Crowborough Camp - no place for 600 migrants

I have had a huge number of emails over the past few days as everyone in Crowborough grapples with the news that broke last Tuesday that the Home Office had informed Wealden that they intended to use the MOD site at Crowborough to house up to 600 migrant males.

Many of you have emailed a number of councillors wanting to know our view on what we think about this proposal, and what the Council is doing about it. I intend to use this piece to put in writing my perspective of the events from October 10th to this point (November 3rd); my view; and actions taken to date.

We are told that the District Council was informed on October 10th 2025 that the Home Office held a Teams call with a number of parties, which included representatives from Wealden District Council. On this call it is alleged that the Home Office informed Wealden of their “intention” to use the Crowborough Training Camp, which is an MOD site and thus “Crown Land,” for the purpose of asylum seeker accommodation.

A letter was sent to Mike Tapp, the current Minister for Migration and Citizenship, on October 22nd. Interestingly, this is a further example of the chaotic and inefficient way Wealden has approached this debacle: Councillor Partridge wrote to the wrong minister. The appropriate minister would have been Alex Norris, who is the Minister of State for Border Security and Asylum. It’s no wonder it was ineffective — they wrote to the wrong person. As my daughters might say, “epic fail.” What a shambles.

Notwithstanding this further evidence of the chronic incompetence, the tone of the letter is polite and appears to focus on service provision. Indeed, the letter says: “We are therefore writing to set out our concerns, confirm our understanding of the proposals, and to ensure that we and all local partners are fully consulted as plans emerge.”

Firstly, I’m assuming that the “we” referred to in this letter related to Wealden District Council. However, at this point, no communication had been made to the wider elected membership of Wealden; not to the opposition at least. It is important to note that Wealden is run by an administration comprising Green Party, Liberal Democrats and Labour. No communication was made outside this group. A serious error of judgement in my view, and certainly not the “open, honest and transparent” Council Wealden purports to be. The letter seems more concerned with procedure, and I can see little evidence, if anything at all, of any effort to object or challenge the Home Office intention. The letter ends with:

“We recognise that the Home Office is not seeking our permission to use the Camp for this purpose, but we are keen to work with you to ensure your plans are as effective as possible and the impact on the community is carefully managed. We welcomed the opportunity for our officers to meet with your operational teams and hope this partnership working can continue.”

Jump forward six days to Tuesday October 28th, and news broke in the press that Crowborough Army Camp was intended to be used to house 600 migrants. Wealden councillors were invited to an “urgent” meeting that morning, where the leadership of Wealden informed those who were on the call, as many were not able to make it, about what they had been told eighteen days earlier. Eighteen days of no communication with the wider member body — people elected to look after your interests and make representations on your behalf. It emerged that day that Nusrat Ghani, the MP for Sussex Weald, had also been kept in the dark about the intended use of the camp. A camp within walking distance of the centre of one of the largest towns in the constituency. Along with the public, she was rightly angry and looking for answers. That same day, Wealden put up a website with some further information; information they had in their possession for 18 days.

At 09:39 that morning I emailed the CEO of Wealden District Council, Trevor Scott, requesting that the Council convene an emergency meeting of the Scrutiny and Performance Committee. As an opposition Councillor, I am Chairman of that Committee; the reason I gave for the urgency was: “to consider the implications of the Home Office decision to use Crowborough Training Camp for asylum accommodation, which has arisen without prior consultation and requires immediate scrutiny to protect public safety and community confidence.”

I spoke that afternoon with a senior officer at Wealden and agreed that, as there is a meeting of the Scrutiny and Performance Committee on November 10th, we could incorporate this item into the agenda. This was confirmed later in the week with another of Wealden’s Directors.

On Wednesday 29th October an urgent question was raised on the floor of the House of Commons regarding the use of Crowborough Training Camp, along with Cameron Barracks in Inverness, to house asylum seekers. Thankfully, the Home Office sent the correct Minister to answer those questions. Contributions were made from two MPs in Sussex, Mims Davies (Uckfield and East Grinstead) and Kieren Mullen (Bexhill and Battle). Nus Ghani, as Deputy Speaker, is prohibited from engaging in debates on the floor.

On the same day, Rachel Millward, the Deputy Leader of Wealden District Council and Green Party member, posted a copy of a letter to Nus Ghani on Twitter, sent on behalf of her and James Partridge.

ExhibitImage evidenceLetter from Cllrs Millward and Partridge to Nusrat Ghani MP, posted on social media, 29 October 2025

On Thursday October 30th I attended a meeting in Crowborough that had been organised by Reform Sussex Weald. I had agreed to come and speak at the meeting, to the extent I could provide some context in what was a fast-moving, confusing and worrying situation for many. The meeting brought hundreds of residents of Crowborough to the Community Centre, in an impressive display of the community we are fortunate enough to have here. Many were angry, rightly so, at being kept in the dark.

I did my level best to inform residents about what was happening — I was there of my own choice. I gave my view and perspective as a local Crowborough Councillor. The entire meeting was recorded and is available online. It’s worth noting that the leadership of WDC did not attend, but there were several Conservative and Independent Councillors in attendance. One takeaway for me is that residents of Crowborough will be looking out for one another more than ever if we are unable to prevent this unsuitable and potentially dangerous proposal for the use of the camp.

