Government approves asylum center for 1,256 men at Piddington base

The government has granted planning permission for a new asylum‑seeker centre on the former Ministry of Defence Bicester site near the Oxfordshire village of Piddington, allowing up to 1,256 men to be housed there. Housing Secretary Angela Rayner signed off the approval using an Urgent Crown Development route, a fast‑track process the Home Office says is for projects of “national importance” and urgent need.

The decision comes as the Home Office pushes ahead with a wider plan to convert disused military bases into accommodation for asylum seekers. National demand for such housing remains high, and the MoD Bicester site was identified as a ready‑made location. Local opposition has been fierce. In a symbolic referendum, Piddington voted to “leave the UK” rather than host the centre, and campaigners have already launched a legal challenge. The village also lodged a formal complaint, with 3,177 representations against the proposal and only one in favour, according to a recent government report.

Critics have condemned the use of emergency powers. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp accused Rayner and the Labour government of betraying Piddington’s residents, while Liberal Democrat MP for Bicester and Woodstock, Calum Miller, called the plan “the wrong site for local communities, asylum seekers and taxpayers”. Parish Council chair Tim McNally, who led the referendum campaign, said the community will pursue every legal avenue, noting a six‑week window to bring a High Court challenge on the grounds that the decision is legally flawed. The approval itself allows demolition of existing structures, the erection of modular housing units, and the provision of health and welfare facilities.

If the challenge proceeds, the case could set a precedent for how quickly the government can repurpose defence sites for immigration purposes. A ruling against the approval would stall the MoD Bicester project and could force the Home Office to seek alternative locations, heightening pressure on an already strained asylum system. The outcome will also test the limits of the urgent‑development powers introduced in July, which were meant to ensure transparency and accountability in high‑profile public projects.