'Providers who oversaw failures': concern over contractor that may run Linton-on-Ouse asylum centre

The Home Office announced that the RAF facility at Linton-on-Ouse, near York, would be part of a new plan to accommodate 3,750 asylum seekers at Ministry of Defence sites.

The contract to oversee a potential asylum centre at RAF Linton-on-Ouse will likely be run by one of “the same providers who oversaw such failures in the past”, a senior MP has revealed.

Dame Karen Bradley, chair of the Home Affairs Committee, raised these concerns after it emerged the Government may not be holding a competitive tender process for firms to manage the site.

The Conservative MP had been quizzing the Home Office after it announced last month that the RAF facility at Linton-on-Ouse, near York, would be part of a new plan to accommodate 3,750 asylum seekers at Ministry of Defence sites.

Ministers have pledged to do “whatever it takes” to close asylum hotels and are braced for a battle over plans to move the migrants into former military barracks.

RAF Linton-on-Ouse is one of three MoD sites where the Home Office is seeking planning permission to turn it into a camp for asylum seekers.

Campaigners outside Linton-on-Ouse Village Hall in 2022. PIC: Jonathan Gawthorpeplaceholder image
Campaigners outside Linton-on-Ouse Village Hall in 2022. PIC: Jonathan Gawthorpe

Dame Karen has raised concerns that the Government does not appear to have a “performance framework” in place to hold accommodation contractors to account, and may not hold a competitive tender process.

She said: “The success or failure of the Government’s asylum accommodation strategy won’t simply be decided on whether large sites enable the Government to get out of asylum hotels.

“It is about having the right contractual and operational frameworks in place to ensure that past failures are not repeated.

“It is concerning that some of these contracts have already gone to the same providers who oversaw such failures in the past, and it beggars belief the Government has pressed ahead with opening more large sites without first putting in place a performance management framework that lets it hold providers of large sites to account.”

The latest announcement comes just four years after there were celebrations in Linton-on-Ouse, when the then defence secretary Ben Wallace scrapped proposals to house up to 1,500 migrants at the disused site, following a high-profile local campaign against the plan.

In a letter to Dame Karen, the Border Security and Asylum Minister Alex Norris explained why the Home Office was considering using the site again, after it was previously deemed incompatible.

He said: “We will draw on lessons learned from previous assessment work and our other more recently successful large site stand ups to ensure a more robust, transparent, and informed approach.

“This will include strengthened engagement with local partners, alongside ensuring that appropriate infrastructure, services and operational arrangements are in place.

A sign for RAF Linton-on-Ouse. PIC: Jonathan Gawthorpeplaceholder image
A sign for RAF Linton-on-Ouse. PIC: Jonathan Gawthorpe

“A key consideration will be identifying and implementing effective mitigations to minimise impacts on the local community, recognising the importance of addressing concerns previously raised.

“Our priority is to ensure that any accommodation that we do progress is safe, appropriate, and supports the effective and orderly management of the asylum system, while being responsive to the needs of the local area.”

Mr Norris stressed that no decision had yet been taken on Linton-on-Ouse, saying: “This will only be taken once all necessary arrangements, assessments and approvals are in place.”

Sir Alec Shelbrooke, Conservative MP for Wetherby and Easingwold, said “nothing had changed” since the previous plans were dropped.

He told The Yorkshire Post: “We have shown in the past, four years ago, that the Linton-on-Ouse site is unable to cope with 1,000 people going into a small village with no shop, no amenities.

“I have been told by utility companies that they cannot supply the electricity and water demands, and that would need upgrading.

“Four years ago the site was rejected on technical grounds, those technical grounds have not changed.”

News you can trust since 1754
Follow us
© 2026 Iconic Media Group Ltd. All rights reserved.Cookie SettingsTerms and ConditionsPrivacy notice