Labour-run councils are considering legal challenges to close hotels housing asylum seekers after a landmark ruling prompted officials to consider increasing the use of former military sites as emergency accommodation.
Wirral and Tamworth councils said they are exploring high court injunctions to remove claimants after the Conservative-run authority in Epping Forest won a temporary high court injunction to remove people from the Bell Hotel.
The developments come after the Home Office minister Dan Jarvis said the government is looking at alternative options if there is a flurry of successful challenges from councils.
Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, is determinedto stick to her plan after the Epping ruling and its consequences, a source said.
“We have a plan and we’re sticking to it to close asylum hotels by the end of the parliament. This is one narrow court judgment that happened yesterday. We’re not being knocked off course, this is our manifesto commitment,” the source said.
Ministers are reluctant to disclose the details about alternatives to asylum hotels because of concerns that it could be used as a recruitment tool for the far right, a government source said.
Cllr Paula Basnett, the leader of Wirral council whose boundaries include the Wallasey constituency of the immigration minister Angela Eagle, said the council is actively considering “all options” to close a local hotel.
She added: “Like many other local authorities, we have concerns about the Home Office’s practice of placing asylum seekers in hotels without consultation or regard to local planning requirements.
“We are actively considering all options available to us to ensure that any use of hotels or other premises in Wirral is lawful and does not ride roughshod over planning regulations or the wishes of our communities.
“Wirral has always been proud of its record in supporting families and those fleeing conflict, but it is unacceptable for the government to impose unsuitable, short-term arrangements that disrupt communities and bypass local decision-making.
“If necessary, we will not hesitate to challenge such decisions in order to protect both residents and those seeking refuge.”
Labour councillor Carol Dean, leader of Tamworth borough council, said they had explored similar legal avenues in 2022 when the Home Office first started using a local hotel, but did not end up pursuing them.
“The situation at Epping Forest represents a potentially important legal precedent, and we are carefully assessing what this might mean for our circumstances here in Tamworth.
“We fully recognise the UK government has a statutory duty to accommodate people seeking asylum. However, we have consistently maintained that the prolonged use of hotel accommodation may not represent the best approach,” she added.
Conservative-run Broxbourne Council in Hertfordshire has said it was taking legal advice “as a matter of urgency”, while Tory-run East Lindsey district council in Lincolnshire said officers are investigating and “will take appropriate action”.
Reform UK-led councils, West Northamptonshire council and Staffordshire county council, also said the authorities would look at the options available after the high court ruling.
On Tuesday, Reform UK leaders Nigel Farage and Richard Tice indicated that councils run by the party will consider their own legal challenges.
However, a number of these do not have responsibility for planning permission, which may limit their ability to launch legal bids.
Other authorities have ruled out legal action, with the leader of Labour-run Newcastle city council saying she was “confident” the council could end the use of hotels without going to court.
Karen Kilgour said: “We recognise that people seeking asylum include families, women, and children, many of whom have faced unimaginable trauma.
“Newcastle has a proud history of offering sanctuary, and we stand ready to play our part – but it must be done in a way that works for our city and supports the dignity and wellbeing of those who come here.”
Mr Justice Eyre granted the Epping injunction after hearing the local council’s complaints that planning law had been breached in changing the site’s use.
Epping district council also cited disruption caused by the protests and concerns for the safety of the asylum seekers themselves.
The hotel has been at the centre of violent far-right protests since an asylum seeker was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl. Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu has denied charges against him and is due to stand trial later this month.
Since 2020, there has been greater reliance on hotels to house asylum seekers, with 32,345 being housed temporarily in England and Wales at the end of March this year. Labour has promised to end the use of hotels to house asylum seekers by 2029 by cutting small boat crossings and building new accommodation.
Asked on Times Radio about possible housing options for anyone removed from hotels, Jarvis said on Wednesday that the government is “looking at a range of different contingency options”.
These are understood to include placing people removed from hotels in Wethersfield Air Base in Essex and Napier Barracks in Kent.
Figures from the end of March show that almost a third of asylum seekers that receive government support were housed in “contingency accommodation” which is flats and houses.
The statistics, from the National Audit Office (NAO) and other official sources, says this amounts to about 32, 300 people, a reduction of 42% compared with its 2023 peak.
But the current government and its predecessors have also been forced to use disused military bases to house refugees, with the two most high-profile being Wethersfield Air Base in Essex and Napier Barracks in Kent.
Despite ministers coming under heavy criticism for the conditions refugees have been forced to endure, this Labour government is set to expand the use of both bases.
It comes after the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, pledged to stop using taxpayer-funded hotels by 2029 in her Spending Review, in a drive to save £1bn. The Home Office aims to achieve this by moving refugees into cheaper sites.
In April of last year, Cooper said Wethersfield is neither “a sustainable solution” nor provides “value for money for the taxpayer”. But an internal Home Office memo dated 24 July, seen by the Guardian, shows there are plans to put people in Wethersfield despite it being at maximum capacity.
It states: “While the site’s regular cap is 800 an additional 445 bed spaces may be used temporarily during peak demand. There are no plans to exceed 1,245.”
In March, the high court found the previous government’s use of Wethersfield to be unlawful after three men likened their conditions to a prison.
Napier Barracks, which was due to be handed back to the Ministry of Defence in September, will instead continue to house migrants into 2026.
