What will happen to all the immigrants housed in hotels?

[RedSkyatNight25]

We are buying a house at the moment and since expressing an interest a local hotel only 3miles away from the house and in what would be our village/town centre. It’s a very rural community. The house is quite unique in what it offers and we haven’t seen anything that ticks our boxes in the same way - we first viewed a while ago.

There’s uproar locally about anti social behaviour on the village green/children’s play park and a sexual assault which resulted in an arrest. There’s videos circulating online with Middle Aged men making death threat gestures. Obviously I don’t know what preceded the death threats. All associated with the occupants of the hotel.

DH says this happens everywhere and that they will be dispersed eventually to social housing which there is none in the village. His view is we should crack on.

Where we will be is relatively isolated so they’re not likely to disturb our enjoyment of the house but the kids school, the park, the local shops are all in the vicinity of where the trouble is.

I’m trying not to express a view as to whether or not I agree with the decision to house them - just thinking practically re the longer term outlook.

I notice your concerns have already been shut down OP by the previous pp. As long as it doesn't effect them eh? The unfortunate truth is that this is happening everywhere and you are powerless to do anything about it. The home office order local councils to take in asylum seekers and they too, are powerless to stop it despite local resident concerns. There is literally nothing anyone can do.

Interesting isn't it, the political ‘sway’.

My council are a long held Conservative led council. Under the Conservative Government, they supported the housing of asylum seekers in local hotels.

No incidents, children attending local schools, residents of the area welcoming and supportive. Yet with a change of central government to Labour, the council have now refused to continue to support the arrangements in place.

A political decision to make a stand against labour, nothing else.

Yes I know it’s everywhere but you can mitigate it to an extent by living in certain areas. I.e I’d expect it more in city centres but we’re spending a significant sum on a house and have the ability to chose where we live.

Your post and several of the responses do raise an interesting question of how the illegal migrants should be accommodated in the UK.

The reality is that there is no way of physically stopping them entering the UK illegally, yes you can try and make the UK a less attractive destination but despite all the political rhetoric of smashing the smuggling gangs or using the Navy, they are still going to keep coming.

So we may as well have a pragmatic discussion on how to best accommodate them. Currently they initially get housed in hotels before being moved to more expensive rented houses - all at considerable cost to the tax payer.

IMO a more inclusive and much cheaper solution would be to replicate the "Homes for Ukrainians" where UK families volunteered to house Ukrainian refugees for a set period, with some funding from the IK Government. This policy managed to house 200k Ukrainian refugees in 2022 alone, compared to less than 50k who enter the UK as illegal migrants. So the numbers are entirely manageable.

There are fantastic charities such as :
https://refugeesathome.org/

Which I hope many people will consider and imagine how much more could be achieved with Government support.

@1dayatatime I agree, but similar to your username, one thing at a time!

The problem with that idea is that the right wing press and politicians have now spent years continually demonising the asylum seekers who come over on boats.

The narrative is that these "fighting age" men are here to harm our women and children, are invading the UK etc. etc. Many people would be reluctant.

Plus expecting individuals to take on the job of the state is problematic in many ways. There were a lot of issues over the Ukranian refugees, for example. There were many threads about it on MN.

One word of advice, if you have concerns about the use of hmos or hotels being used to house asylum seekers, whatever you do don't move to a " city of sanctuary ". Councils are legally mandated to take in certain numbers of asylum seekers already, but under the " city of sanctuary " scheme the door is thrown wide open, and the red carpet laid out. Local residents have no choice, they didn't vote for it, they weren't consulted on this scheme - it's foisted upon them. Very popular with greens and Labour councils.

We live in a lovely surburban area and I had to move on a group of drunken young adults the other weekend who were loitering on a residential street, shouting at eachother (some of which wasn’t nice) and pissing on peoples drive ways. Definitely not immigrants! I’m pretty sure our local park and green areas are horrendous at night - that’s why we wouldn’t go there! But this isn’t a new or immigration problem - people have always hung around parks at night.

