Scottish Refugee Council: Asylum Seekers Must Be Treated with Dignity

(INVERNESS, SCOTLAND) The Scottish Refugee Council has condemned UK government barracks plans to house hundreds of asylum seekers at military sites in Scotland and England, warning the move risks retraumatising people fleeing war and persecution and urging ministers to adopt community-based alternatives. The charity said the Home Office proposal includes using Cameron Barracks in Inverness and the Crowborough army training camp in East Sussex for large-scale accommodation, amid a wider push to stop using hotels.

“People seeking safety in Scotland must be treated with dignity and respect, not housed in military barracks or other institutional accommodation. These are people who have fled war, torture and persecution. They deserve support and a chance to rebuild their lives, not to be retraumatised by being placed in unsuitable, isolating accommodation,” said Sabir Zazai, chief executive of the Scottish Refugee Council.

The plan, as set out in recent briefings to local authorities and community groups, involves housing around 300 people at the Inverness site and 600 at the East Sussex site. Both sites were used after the Kabul evacuation to host Afghan families in the aftermath of the 2021 withdrawal, but those families have since been resettled elsewhere.

The charity’s intervention comes as opposition mounts in the Highlands and the south of England. Local organisations and the Scottish Refugee Council say barracks-style facilities are “unsuitable and isolating,” arguing that institutional settings risk worsening trauma and cutting people off from services. The council is calling instead for “community-based accommodation and support,” saying dispersed housing models—where families and individuals live in ordinary homes with access to health, education and legal services—are safer and more effective.

The pressure on ministers has intensified with a coordinated response from civil society. The Scottish Refugee Council, alongside over 80 charities and community groups, has sent a letter to the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary expressing “deep concerns” about the barracks plan and the broader direction of asylum policy, describing the proposals as “inhumane and cruel” and warning they could breach international law. The signatories argue that pushing people into military sites further isolates them and undermines integration efforts across communities that have already committed resources and volunteers to support new arrivals.

The UK government says the move is necessary to reduce the use of hotels, which have been costly and controversial. Defence Minister Luke Pollard said, “We are looking at the sites that we have available where we could house asylum seekers, allowing the Home Office to close more asylum hotels faster.” Officials have pointed to a need for “contingency accommodation” as asylum decisions are processed, though ministers have not set out a detailed timeline for opening the Inverness and East Sussex sites. The Home Office says its aim is to manage numbers while maintaining basic welfare standards; its accommodation arrangements are set out on the UK government’s asylum support and accommodation guidance.

Scottish organisations argue that capacity management should not come at the expense of safety or dignity. They point to the scale of support already built in Scotland to help people navigate complex asylum procedures and access services. Esther Muchena, Family Rights Service manager at the Scottish Refugee Council, said: “The Family Rights Service gives each family the tailored support they need to address the unique challenges they face. We support people in so many ways, from improving their understanding of the complex asylum process, meeting their health needs and reducing poverty to helping children and parents access education and make social connections.” The council says placing families in barracks would undercut this work by separating people from local networks and practical help.

Personal testimony collected by the Scottish Refugee Council underscores the stakes for those at the heart of the debate. One participant in the Family Rights Service pilot wrote, “I wanted to end my life three times. I was preparing for suicide, but I didn’t do it, thinking about my kids. [My case manager] knew about my situation, so she took care of me a lot… and guided me so that I could get treatment.” Caseworkers say this kind of intervention depends on trust and continuous contact with community services—support they argue is harder to deliver inside barracks on the edge of towns or in remote locations.

In Inverness, attention has focused on Cameron Barracks, a historic site on the city’s south-eastern edge. Local authorities and third sector groups have warned that using it to house around 300 asylum seekers could strain services while isolating people from everyday community life. Some residents recall its earlier use during the Afghanistan evacuation, when the site briefly hosted families before they were moved into longer-term homes. Advocates say that experience shows the difference between short, emergency placements for a defined group and prolonged institutional accommodation for people at an uncertain stage of their asylum claim.

