Savings from shutting down asylum hotels should return to impacted communities to alleviate rising tensions, according to a comprehensive study. Officials warn that these hotels serve as stark symbols of perceived unfairness, fueling protests and violence in recent years.
Key Findings from Community Consultations
The research, drawn from discussions in six English areas experiencing unrest—Liverpool, Plymouth, Hillingdon, Derby, Tamworth, and Wakefield—reveals that most residents do not oppose asylum seekers. However, the hotel-based accommodation system ignites conflicts amid local economic struggles.
Dr. Lucy Mort, lead researcher at the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), explains: “Media portrayals suggest widespread hatred toward asylum seekers, but views are often more nuanced. Many residents accept asylum seekers, yet hotels in declining high streets symbolize broader unfairness during tough economic times.”
Government Plans and Recommendations
The government commits to eliminating all asylum hotels by 2029, accelerating closures from a peak of 400 sites to about 185 in April. Prime Minister Keir Starmer pushes for quicker action, including expanded use of military sites.
Dr. Mort advocates rewarding host communities: “Areas that accommodated asylum seekers deserve recognition through investments. Hotels once provided local jobs and community spaces; now, losses prevail without compensation.”
The study proposes reviving the Migration Impact Fund, a £35 million initiative from 2009 scrapped later, to bolster services like English classes and integration programs in high-migration zones.
“Communities lack dedicated funding for cohesion efforts,” Dr. Mort states. “Reinstating this fund would direct resources to local authorities for essential support.”
Communication Gaps Fuel Misinformation
Poor consultation and vague information breed rumors. In Tamworth, one resident notes: “Placing asylum seekers centrally in a volatile area invites trouble—like painting a target on it.”
Across sites, updates on hotels arrive too late or lack clarity. IPPR urges faster closures, better temporary housing for asylum seekers and locals, and transparent communication.
Mark Curl, 65, from Hillingdon and a former homeless individual, shares: “Asylum seekers aren’t enjoying luxury; the system fails everyone. No one seems to listen.”
Marley Morris, IPPR associate director for migration, trade, and communities, concludes: “To ease tensions, reform the asylum system by phasing out hotels and funding community housing that benefits residents long-term.”
