On Saturday, November 8, 2025, the quiet town of Crowborough in East Sussex found itself at the center of a heated national debate as hundreds—some estimates put the number as high as 1,200—of residents and supporters marched through its streets. Their message was clear: strong opposition to government plans to house up to 600 asylum seekers at the town’s military training camp. The protest, marked by a sea of St George and Union Jack flags, banners, and passionate speeches, unfolded against a backdrop of mounting anxiety over safety, local services, and the perceived lack of transparency from officials.
The government’s recent announcement that the Crowborough army camp would serve as temporary accommodation for these asylum seekers is part of a broader initiative to phase out the use of hotels, which, according to BBC reporting, have been a controversial and costly solution. As of June 2025, government figures indicated that about 32,000 asylum seekers remained in hotels, a significant drop from the 56,000 peak in 2023. The Home Office now aims to transition to what it calls “more suitable sites,” with Crowborough at the forefront of this shift.
For many in Crowborough, a town of just 22,000, the news landed like a thunderclap. “If you dump any 600 young men of undocumented, unknown origin in a small town, you’re asking for trouble,” local resident Keith Brown told the BBC. The sentiment echoed across the protest, with placards reading “Crowborough says no to illegal immigrants” and “You’re not welcome” lining the roads near the camp.
Safety was the dominant concern voiced by many. Ben Grant, another resident, explained to the BBC, “Straight after our last council meeting, I had a lot of our vulnerable, elderly and especially women who told me they are really worried about their safety.” For Shirley Hartfield, the fear was more personal: “I don’t want to be confronted by them in the street,” she told the Daily Mail. Similar worries were raised by Barbara Mayne, who said, “I’m terrified. I won’t be going out at night on my own if this goes ahead. I’m worried about myself and my grandchildren.”
Many protesters emphasized that their opposition was not about race, but about community and the lack of consultation. Nate Austin, one organizer, told the Daily Mail, “We’ve had at least 1,000, maybe 1,200 people here today and we all know this is about the community and mothers who don’t feel safe. Most of the people here are concerned mothers.” He added, “The council has not been helping, so the people have been organizing this protest for themselves.”
The protest also drew support from outside groups, including the Pink Ladies from Epping and Kent. Orla Minihane, who traveled from Epping, said, “We were asked to come by the people of Crowborough. This is a movement of concerned women and mothers.” Kerrie Knight, a Pink Lady organizer from Kent, remarked, “We really need this movement to succeed for our daughters and our sons. We need to protect our girls from people we know nothing about. We need people to know we are not Far Right, we are just mums.”
The government, for its part, has defended its approach. A Home Office spokesperson stated to both the BBC and the Daily Mail, “The right to protest is fundamental to our democracy. This government will close every asylum hotel. Work is well underway, with more suitable sites being brought forward to ease pressure on communities across the country.” The spokesperson also emphasized that all sites would comply with safety, security, health, and wellbeing standards, and that the Home Office was in contact with Sussex Police to ensure disruption was kept to a minimum.
Yet, the sense of being “kept in the dark” pervaded the community. Sussex Police and Crime Commissioner Katy Bourne attended the protest, expressing her own frustration: “I’m here today because I’m as disgusted as local residents are about this migrant camp that’s being opened up. The plan had been dumped on everybody. Not even I was warned about this.” Wealden District Council echoed these concerns, calling for a reversal of the plans due to a “total failure” to engage with the community or provide assurances around safeguarding for both asylum seekers and residents.
The council’s deputy leader, Rachel Millward, revealed to the Daily Mail that the local authority had sought legal advice but was powerless to halt the move because the site is Crown land. “That was a huge shock and a massive disappointment,” Millward said. “People need to be... reassured and understand. The Home Office has a lot of trust to regain.” At a packed public meeting organized by Reform UK, local Conservative MP Nusrat Ghani was notably absent, further fueling residents’ sense of abandonment. Independent councillor Andrew Wilson, the only elected official present, admitted, “I can’t give you any kind of answer.”
Underlying the protest were practical worries about the strain on already stretched local services. Residents voiced fears about the impact on GP appointments, with some struggling to book even before the proposed influx. NHS Sussex responded, stating it was working to meet the immediate health needs of the asylum seekers, with primary care to be provided on site or virtually. The NHS is legally required to provide services to asylum seekers, a point that has become a flashpoint for local frustration.
For some, the nature of the camp’s new residents was also a sticking point. Christine Straker, who lives near the main entrance, contrasted the new arrivals with Afghan families previously housed there after the 2021 Kabul evacuation. “They’ve given freedom to all these boat people and taken our freedom away. There will be 600 men here, not families. When there were families living here, we welcomed them.” Others, like Lucy Haddon, worried about the impact on the town’s character and safety: “This town has a lot of old people and some of them are vulnerable. I’m worried about my daughter and the town. I don’t want her to be out at night on her own.”
Meanwhile, the camp’s use by local cadet groups is now in jeopardy. “I’ve heard the MoD is really annoyed with this because there will be nowhere for the cadets to train now,” Haddon added. “We moved from London to get away from gangs and crime and 600 is a lot to come to our small town. There’s going to be nothing for them to do here. What are they going to do all day?”
Amid the uproar, refugee advocates offered a different perspective. Steve Smith of Care4Calais told the BBC, “In terms of people seeking asylum, the government has a duty, under the Refugee Convention, to house those who would be otherwise destitute.” But he also criticized the choice of the site: “From my point of view, shoveling people into former barracks is not the best use of money and for those seeking asylum. Housing them in old barracks is not the best accommodation for people who had undergone these experiences.”
With a petition against the move gathering about 6,000 signatures and local officials seeking legal recourse, the future of the Crowborough camp remains uncertain. What is not in doubt is the depth of feeling in this East Sussex town, where questions of safety, community, and trust in government have collided in a very public way.
