Labour accused of audacious plot to create ‘migrant cities’ and flood towns with asylum seekers

But with ministers aiming to boot out approximately 30,000 asylum seekers from 200 hotels across the UK by 2029, questions have been raised over which of Britain’s beloved communities could be next in line to host hundreds of unvetted foreigners.

Crowborough, a town in East Sussex, has now become home for 350 migrant men, while Cameron Barracks, a British Army installation in the Scottish city of Inverness, is set to accommodate 300 asylum seekers in the imminent future.

To find out where in the UK asylum seekers could be housed next, GB News approached every council across Great Britain which has barracks set to be "disposed of" over the next 12 years.

However, when asked whether the Home Office has expressed interest in using disused military sites for the initiative, local bosses refused to be drawn in and passed the buck back onto the Government.

Of the 63 councils approached by the People's Channel, 25 stated no plans have yet been made to move migrants into former quarters.

Meanwhile, eight local authorities reported no dealings were being explored with Government officials – but with the added caveat Whitehall should be questioned on the matter.

Those that denied ongoing negotiations were taking place but still shirked responsibility were Breckland Council, Central Bedfordshire Council, South Keveston Council, Kirklees Council, Rushmoor Borough Council, Shropshire Council, South Oxfordshire and the Vale of White Horse District Councils, and the Vale of Glamorgan Council.

Four local authorities refused to confirm nor deny whether they were in communication with the Home Office about such an initiative.

Aberdeen City Council, City of York Council, Pembrokeshire County Council and South Lanarkshire Council copped out of giving Britain's News Channel an answer.

Combined, the sites have the capacity to deliver nearly 22,000 homes for asylum seekers.

The Prince William of Gloucester Barracks, the largest army barracks in Lincolnshire and surrounding areas, could theoretically accommodate 3,000 people — the size of a small town.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) was due to sell off the land back in 2020 but now plans to keep a hold of it for almost a decade longer than originally planned.

The Prince William of Gloucester Barracks, which is set to close in 2029, is located outside Grantham, a leafy market town and the birthplace of former prime minister Margaret Thatcher.

A spokesman for South Kesteven District Council, whose boundary encompasses the mammoth complex, replied it “has not expressed an interest in using disused military sites for asylum accommodation”, adding: “We are not aware of being put forward or selected for a Home Office initiative by a third party."

However, full disclosure from Whitehall, as Crowborough’s representatives discovered last year, does not appear to be a requirement. Nusrat Ghani, the Conservative MP for Sussex Weald, claimed neither she nor Tory councillors were informed of the decision to house hundreds of men at the Crowborough camp, accusing Wealden District Council's Green and Liberal Democrat coalition of conducting “secret” talks behind the community’s back.

GB News understands Ms Mahmood’s department has a longstanding policy not to provide a running commentary on operational matters. The People’s Channel has been assured the Home Office is working closely with councils and other stakeholders to speed up delivery, confirming plans to scale up the use of military barracks.

As a result, activists and politicians have accused Labour of conducting a “cover-up”.

Chris Philp, the Shadow Home Secretary, urged Labour to “come clean” about where they plan to send illegal migrants, commenting: “The truth is that they are moving illegal immigrants from asylum hotels to residential housing because they do not have control of our borders."

So far this year, more than 6,000 small boat migrants have arrived in the UK, which is enough to fill the Crowborough camp more than 11 times over.

“We know there are far fewer checks and safeguards in dispersal accommodation, which allows illegal immigrants to work illegally, commit more crime, and disappear into your community,” Mr Philp added.

His warning has already become a “nightmare” reality for Crowborough residents. All 350 male migrants live a mere 20-minute walk from the town centre and are able to freely roam without a curfew. Residents are also entitled to a £50 weekly allowance to pay for basic amenities, such as food, clothing, and toiletries.

The Home Office confirmed the Crowborough site could house as many as 540 people. They will stay in the barracks for up to three months while their asylum claims are processed.

Hundreds of people have marched through the streets of Crowborough brandishing England and Union flags in protest, with demonstrators encouraging residents to “form patrols” and stop paying council tax.

The Pink Ladies, a women's pressure group, have regularly appeared at Crowborough rallies, sounding the alarm over the impact mass migration has on local communities. Its founder, Orla Minihane, said she was “furious” at Labour over the lack of clarity and transparency on plans to accommodate asylum seekers, accusing Westminster of carrying out a “nothing-to-see-here” operation.

She told Britain's News Channel: “It’s a mass cover-up. That’s what it is. As concerned citizens, what choice do we have apart from shutting up? The only power you have is to protest.”

Ms Minihane is also a trustee of the Rhiannon Whyte Foundation, a fundraiser made in memory of the 27-year-old mother who was stabbed to death by a Sudanese national in 2024.

Deng Majek, who was staying at the Park Inn by Radisson hotel in Walsall, arrived in Britain via small boat just three months before the attack, in which he stabbed Ms Whyte 23 times with a screwdriver.

