. The city is already overcrowded, with traffic and infrastructure under increasing pressure. Labour cannot be relied upon to address these challenges.
Expect that ignores the fact that asylum accommodation is Home Office-funded and ring-fenced, not council-controlled.
In Bournemouth residents are so fed up with the impact of these hotels that have started an organised resident vigilante group. This council concerns me as if they say they will not try and close them down then the home office will move these hotels to Brighton. No doubt this will then start causing unpleasant community cohesion problems which the Jews are already facing in the City. It will also impact tourism jobs and employment.
I agree 100% with Rob. This is so terrible that our homeless are living on the street. I went to Morley Street dentist today. How sad I feel for our own citizens are doing this. It is totally wrong. WAKE UP LABOUR.
Well said Maureen, if the government can’t handle a dinghy, how can we expect it to tackle more severe global threats?
are these poor people on the street because of 70 or so asylum seekers being housesd in grotty hotels in B/H while their applications are processed?? Really?? think about the logistička.. the numbers
Blaming 65 asylum seekers for a citywide housing crisis is a dodge. Different funding, different duties. Fix rents, evictions and supply. Labour has also built more houses than any other administration since the 1980s in this city. Tories built none. Greens did mainly policy work. WAKE UP, MARUEEN.
Appears the number is less this month and is now 55 asylum seekers in Brighton and hove. Yet this number is to blame for Brighton’s housing shortage, problems with community cohesion and the down fall of Labour locally???????? Got a problem blame it on asylum seekers – job done.
Perhaps Cllr Taylor should take some time to walk along the seafront & around the city and see with his own eyes, the number of homeless sleeping in tents. These individuals could be accommodated rather than illegal immigrants in our hotels. Pandering to the Greens as Brighton & Hove as a City of sanctuary will ensure the ongoing brain drain away, families moving out & schools closing – but hey that is irrelevant to him as a hard left winger as no doubt the memo has already been sent to Rachel Reeves that there are still some ‘easy pickings’ to increase property taxes here, to fund for more accommodation to those who shouldn’t necessarily be in the UK in the first place.
As a councillor you already know that Brighton council does and has done for many years housed homeless in hotels in Brighton until a suitable accommodation is available. No pandering just sadly having to peddle water because of the 14 year of under funding by the conservative government. Cllr Lyons you continue to comment lies and is rich you say pandering considering your blind support.
These people are “asylum” seekers, seeking asylum. Shelter from harm is a human right and as fellow humans we need to be compassionate and offer it where we can. To everyone.
If these people are really fleeing “from harm” why did they travel through numerous countries where they would be safe to get to the UK. Rhetorical question
That’s a false narrative. International law doesn’t say you must stop in the first safe country. People often come to the UK because of language, family or community ties.
Why is it false? International Law may not insist on it, but if you are truly ‘fleeing harm’ you would seek sanctuary in the nearest safe country. Once you start travelling across countries to a preferred choice you become an economic migrant. If you arrive via an illegal route, to essentially jump the queue, you become an illegal immigrant, a criminal. This is internationally accepted but weak Western governments have failed, until recently, to enforce it. If Britain was at war, I’d try to get my family to France, even though we don’t speak French and have no ties. If instead we rock up in Hawaii or Bora Bora or Dubai, because they’re our preferred choices, we become economic migrants, no longer refugees ‘fleeing harm’. Your ideology would qualify the populations of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh (over 1 billion) to move to England on the basis of poverty, language, family ties, government corruption, misogyny and clan wars. Madness
They can start taking up all those empty HMO’s in your local vicinity, at least all the landlords that can’t rent them will now get 30% over market value direct from the government
Perhaps Cllr Lyons should take some time to understand what his own council already does with his own eyes. Maybe he could also learn the difference between an asylum seeker and an illegal immigrant. It’s lazy scapegoating and has nothing to do with facts. Perhaps he will also stop peddling stereotypes about desperate people.
…But constant sneering and scapegoating is about the only contribution Lyons ever makes; no wonder his party has become irrelevant.
Oh, and let’s also check Cllr Lyon’s track record when it comes to building housing in Brighton…oh, that’s odd. There’s nothing…nothing here at all…Conservatives literally built ZERO council homes? Oh, how embarrassing…
I am glad to see that Cllr Lyons concerns for the homeless of Brighton and look forward to him aggressively backing social houses and not support any objections from constituents in Westdean and hove park area.
Happy to see you make a change.
