14 Reasons Why Campsfield Must Not Be Expanded

This leaflet was handed out at the lobby of the Cherwell District Planning meeting.

1 The position of Leigh Day, solicitors for Stop Campsfield Expansion, is: the Home Office must show that very special conditions exist to justify inappropriate development in the Green Belt. They haven’t, so the application should be refused. (There is no reason to treat the HO/MOJ differently.)

2 It is wrong to consider that simply because something is government “policy” this means that the “need” is established and this case must be taken at face value. The Council must reach an independent view, not knuckle under to the government.

3 The criteria for the alternatives sites search were not reasonable. It is not reasonable to confine your search to sites you already own to justify development on a Green Belt site.

4 The logic of the government’s own trend figures is that more detention beds are not needed: fewer people are being deported, while detention capacity has been going up fast.

5 There are serious concerns about the plans for the building themselves and the risks in having 2 regimes for the old and proposed new parts of the centre.

6 The plans (incomplete in some areas for ‘security’) would involve lower standards than in the present centre in the new areas: a less open regime, poor toilet facilities, less sports facilities.

7 Emerging Local Plan policies Kidlington 1 and ESD14 allow for a small-scale local review of the Green Belt to allow for identified high-value employment. Additional employment from an expanded Campsfield would not be of this kind.

8 Aspects of the suggested development (mass, size of development in the Green Belt, height of buildings, concentration of buildings on the site, likely increase in traffic, insufficient parking, water drainage problems, likely increased light pollution) in any case make it unacceptable, and inappropriate in a Green Belt.

9 Government figures show larger centres have more incidents (disturbances) per 100 detainees. So – more disturbances and emergency services demand if the application is approved.

10 This project would strongly undermine the reputation of Kidlington. Immigration detention has been widely criticised in the UK and by international agencies. A Campsfield X 2 would make the district a less desirable place to bring up children to believe in just treatment and respect for all.

11 One of Europe’s biggest detention centres nearby would not favour the Science Park, hotels.

12 Pressure is on Councillors to exclude issues such as the fact that it is wrong to lock up innocent people. We contend that nevertheless, Councillors have an overarching humanitarian duty to take these matters into account.

13 Local people do not want the development. E.g. The local parish councils, over 65 public submissions to Cherwell Council including a letter signed by 21 Oxfordshire Organisations, and another signed by 69 senior Oxford University academics, the deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, the current MP and all prospective parliamentary candidates for Oxford (West) and Abingdon.

14 National developments mean that the application is not well-timed (e.g. Theresa May’s review of detention & vulnerability, the Parliamentary Inquiry into the Use of Immigration Detention due to report in March).



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s