Ms Minihane declared: “This is a matter of safeguarding. Girls and women everywhere are under threat from these men thinking Britain is the land of milk and honey."

Making a direct appeal to the Government, she exclaimed: “What is the plan?! What are you doing? As mothers and grandmothers of our country, we demand your plan. Why are you covering it up?”

Elsewhere in the UK, the Home Office was slated with accusations of “secretly” moving migrants into a £500,000 cottage in Laleham, Surrey. A mere 200 yards from a primary school, one of the residents, an Afghan national, was arrested this week on suspicion of harassment. After being handcuffed at the schoolgates and held, the migrant, in his 20s, was later alleged to have returned to the school in question. He is currently being held at a facility under the Mental Health Act.

Lincoln Jopp, the Conservative MP for Spelthorne, grilled Sir Keir Starmer on this incident at Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, asking: “Who was responsible for the risk assessment that put him there? Who screwed up, and who can I hold accountable?”

The Labour leader responded: “Can I reassure him that all accommodation must meet contractual standards and the Home Office works with the police to manage all sites safely? Local authorities are consulted prior to any accommodation being procured and can object to any proposal."

Despite this claim, Spelthorne Borough Council politicians claimed they were not aware of the plans – just as 25 local councils told GB News they were unaware of any negotiations going on with the Home Office. They argue the move-in happened “without the normal risk assessment and communication from the Home Office to the local agencies”. Later, the authority admitted there was correspondence with Government officials at the end of November 2025 which sought feedback on the proposed acquisition of the property in question for an HMO for six residents.

But they argued the internal system in place was insufficiently "robust". Gordon Mitchell, Interim Chief Executive of Spelthorne Borough Council, who joined the council last month, remarked: "I accept that our internal processes are not robust enough and I apologise on behalf of the Council for this." An investigation into the matter has been actioned.

Alp Mehmet, Chairman of the Migration Watch think-tank, told the People's Channel housing asylum seekers in barracks far from towns and small communities "makes sense", yet added: "It isn’t acceptable, carries huge risks, and often proves destabilising by parachuting large numbers of young men from very different cultures into these areas, giving each £50 a week and complete freedom to come and go as they please. What makes it worse is when the Government does this without consulting or seeking the consent of those most impacted."

Reform UK’s Home Affairs Spokesman Zia Yusuf proclaimed it was “outrageous” migrants were simply being moved from one form of housing to another, telling Britain's News Channel: “Those leaving hotels aren’t being deported; they’re being dispersed into communities through HMOs and key military sites, preventing our armed forces from training. Don’t be fooled by the hotel closures. Labour isn’t solving the problem; it’s simply shifting it.”

Set to close in 2029, the Invicta Park Barracks in Maidstone, Kent, has the ability to house 1,300 people – exactly the number of residential homes it is said to host by 2037 after it was purchased by a private redevelopment company.

The site is home to the 36 Engineer Regiment and the Queen's Gurkha Engineers, leading to uproar over its closure. The barracks sit just 0.3 miles away from an infant school and include a grade II listed building, Park House.

These newly constructed buildings could, in theory, fall under Labour’s scheme to house asylum seekers in new council homes in just a few years’ time.

Earlier this year, a GB News investigation revealed 17 councils had already expressed an interest or requested more information about participating in the £500million pilot scheme.

The pilot scheme would allocate £100million in extra funding for the construction of new properties or the refurbishment of derelict buildings to house asylum seekers. Maidstone Borough Council dispelled any rumours, saying the current plans do not involve asylum accommodation.

During the 2024/25 year, around £2.1billion was splashed on migrant hotels. Last year, Chancellor Rachel Reeves promised Labour would close asylum hotels across Britain, saving the taxpayer £1billion annually.

Nevertheless, when plans for Crowborough were first revealed, the Home Office's Director of Asylum Accommodation Andrew Larter admitted asylum seekers at the camp would cost roughly the same as accommodating them in hotels.

He confirmed each migrant's stay at the site would cost £100 a night.

With 350 migrants in the camp currently, that figure reaches £35,000 just for one night, adding to the bill with every passing day.

William Yarwood, Campaigns Director at the TaxPayers' Alliance, commented: "Taxpayers were promised savings, but the Crowborough camp is just a shell game that keeps them on the hook for the same bill. With costs matching hotel rates and local policing bills soaring, the Home Office is simply shuffling figures on a spreadsheet. The Government must stop the boats, detain, and deport those here illegally to finally end this massive drain on the pockets of hard-working Britons."

A Home Office spokesman said: “The Government is removing the incentives drawing illegal migrants to Britain, closing every single asylum hotel. Illegal migrants are being moved into basic accommodation as the Government scales up the use of military barracks. The population in asylum hotels has fallen by nearly 20 per cent in the last year and by 45 per cent since the peak under the previous Government – helping reduce asylum support costs by nearly £1billion.”

Our Standards: The GB News Editorial Charter