This is a politically naive thing for B&H Labour to do. It could have chosen a “we’re waiting court decisions, no other comment at this time” line. Instead, it has gone for “we’re open” implying “send us more”. That could be a disastrous decision.
I think the major risk locally isn’t hotels but HMOs. Not all have been filled by usual students this year, apparently (decline in international students, less demand etc). If that’s the case, potential to be used by the government (who are today reportedly looking for 20,000 HMO spaces nationally). That means illegal immigrants living within communities somewhere rather than in hotels. How many in Brighton?
Nick what are the risks you mention over any other unchecked person living in these HMO ?
I was referring to political risk for Labour locally rather than a risk from any resident of the HMO. However, regular renters of HMOs (and any other rental) have to go through referencing with financial and other checks. They are certainly not unchecked. This wouldn’t be the case for illegal immigrants as papers/ID are destroyed – so referencing isn’t possible. Different for many regular asylum seekers, as Cllr Taylor states who are fleeing war etc (as with Ukranian refugees)
Cllr Taylor is putting all asylum seekers into one category – and ignoring the majority of economic migrants arriving via illegal means. He states these arrivals, usually from France, are “fleeing persecution and horrific circumstances”. I don’t know if he’s visited France, but I find it delightful and safe rather than horrific!
Could the neighbours of these hotels not take the council to court for failing to protect them from the irregular use of the hotels against planning law? I recall the council getting onto trouble for breaching planning law at St Catherin’s Lodge Hotel in similar circumstances.
Planning law does apply, but in cases like asylum accommodation, the government can override local planning rules using emergency powers. That’s why councils rarely succeed in blocking hotel use through planning law, even though neighbours can raise objections. The St Catherine’s Lodge case was different: that was a straight planning breach, not a Home Office placement under national powers.
Number of things here.
Many of the people in tents on the seafront are not homeless but wild camping. Ask them if you don’t believe me.
Brighton has one of the highest number of long term empty properties that are not suitable for habitation. Unlike other cities there are no grants available to help renovate these properties.
Bhcc has gone out of its way to vilify private landlords and together with the government has sought to drive them away.
However Brighton is one of the most expensive places to live in the UK surpassing many London boroughs.
In short Brighton is not the place for homeless people or illegal immigrants because it is too expensive. There are cheaper places in the UK.
If such hotels are breaching the original planning consent to be a hotel rather than effectively a long term hostel, the question of breaching insurance must be taken into consideration.
Insurance is a matter for the property owner, not the council. Planning consent for a hotel still covers temporary accommodation, even if it’s used by the Home Office for asylum seekers, so it isn’t classed as a breach in the same way as converting it into flats or a hostel would be.
Think this should be up to a vote personally getting fed up of the council and government doing what it wants when its supposed to work for us the people. Over half the people in brighton want them out and the homless in there place instead look after our own stop letting countries we give aid to come here stop the aid or stop the boats simple. cant have both.
It isn’t the council choosing, it’s the Home Office using emergency powers. Local people don’t get a vote on it, and neither does the council. And foreign aid is less than 1% of the budget, so cutting it wouldn’t fund housing here.
If the council won’t seek an injunction perhaps someone else will? Can the council then try and block it ?
I hope the council welcomes refugees and asylum seekers that are moved on from Epping. Brighton is such a welcoming city and I’ll be glad to see the city help more people in need.
For all the moaners and haters, the total number of asylum seekers and refugees in hotels according to the Home Office is only about the same as the capacity of the Amex stadium.
Will you put your name forward to house them ? Or are they someone else’s problem ?
as an aside be sure to check out and read carefully a petition on the official uk government and parliament petition page..repeal the online safety act it currently has 528,093, signatures it needs many more it can be signed and reshared widely from all over the uk including brighton theres much more information online concerning the online safety act
Asylum seekers deserve support and need refuge. The thing that is broken is our governments inhumane and degrading asylum system, which forbids people from taking work, contributing and integrating whilst waiting a decision, and condemns them to hostile treatment placing them in “hotels” to be targeted by fascists and their handmaidens.
As you enter Brighton on the A23 you pass the Patcham Pylons, where a poem is engraved:
HAIL GUEST• WE ASK NOT WHAT THOU ART.
IF FRIEND. WE GREET THEE. HAND & HEART:
IF STRANGER. SUCH NO LONGER BE:
IF FOE. OUR LOVE SHALL CONQUER THEE.
Yes – a bit tacky. But the sentiment is right.
we have one of the most generous asylum systems in the world. So much so that other countries, for example France, see it as a draw and encouraging people to take huge risks. Yes, we need to give sanctuary to those truly in need. But many are currently economic migrants. They are not in danger – unless you see France and most of Europe as dangerous! They are coming here, often on false promises.
