Northeye locals air grievances, MP appeals for calm
HUGH SULLIVAN
Huw Merriman, MP for Battle and Bexhill, has found himself caught between the demands of the national government, of which he is Rail Minister, and grievances felt and expressed by many of his local constituents over the choice of the former prison premises of Northeye as a site to house future asylum seekers en masse.
Originally an RAF mobile radio base turned radar station, Northeye was used as a Category C prison for 23 years between 1969 and 1992, then over a further 20+year period by the United Arab Emirates government for private military and technical training. Vacant for the last seven years or more, but still surrounded by a high wire fence, it’s perhaps unsurprising that it has attracted the attention of the Home Office as a potential site to accommodate another collection of unattached adult males.
However, the announcement that up to 1,200 asylum seekers are intended to be housed there by the end of this year has been greeted with dismay and in some cases anger by residents of the housing estates on the perimeter, on Wartling Drive, Pleyden Rise and Ticehurst Avenue.
Challenging the numbers
Asked for their views, some openly express opinions that asylum seekers pose a threat to their local community by who they are and where they come from. But most keep their criticisms to the unsuitability of the site to house any class of people in such numbers.
One resident pointed out that housing 1,200 would treble or quadruple previous numbers. “The prison had a maximum of 450 inmates. That was too many to control and they burnt it down. After that the prison population was reduced to 250. The UAE had around 300 students, max. There’s no way that the site can accommodate 1,200. There’s a shared sewage system across the estate. It won’t be able to cope. Has the Home Office asked Southern Water about that?”
He also claimed that there’s a large quantity of asbestos buried on the site. “It’s contaminated land – that’s why the Home Office has bought it so cheap. It’s full of toxic, hazardous waste. What are they going to do about that?”
Posters in some windows proclaim: “Residents say NO to Northeye”, along with support for named candidates in the upcoming district council elections who have presumably endorsed this message, among them independents Nigel Jacklin and Connor Winter.
However, another resident observed – “It’s very convenient to have an election right now. Some councillors are stepping down, others coming in – no-one is taking any responsibility. Everyone here is very unhappy about the proposed use. You won’t find anyone who isn’t. But who’ll do anything about it? The council have done nothing.”
Safety and security
Mr Merriman issued a statement on 11 April in which he maintained that his main concern was that local residents should feel safe, given that the asylum seekers housed at Northeye would not be locked in or subject to curfew. “I was told that the residents would likely comprise those from Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Sudan and Eritrea,” he said. “To my concerns about security, I was told that it was expected around 50% of the residents would never leave the camp. It is not in their interests to break the law because it would negatively impact their asylum application. Nearly 70% are expected to have a successful application. The camp would have sport, recreational and religious amenities to occupy the residents and deter leaving the camp.
“I recognise the frustration a lack of detailed information causes. Whilst I understand the concerns, I would appeal for calm.”
His own aim, he declared, was to “argue the case for the resources and controls which will mitigate the impact”. He was meeting that day with local residents and then with local clergy to discuss community impacts. “This is the start of many meetings with the Home Office, community stakeholders and leaders over the coming weeks. Some will have empathy for those who have travelled from afar. Others will be less welcoming. My job is to represent every person in the constituency, and I hope to do so in this challenging environment,” he concluded.
One resident, speaking subsequently, was unimpressed. “The Home Office has already made it clear that they want to do everything on the cheap – so much for ‘levelling up’. We knew something would happen with the site, but this is worse than anything we imagined.”
We hope you have enjoyed reading this article. The future of our volunteer led, non-profit publication would be far more secure with the aid of a small donation. You can also support local journalism by becoming a friend of HIP. It only takes a minute and we would be very grateful.
Leave a Reply