Derbyshire council will assess if two hotels housing asylum seekers have broken planning laws

Following a tense and heated debate at a meeting last night (Wednesday, September 17), a casting vote from the Liberal Democrat Mayor of Derby, Cllr Ajit Singh Atwal, broke a deadlock to see the authority take proactive steps to assess the city’s two asylum seeker hotels for potential planning breaches.

Home Office data shows that Derby is accommodating 329 asylum seekers in two hotels in the city, the Midland Hotel and the Station Hotel, both in Midland Road near the railway station.

Cllr Steve Hassell, Conservative group leader, brought a motion calling for the council to take direct steps to assess the two hotels for potential breaches and to take action where necessary, along with keeping a log of relevant incidents.

During the debate, Cllr Hardyal Dhindsa, Labour, said that no complaints about the two facilities had been received by the authority in the six years they have been operating.

The motion was referred to as a “fishing” exercise which played on “fear” by Labour’s leader, Cllr Nadine Peatfield.

Cllr Alan Graves, Reform’s Derbyshire County Council leader, made uncorroborated claims that the hotels were housing “opportunist economic migrants and an element of criminal migrant”.

Kicking off the debate, Cllr Hassell referred to a recent YouGov poll that found 58 per cent of people felt immigration was one of the most important issues facing the country, with 51 per cent saying the economy and 29 per cent saying health.

He said the council must listen to the voices of the “six out of 10” people who do not feel listened to in terms of their priorities, saying flags and demonstrations at the weekends were a sign of “frustration”.

Cllr Hassell said “no one in this room would berate the positive impact of immigration” but said his concerns rested on “fairness and safety” and “people wanting to come to this country illegally”.

He said, “Speaking about asylum and immigration is not right-wing. That shuts the conversation down.

“This is our Epping moment.”

This follows a High Court judgement in August brought by a challenge from Epping Forest District Council in Essex, which saw an interim injunction put in place blocking The Bell Hotel from its continued use to house asylum seekers.

That decision has since been overturned following an appeal from the Government and a court hearing over a permanent injunction is set to be heard in October.

Cllr Dhindsa, Labour, said: “If the council receives a complaint, it has a duty to investigate. To date there have been no complaints to prompt a legitimate investigation. Our officers will respond to any legitimate, reasonable complaints.”

He said asylum seekers would not be able to be housed in council accommodation because they have no legal right to public funds, including no access to the housing register.

Cllr Shiraz Khan, Labour, said it was “foolish” to bring the issue to full council when it was a planning issue.

Cllr Tim Prosser, Reform, said this would represent a “proactive response to public outcry”.

He said he believed there had been a breach for every property in the city which has been used to accommodate asylum seekers.

Cllr John Wright, Conservative, said the council ought to be “getting ahead of the game”, including avoiding potential “potentially dangerous protests” instead of “kicking it into the long grass”.

Cllr Lucy Care, Liberal Democrat, said the country needed immigration to maintain existing infrastructure but said more work needed to be done on teaching English to new lawful adult residents.

Cllr Tim Prosser, Reform, said: “The rights of illegal and other immigrants can never and must never trump the lawful rights of the residents of this country.”

He said frustrations were being aimed at central Government, not at migrants, saying the use of hotels was a “complete abuse of migration policies [and an] abandonment of our own population”.

Cllr Sarah Chambers, Labour, said Conservative members could have pushed for the same action when they had control of the council and when it was in charge of central government, but chose not to.

She said there was a “safe environment” in and around the city’s two asylum hotels at present.

Cllr Chambers said: “Pushing for an Epping moment in Derby would not be a triumph, it would be an Epping mistake.”

Cllr Kieran Morgan-McGeehan, Conservative, said: “I don’t want our message here to be that people are not welcome in Derby, quite the opposite.

“I want Derby to be seen as a city of compassion, love and sanctuary, but not like this, herding people into temporary accommodation without proper amenities that was never built or licensed for that purpose. It masks the real problem.”

Cllr Dhindsa said: “There is not a problem in Derby at the moment. There is a problem with immigration, we understand that.”

He said that the use of hotels for asylum seekers was brought in by the former Conservative government.

Cllr Dhindsa said: “This motion does play on fear that has not existed in this city for six years. There have been no problems raised of these properties causing community unrest or difficulties.

“We would have been the first ones to act as an administration if that was the case

“We cannot demonise people who are seeking asylum

“People who have been granted asylum have been welcomed in Derby and they have contributed culturally and financially.”

He said the motion represented an aim to “create a concern over the two hotels in Derby which does not currently exist”.

Cllr Nicola Roulstone, Conservative, a former cabinet member when her party was in control of the council, claimed people were leaving the city’s asylum hotels and “being put into slavery” during her time in office.

Cllr Peatfield said: “This is framed as the protection of Derby’s communities but stigmatises people that are fleeing war and trauma by treating them as a planning problem.”

She said “blaming asylum seekers for the housing crisis is deeply irresponsible”, saying this has been caused by “decades of underinvestment, lack of council house building, broken rental markets and right to buy”.

Cllr Peatfield said the move aimed to “use asylum seekers as a scapegoat” and was “trying to exploit concerns to increase fear and division”.

Cllr Graves said: “I don’t think you will find one person here who doesn’t agree that people fleeing persecution, violence or conflict should feel welcome.

“However, it is quite evident now that these asylum hotels are not being used to help people fleeing persecution, violence or conflict but housing opportunist economic migrants and an element of criminal migrant.

“We cannot tell which is which because the government does not know. I question whether these people fleeing persecution, violence or conflict are genuine and bona fide when they have left France to get here.

“Why is it that we as a city put the safety of migrants ahead of the safety of the people of Derby and the UK?”

He claimed to have been informed of concerns of residents living around the two hotels including alleged incidents of “harassment and intimidation”.

A vote to approve the motion was passed by the casting vote of Cllr Atwal, after the votes were deadlocked at 24 for, 24 against and one abstaining (Cllr Care).