Asylum centre on military base near Piddington approved

Plans to house asylum seekers at a former military site near the Oxfordshire village of Piddington have been approved by the government.

Planning permission for housing up to 1,256 men at the MoD Bicester site was approved by the Housing Secretary Angela Rayner after the Home Office used a fast-track route for projects deemed to be urgently needed and of national importance.

The Home Office said this would allow it to continue developing the plan but that no final decision on the site had been taken.

Piddington symbolically voted to leave the UK over the planned use for the site, which has also been legally challenged by campaigners. Opponents now have six weeks to challenge the approval.

A government report said the decision received 3,177 representations against and one in support.

It also said Rayner had ruled permission via an Urgent Crown Development application should be granted because "national demand for asylum accommodation remains high".

The permission allows for demolition of existing buildings, the building of new modular accommodation, and provisions for health and welfare facilities.

Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: "Angela Rayner and the Labour government have betrayed the people of Piddington by abusing their emergency powers in this way."

He continued: "Instead of accommodating illegal immigrants, the government should leave the ECHR so they can be rapidly deported."

Liberal Democrat MP for Bicester and Woodstock Calum Miller said it was "the wrong plan and the wrong site for local communities, asylum seekers and taxpayers".

"I am deeply disappointed that the government has approved this proposal despite the serious concerns raised by residents and local councils as well as the major problems with the site," he added.

The approval could be challenged by an application to the High Court within six weeks of the day after the decision date.

The government said a challenge "may be brought only on the ground that the decision is legally flawed - it is not an opportunity to reconsider the planning merits".