In East Sussex, campaigners have raised similar concerns about the Crowborough army training camp, where around 600 people would be housed under the plan. Community groups say access to legal advisers, GPs and schools will be more complicated than in dispersed housing, and note that long transport times and restricted movement around military facilities can discourage people from seeking help. The Scottish Refugee Council says barracks plans of this kind cut against best practice developed over years by local authorities and charities to support asylum seekers as part of existing neighbourhoods.

Scottish political leaders have also restated their stance on international protection. The Scottish Government and Parliament have reaffirmed their commitment to international law and human rights, with recent parliamentary motions emphasising Scotland’s role as a welcoming nation for those fleeing persecution and conflict. The government has committed funding to bolster frontline services. The Scottish Government allocated £3.6 million for the Refugee Support Service in 2024–2025, helping sustain confidential advice and casework delivered by the Scottish Refugee Council and partner organisations. The council says this funding underwrites critical help with housing, healthcare access and school enrolment—support it says would be harder to deliver in military accommodation.

For the Scottish Refugee Council, the principle at stake is whether asylum seekers should be met first by uniforms and fences or by communities and services. Zazai’s statement and the multi-organisation letter frame the barracks plans as a step back from humane, community-focused support, which the council argues is essential to stabilise families after flight and loss. The charity says barracks-based models risk recreating institutional harms that many people fled, citing high rates of trauma among those arriving from conflicts, torture and persecution. Frontline staff say isolation inside large, regimented facilities can make it harder to identify mental health crises or domestic abuse, and can slow access to treatment and legal advice.

The government insists that ending hotel use is a priority and that large-scale sites are a practical bridge while it reforms the asylum system. Ministers say hotels are unsustainable and costly for taxpayers, and argue that centralised sites make it easier to coordinate services. Yet critics in Scotland note that institutional accommodation often becomes semi-permanent in practice, as processing backlogs and appeals drag on. They argue the better answer is to expand safe, habitable housing in communities, backed by funded casework, language classes and clear routes into schools and healthcare—services they say are already stretched but workable when planned.

Local charities emphasise that those arriving at Cameron Barracks or Crowborough would include people at different stages of the asylum process, including families with children and individuals with complex medical needs. Muchena’s description of the Family Rights Service shows the practical detail of what is at risk. She said her team helps parents enrol children in nearby schools, arranges GP appointments within walking distance, and builds links with neighbours and faith groups—steps that hinge on being embedded in ordinary streets, not behind the gates of a military site.

Civil society groups say the stakes are moral as well as practical. The letter to the Prime Minister and Home Secretary warns the barracks plans could breach international law obligations toward refugees and asylum seekers. Lawyers involved with the signatories say institutional settings may fall short of safeguarding duties, particularly for survivors of sexual violence and torture who need specialist care in stable, supportive environments. The Scottish Refugee Council says the safest approach is to house people in small-scale, community settings, supported by trained caseworkers and clear referral paths to medical, legal and social services.

As the Home Office considers the two sites, attention is turning to what comes next. Highland groups are urging ministers to meet local service providers on the ground in Inverness, assess the suitability of Cameron Barracks for anything beyond short-term contingency, and commit to alternatives that keep people inside the city’s existing support networks. In East Sussex, campaigners want the government to publish detailed impact assessments for the Crowborough camp, including travel times to legal aid providers and NHS services, and plans for schooling if families are placed there.

For now, the Scottish Refugee Council’s message remains rooted in dignity and practical support. > “People seeking safety in Scotland must be treated with dignity and respect, not housed in military barracks or other institutional accommodation,” Zazai said. The council’s call for “community-based accommodation and support” has been echoed by local partners and a broad coalition of charities, backed by testimony from those who have survived war and loss and are trying to rebuild. As ministers weigh the future of asylum accommodation, the test in Inverness and Crowborough may be whether the barracks plans can be reconciled with the promise to protect, not isolate, those seeking safety.