(UNITED KINGDOM) — Migrants Organise and Medact published a report titled “Hostile Housing” warning that UK asylum accommodation prioritises “containment over care” and harms asylum seekers’ physical and mental health.
The report links asylum accommodation to worsening health, arguing that housing arranged for control and containment can undermine safety, recovery from trauma and day-to-day stability.
Findings on accommodation and health
The authors say the people most affected are asylum seekers placed in Home Office-provided asylum accommodation, where conditions can shape access to healthcare, legal support and community ties.
At the centre of the critique is asylum accommodation described as organised around restriction rather than care and integration, with predictable consequences for wellbeing and safeguarding.
The report describes a system that relies heavily on hotels, dispersal accommodation and large sites including the Bibby Stockholm barge, and it says repeated patterns appear across different settings.
Overcrowding features prominently, alongside poor sanitation and limited privacy that can make sleep difficult and heighten stress, the report says.
Isolation from communities also recurs, with placements that leave residents far from everyday services and support networks.
Medical access appears uneven, the report notes, with barriers to timely care and gaps in mental health support reported across multiple accommodation types.
Residents on the Bibby Stockholm reported mouldy conditions and limited mental health support, the report says, while some hotel placements added strain through frequent moves and a lack of privacy.
Migrants Organise and Medact said these conditions carry practical consequences beyond discomfort, pointing to risks linked to infectious diseases, chronic stress, depression, anxiety and self-harm among residents.
In day-to-day life, isolation and unstable placements can complicate basic routines, including attending GP appointments, keeping contact with support workers and maintaining regular legal consultations.
A move between sites can break continuity, forcing people to restart arrangements for healthcare access while coping with uncertainty about where they will be living next.
“containment over care”
System drivers and support
The report situates its critique within a broader shift in UK asylum accommodation since 2020, describing how the system moved away from longer-term private rentals toward hotels under pressure.
Backlogs in asylum decisions and a wider housing shortage have pushed the use of hotels and other large-scale solutions, while procurement constraints can make rapid alternatives difficult to implement.
Migrants Organise and Medact also highlighted the importance of cash support alongside accommodation, drawing attention to Section 95 support under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.
Section 95 support provides for accommodation and subsistence, and the report stresses that the cash element matters for nutrition, transport, phone and data, and maintaining stability while awaiting decisions.
The authors said asylum support payments have eroded substantially in real terms over the long term, which can make it harder to stay connected to services even when a roof is provided.
Accommodation pressure rises when people wait longer for decisions, because longer waits mean more people remain in the system at once and spend longer in temporary settings.
“awaiting an initial decision”
By the report’s account, this often means extended uncertainty, delayed ability to move on, and disruption to schooling and continuity of healthcare, particularly when placements change.
The report notes the Home Office has pursued backlog clearance efforts, while stressing that outcomes vary across cases and that many people still wait through multiple reporting periods.
Government responses, proposals and scrutiny
Government responses described in the report focus on cost control and alternatives to hotels, including proposals linked to larger sites and camps.
Migrants Organise and Medact referenced plans to operationalise camps at sites including Crowborough training camp in East Sussex and Cameron Barracks in Inverness, while saying final decisions had not been confirmed and that local communication drew criticism.
The report points to scrutiny from the Public Accounts Committee on what it describes as wasteful spending, and describes oversight pressures that can shape how accommodation plans are examined.
A policy paper titled “Restoring Order and Control” features in the report’s overview of proposals, and the authors said UNHCR issued legal observations on its implications for asylum seekers.
The report describes scrutiny and challenge as coming through multiple routes, including local councils, courts where relevant, NGOs and UN agencies, arguing that the design of large sites would typically require safeguarding arrangements and coordination.
Financial arguments run through the debate, with the report describing hotels as expensive and often ill-suited, particularly when used at scale and under short-term contracting pressures.
Migrants Organise and Medact said claims about savings from closing asylum hotels can be substantial in headline terms, while warning that real-world savings depend on transition costs, supply constraints and existing contractual obligations.
The report says policymakers and advocates often frame alternatives around reinvestment into community housing, which would still depend on availability, local authority capacity, safeguarding and access to health services.
Advocacy group Asylum Matters urged MPs to prioritise community housing over camps and highlighted move-on pressures for people recognised as refugees.
Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham raised concerns about fast move-on periods driving homelessness in an ITV News interview, the report says, with advocates arguing that short timelines can push people into precarious situations.
Eligibility rules shape what happens next, the report notes, because asylum seekers generally cannot access social housing in the same way as people with settled status, and local allocation rules govern who gets scarce homes.
Migrants Organise and Medact said social housing remains ineligible for asylum seekers, student and work visa holders, and those without leave to remain, while local connection rules mean most units go to UK nationals.
Wider implications
The report’s wider point is that debates over asylum accommodation are not only about beds and buildings, but about how a system under pressure manages health, safeguarding and community cohesion while cases remain unresolved.
It highlights the interconnected effects of accommodation design, cash support, eligibility rules and decision backlogs on the wellbeing and practical stability of people seeking asylum in the UK.
