Calls for urgent government action are mounting as the United Kingdom’s approach to housing asylum seekers faces renewed legal, political, and community challenges. On August 20, 2025, Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer was pressed to convene an emergency Cabinet meeting after the High Court granted a temporary injunction requiring the removal of asylum seekers from the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex. According to GB News, Conservative MP Tom Pursglove described the Epping asylum hotel ruling as a “wake up call” for Labour ministers, while Conservative MP Chris Philp wrote to the Home Secretary demanding answers following the court’s decision.
The legal action in Epping is part of a wider trend: the number of asylum seekers temporarily housed in UK hotels has risen by 8 percent under Labour compared to the same time last year, Home Office data reveals. Yet, the most recent figures show a slight decrease in the last three months—from 32,345 in March 2025 to 32,059 in June 2025. Despite the modest decline, the government still spent £4.76 billion on asylum in 2024/25, a 12 percent drop from the record £5.38 billion spent in 2023/24, as reported by The Independent.
Behind these numbers lies a complex legal and political battle. The High Court’s ruling in Epping was grounded in planning law: the hotel owner had failed to obtain a change of use permission, a technicality with significant consequences. The Home Office, caught off guard by the legal action brought by the Conservative-led Epping Forest District Council, made a last-minute plea to the court, but it was dismissed. The ruling has left ministers worried about setting a precedent that could encourage further legal challenges and protests outside other asylum hotels.
Labour-run councils, such as Tamworth Council, are now weighing their own legal challenges against the use of hotels for asylum seekers. Carol Dean, leader of Tamworth Council, told The Independent her authority was “carefully assessing” the Epping decision, calling it a “potentially important legal precedent.” Meanwhile, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has urged Tory-led councils to follow Epping’s example. In a letter, Badenoch encouraged councils to “take the same steps” if their legal advice supports it, a move that has drawn criticism from political opponents who describe it as “desperate and hypocritical nonsense,” given the Conservative Party’s previous reliance on hotels for asylum accommodation.
Across the UK, the use of hotels for asylum seekers has become a flashpoint for community tensions and political debate. The Independent notes that anti-immigration protests have surged in recent weeks, with some demonstrations turning violent and resulting in arrests. The protests have frequently targeted hotels housing asylum seekers, and campaigners warn that conversations about violence against women and girls are being “hijacked by an anti-migrant agenda.” In a letter to ministers, more than 100 women’s organizations expressed alarm at the rise in unfounded claims blaming migrants for sexual violence, arguing that such rhetoric “undermines genuine concerns about women’s safety” and perpetuates damaging myths.
In Northern Ireland, the issue has also stoked political tensions. DUP Education Minister Paul Givan criticized the UK Government’s handling of immigration, calling the system “broken” and claiming it has “failed Northern Ireland.” Givan highlighted the pressures on public services and housing, while unionist politicians have requested further investigations into the planning status of hotels used for asylum accommodation in several council areas. Antrim and Newtownabbey Council, for instance, has launched an enforcement investigation into the Chimney Corner Hotel in Co Antrim.
The challenges are not limited to England or Northern Ireland. Stevenage Borough Council in Hertfordshire is actively investigating alleged breaches related to asylum hotels and is closely studying the Epping ruling to determine its implications. A council spokesperson told The Independent, “We are studying the Epping and Somani Hotels Judgement closely to determine the implications this has for our own investigations.”
At the heart of the crisis is the UK’s ongoing struggle to process asylum claims efficiently. Dr. Nuni Jorgensen, a researcher at the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford, emphasized to The Independent that “reducing the backlog in processing asylum claims is critical to any plan to reduce the use of contingency accommodation like hotels.” While the backlog of initial decisions has decreased since Labour took office, a new backlog has emerged in the courts due to appeals against rejected claims. The government hopes that enforcement activities and a new “one in, one out” returns agreement with France will help, but, as Jorgensen notes, “there is no sign of this in the data so far.”
Financially, the cost of housing asylum seekers in hotels remains staggering. The National Audit Office reported that hotel accommodation accounted for about 76 percent of the annual costs for asylum accommodation and support contracts—around £1.3 billion of an estimated £1.7 billion in 2024/25. The Home Office is legally obliged to provide accommodation to asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute, often turning to hotels and large sites such as former military bases when there is insufficient long-term housing available.
The debate over how best to manage the crisis has become increasingly polarized. Some, like the author of a Telegraph opinion piece, argue that “the immigration system sometimes feels like an organised conspiracy against the British people,” blaming weak enforcement, activist judges, and human rights laws for undermining efforts to control Channel crossings and reduce illegal immigration. The same piece criticizes Labour for increasing asylum approvals and moving more migrants into social housing and welfare systems, claiming that “once asylum is granted, the migrants are hidden in the social housing and welfare systems, where it is impossible to track their costs.”
The statistics are stark: Channel crossings have increased by almost 50 percent under Labour, and there are more than twice as many migrants now housed in private accommodation—including houses of multiple occupancy—than in hotels. The Home Office, often working with private contractors, has been expanding its property portfolio for migrant housing, sometimes favoring dispersed housing over hotels to avoid creating focal points for protest. Yet this approach brings its own problems, as 1.33 million people remain on local waiting lists for social housing, fueling perceptions of unfairness and secrecy.
Transparency is another sore point. Ministers have been criticized for failing to inform MPs when migrants are moved into their constituencies. According to a Telegraph account, the immigration minister stated that MPs would only be told when it is “lawful, proportional and necessary.” Leaked government documents from 2024 reportedly acknowledged that asylum hotels had “stoked community tensions” and were a “critical factor behind the summer riots.”
Political leaders from across the spectrum are pointing fingers. Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson Lisa Smart accused the government of failing to “speed up asylum processing to bring down the backlog and end hotel use once and for all,” adding, “The Conservatives trashed our immigration system and let numbers spiral. Now this Labour government is failing to get a grip on the crisis.”
As the legal, political, and community pressures intensify, the UK faces tough choices about how to balance its legal obligations, public concerns, and humanitarian responsibilities. The coming months will test whether ministers can find a sustainable solution—or if the crisis will continue to fuel division and uncertainty nationwide.