The following day, the Wealden Green Party released a statement on Crowborough Army Camp. You can read it here. To my mind, they completely neglect to acknowledge the problem and community concerns. I will outline why I believe this to be the case below.

Nusrat Ghani released information on Friday evening that she had been informed by the Home Office that Wealden would be given money for each asylum seeker in the camp. Unbelievable. I am livid if there has been a deal to potentially sacrifice the safety of Crowborough for a pittance. No amount of money can compensate Crowborough, and there is no compulsion that this money be spent on Crowborough.

On Saturday November 1st, Wealden released a letter written by James Partridge, the Liberal Democrat Leader of WDC, and Rachel Millward, Green Party Deputy Leader and their candidate for Sussex Mayor. My view is that letter again falls far short of what Wealden needs and expects. No material challenge is raised in the letter, and it reads more like a whinge. Again, it falls far short of the standard expected of the Council.

That brings us to today. What should Wealden do?

In every single case where large concentrations of asylum seekers have been proposed, it is the local District or Borough Council that has fought on behalf of residents. There is complexity, as the Home Office is attempting to use Crown powers under the General Permitted Development Order 2015. Does this mean that nothing can be done? Not in my view. “Not my fault, gov” is buck-passing.

There are potential avenues that we need to explore as a Council. At this point, I am not aware they have mounted any form of credible challenge. As a Council, we have a range of planning powers, measures we can use to enforce environmental and habitat-related statutory responsibilities, and so on. Anyone who has ever made a planning application will be familiar with them. Wealden needs to outline the avenues they have explored and potentially discounted. I would also like to see strong representations made about the open camp policy. If the camp is used, occupants should be confined to the camp, unable to wander the streets of Crowborough and Wealden. It needs to be a closed facility. I don’t see a political will to effectively challenge the use of the camp. It’s not good enough. I intend to explore all of this in detail at the Scrutiny meeting. If WDC leadership won’t act, opposition will have to apply pressure to get off the fence.

I would also like to see Wealden District Council hold a meeting in Crowborough to explain what they are doing and why they have taken the course they have. Leadership without action is just a title.

Why have the leadership not objected with force?

As I stated above, the leadership comprises Green Party, Liberal Democrat and Labour Councillors. The Green Party are the dominant force within the Alliance, ideologically driven, and their stated policies are not conducive to objecting to the camp’s use. Indeed, the UK would be flooded with migrants if they were ever to gain more than the handful of MPs they have. I believe Rachel Millward, being the Deputy Leader of the National Green Party of England and Wales, is conflicted.

Their policy book includes the following:

• The Green Party wants to see a world without borders; until this happens the Green Party will implement a fair and humane system of managed immigration where people can move if they wish to do so.
• The Green Party believes that migration is not a criminal offence under any circumstances, i.e. there is no distinction between legal and illegal migration.
• The Green Party is opposed to forced migration and forced repatriation unless standard exclusions apply.
• The Green Party seeks to establish a system that recognises that all migrants are treated as citizens in waiting, and therefore supports and encourages them to put down roots in their new home.
• Undocumented migrants will be given free advice and support to help them to regularise their status without penalty for being undocumented.

The full policy book on the Green Party asylum and immigration policy is here: migration.greenparty.org.uk/migration-policy.

You can decide for yourself whether you think this formal policy list is compatible with a willingness to robustly challenge the Home Office desire to use the camp in Crowborough for one of the largest concentrations of illegal male entrants to the UK, and all of the potential issues that brings for Crowborough and, more widely, Wealden and the UK. I think it’s nuts.

More recently, the wider Green Group at East Sussex County Council attempted to “designate East Sussex as a County of Sanctuary” for migrants — even suggesting the County Council sign up to an organisation called the “Migrant Champions Network”, an organisation that advocates against data-sharing with the Home Office. The Green Party attempt was rightly voted down.

So in summary:

• WDC have been aware of the government position since October 10th.
• WDC briefed their own councillors significantly in advance of opposition councillors.
• I was kept in the dark while Green and Lib Dem Crowborough Councillors were briefed.
• There is no evidence that key Cabinet members have visited the site.
• They’ve attempted to pass the buck, claiming no agency in this process when they are clearly the lead stakeholder and the planning authority — it’s their district.
• WDC have, as far as we are aware, taken no external legal advice.
• WDC have known about government funds according to the Home Office and not shared this with their councillors or the public.
• WDC’s very limited communications have been lame, and the letters were sent to the wrong minister.
• Their pre-occupations seem to subordinate the welfare of local people to that of the illegal migrants — clearly there is a balance to be found here.
• An apparent ideological predisposition to accommodating large numbers of asylum seekers in the community.

WDC has not reached for or considered any of the tools used by other District Councils put in a similar position: judicial review; stop order or other planning-related or environmental hurdles; a request for lower camp numbers; a request for a closed, as opposed to an open, processing facility; raised concerns related to illegal migrants absconding; or made specific and material demands to support the welfare of our impacted community.

What the Council needs to do now is work together for the best outcome for our residents.

I think you all know where I stand.

Post publication updates

• Nov 3 — Since publication of this post earlier today, I have noted that the District Council has amended the record of communications posted on November 1st. The letter sent to Mike Tapp has been removed and very curiously replaced with a letter to Minister of State Alex Norris. I will pursue questions around this at the upcoming Scrutiny meeting on November 10th.