Immigration: east London docks rejects Home Office plea to moor asylum barge there

It’s emerged that the Home Office asked officials operating docks in east London whether it could moor a barge there to house asylum seekers.

The Royal Docks Management Authority said it told the government last month that water beside London City Airport wouldn’t be appropriate. Earlier this week, Rishi Sunak said two more barges had been secured to accommodate refugees - but didn’t reveal where they’d be based.

What’s happening with the barges?

Plans to move hundreds of asylum seekers onto barges were announced as part of the Prime Minister’s pledge to reduce small boat crossings in the English Channel and cut the cost of putting refugees up in hotels. One of the vessels - the Bibby Stockholm - is due to be moored in Dorset in the next fortnight. The local Conservative-run council previously said it had “serious reservations” and was considering legal action.

At a press conference in Dover on Monday (5 June), Sunak confirmed the Home Office had secured two additional barges but said he’d “wait to announce” where they’d be moored. Today, it emerged ministers explored whether one of them could be berthed at the Royal Docks in east London.

Why won’t the Docks be used?

Scott Derben from the authority running the Docks said they “were approached by the Home Office to look at the feasibility of berthing a cruise ship to house asylum seekers. After investigation, it was concluded that this would not be an appropriate use for the Royal Docks”.

Labour’s London Mayor Sadiq Khan added his opposition - telling Home Secretary Suella Braverman there was “no evidence” that barge accommodation would deter those seeking to come to Britain. and argued it would “leave large numbers of people in wholly unsuitable conditions”.

He added the boats would be “highly visible” and that those living inside could be at “significant risk” from far-right protests.

What has the government said?

A Home Office spokeswoman said: “The pressure on the asylum system has continued to grow and requires us to look at a range of accommodation options which offer better value for the British taxpayer than expensive hotels.”

“This is why we continue to source new alternative sites and vessels to accommodate migrants, which are more manageable for communities, as our European neighbours are doing. We understand the concerns of local communities and will work closely with councils and key partners to manage the impact of using these sites”.

He also accepted more people were likely to cross the Channel over the summer - and said ministers were “not complacent”.

Finally, Sunak confirmed the government had leased two more barges - capable of holding 1,000 asylum seekers - to reduce Home Office spending on hotels.

What about other asylum accommodation?

The Bibby Stockholm, a three-storey vessel earmarked to hold 500 asylum seekers, is due to moor in the Dorset town of Portland in the next two weeks.

In April, Dorset Council - which is Tory-controlled - said it has “serious reservations” about the decision to house it there, because of the pressure it would put on local services. Sunak said the government carried out “extensive engagement with local communities” when plans like these were put forward.

Thousands more asylum seekers are set to be moved to former RAF bases at Wethersfield in Essex and Scampton in Lincolnshire despite local opposition there too. Sunak confirmed nearly 3,000 migrants would be based at the two sites “by the autumn”.

How have charities and human rights groups reacted?

Amnesty International called on the government to scrap the use of barges to house asylum seekers - describing it as a “terrible idea” that “should be abandoned”.

The human rights group’s chief executive Sacha Deshmukh said: “Confining people who’ve escaped terror, torture and other cruelty in locations which will inevitably lead to their social isolation is immoral and potentially unlawful”.

“The giant barges project is being used to distract from the urgent need to fairly and efficiently decide people’s asylum claims, something this government is still failing to do”.

The British Red Cross agreed, saying if ministers were “serious about improving the asylum system”, they would “focus on processing people’s claims quickly and correctly”.

“Meanwhile that’s costing a fortune for the taxpayer and there’s this growing sense of frustration”.