@tantrummingterrors the point is it would appear to be new in this locality. I’m not suggesting it never happens but the incidences and occurrences have clearly increased.

Well the type of people that listen to right wing media and right wing politicians were never the type of people that would show charity and welcome refugees into their own homes anyway.

Regarding your point that it's the job of the State and not individuals is a cop out and could apply to any charitable act from donations to the homeless, checking in on an elderly neighbour or volunteering on a local litter cleanup - why should I do it when it's the job of the local council or Government.

Housing a vulnerable asylum seeker is a bit different to:

"donations to the homeless, checking in on an elderly neighbour or volunteering on a local litter cleanup".

Every you’ve mentioned is technically a job of the state. Why not come out with it and admit you wouldn’t trust one of these vulnerable asylum seekers in your home? I’ll hold my hands up and say no way would I want one but that’s because I live in close proximity to a hotel they are currently being housed in and have seen firsthand the problems they create.

I didn't volunteer to house a Ukranian refugee either. I admire anyone who offers their home to a refugee. Not every one is cut out to do it or is able to do it. Which is why the state steps in.

But there are far right protesters and many people across the UK who don't want the State to be paying for the accommodation of the refugees. Plus let's be honest Government finances are not looking great.

If something as important as the RNLI or air ambulances are funded by charitable individuals rather than the state then I don't see why charitable individuals shouldn't receive state support to house asylum seekers.

Lots of this untrue. I live in an area led by a Conservative Council. One city within the whole area is a City of Sanctuary, not the whole council area.

City of Sanctuary is very positive too.

City of Sanctuary/Schools of Sanctuary are programmes developed on our British Values.
British values are the fundamental principles that underpin citizenship and society in the UK, defined by the Department for Education as
democracy, therule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs. These values emphasise a society built on freedom, fairness, and a respect for the diversity of beliefs and backgrounds, guiding individuals and institutions to promote positive community and civic life.

Vital in developing our communities and young people to be fantastic British citizens.

You've copy and paste d a definition of British values. I can't see the point your trying to make? What do you think a ' city of sanctuary ' status is? Clues in the title.

That we are British, that Reform want to promote Britain and that our British values align with that of the ‘City of Sanctuary’ programme already.

Yet you criticise it.

Everything and everyone is ‘raycist’.

Your rather pathetic insults carry no weight.

Do you live next to an immigrant hotel or HMO?

No?

What a surprise.

No, I don’t live next door to an asylum hotel, but there’s one a few streets away. I also volunteer with a refugee charity and I’ve had three refugees living in my house. Is that good enough for you?

Oh and there’s no y in ‘racist’, but there is a U in ‘prejudice’.

No, still not getting your point. What has reform got to do with this thread? You can't define what a ' city of sanctuary ' actually is; if you genuinely lived in a council area that had adopted this policy you would be able to tell me.

Oh, I can define a City of Sanctuary. I also led my school in becoming a School of Sanctuary.

You know nothing about me (of course).

This comes up when you google city of sanctuary- so it looks like it’s a scheme that exists. Although I don’t profess to know anymore about it.

cityofsanctuary.org

My main concern would be about reform bussing in protesters, who are often violent and aggressive. I live in the middle of a city that has lots of immigrants and a few asylum seeker hotels and don't find that a problem. The diversity is really nice and from a greedy point of view means there are loads of great takeaways. From a moral point of view, I also like living in a country that makes at least some effort to show kindness to refugees.

Ditto. I think you're trying to shoe horn a political argument into a thread where the op has asked for advice on housing concerns. My point remains, if you choose to buy property in a designated city of sanctuary, do your research. Find out what that means and how it will affect you. The council's certainly don't consult on the process.

Oof. I ddnt know about this! Maybe the cities of sanctuary could be matched by cities of sanctuary for people that would like to maintain their current demographic. It would be great if we actually had a choice.