Ask yourself – if another country offered people free accommodation in 3 or 4 star hotels along with food/small allowance and free healthcare, how many of our population would travel there? Lots would IMHO. We need a way to stop economic migrants (I respect what they are doing, but we don’t have the housing and money for more people currently) while still helping the few genuine people.
Hi Nick, That’s a lovely thing to say about our country. I wasn’t aware that the United Kingdom had one of the most generous assylum system in the world. Where did you find this out. I’d love to learn more.
To get to the UK you have to travel through many safe and lovely countries. Then you have to make an illegal crossing of the channel one which tragically claims many lives each year. Yet tens of thousands of people choose to do this every year. They know what they’re doing. They know the asylum system is that good in the UK. Why else would they take such risks and spend so much money? There are numerous places along the route that offer safety and asylum. Why continue on unless there is something better ahead? We need to listen to the asylum seekers themselves and what they’re doing and the choices and risks they’re taking.
People don’t risk their lives in dinghies because the UK has a ‘soft’ asylum system, it doesn’t. They come here because they already have family, speak English, or have ties here. International law doesn’t say you must stop in the first safe country. The real problem is the lack of safe legal routes, which forces people into dangerous crossings.
As you approach Brighton on the A259 through Saltdean you can see that the flagshaggers have been out overnight with their cheap Chinese St George’s Crosses. Sadly not the sentiment that you rightly noted.
We pay Foreign Aid to help other countries.
The rest of our taxes are supposed to be spent on us, including council tax.
How come our own homeless are coming last on the list here?
Most are economic migrants and have gone through many ‘safe’ countries to get to ours because we are regarded as a soft target.
Elaine, it’s sad how these narratives twist real issues into something they’re not. Foreign aid is less than 1% of our budget, and homelessness here is driven by rents, evictions, and lack of social housing and not by refugees. Groups push the ‘soft target’ line because it plays on fears, not facts. It’s frustrating to see people like yourself pulled into their propaganda…
Housing problems are caused by lack of supply. We have built far fewer homes than needed for decades under all governments – we have fewer homes per head than virtually all EU countries. This leads to high prices to buy and rent. Immigration – both legal and illegal is part of this. Running into millions of people over the past few years, far above the level of house building. So the housing crisis is getting worse not better
If governments of all colours had built homes and infrastructure (GPs, dentists, roads, homes etc) at the rate of immigration and population growth, then this would not be the hot issue it is now. However, everything is stretched and under-resourced. NHS waiting times are a scandal. Not a recent issue – it’s decades worth of lack of planning.
You’re absolutely right that decades of under-building is the core problem, Nick, and that governments of all stripes have failed to keep up.
Where I’d push back is on immigration being the decisive cause; it certainly has an impact, but not significantly. Most studies show house price inflation is overwhelmingly driven by lack of supply (like you said), buy-to-let speculation, and weak renters’ protections.
Immigration is a factor in population growth, but so is an ageing population, internal migration, and falling household size. I think we share the same thought here that the real solution is to build the homes and infrastructure we need.
When I grew up in Brighton there was surplus of property. Since then the population has exploded. This is fact. We do not have and nor do many of us want every single piece of green space built on. The population density of the UK is already one of the highest in Europe and as we can see this affects everything from road congestion to water supply as well as housing. The real solution is to stop immigration other than on a one out one in basis and based on skills and earning potential. Also, Brighton has always been an expensive place to live and we should also be realistic and not expect everyone who wants to live here. One of the reasons we have so few asylum seekers is SERCO are leasing housing to rent for asylum seekers in cheaper areas. They are realistic and if you cannot afford housing here sadly everyone should be realistic.
Jane, you’re right that Brighton has always been an expensive place to live, and geography makes development difficult. But it’s important to separate out what’s really driving the squeeze.
UK density is often overstated; we’re actually less dense than, say, the Netherlands or Belgium. The real problem here is housing policy, not headcount. Decades of under-building, deregulated buy-to-let, and thousands of homes lost to AirBnB have hit Brighton hard.
Brighton is attractive to people moving from London and abroad. The only sustainable answer is to build the right homes in the right places, protect green space by making better use of brownfield sites, and ensure affordability through regulation. The realistic solution here is a better housing policy.
BHCC are not fit for purpose. Less services = Increase in Council tax.
Not accurate I’m afraid. Less budget from central government with more services provided locally to more people means that the fat has to be trimmed.