Council leaving migration-related Local Authority of Sanctuary scheme after debate clash

Calderdale will be leaving the Local Authority of Sanctuary scheme after a debate which saw councillors clash heatedly over issues of cost, culture and compassion.

The Local Authority of Sanctuary scheme is a voluntary recognition for councils that commit to being welcoming, inclusive and supportive towards refugees, asylum seekers and others seeking safety in their area.

Calderdale Council joined it following a vote three years ago under Labour’s administration but in May’s local elections Reform UK took control of the council and proposed a successful motion to withdraw from it.

Councillors were lobbied on their way into the meeting by Calderdale group Stand Up To Racism who were supporting the council remaining a Local Authority of Sanctuary.

Calderdale Group Stand Up To Racism Lobbying Councillors Over Motion To Leave Local Authority Of Sanctuary Statusplaceholder image
Calderdale Group Stand Up To Racism Lobbying Councillors Over Motion To Leave Local Authority Of Sanctuary Status

On the same day, Leader of the Council, Coun Dan Sutherland (Reform UK, Illingworth and Mixenden) was one of the leaders of Reform-controlled councils signing a letter to new Prime Minister Andy Burnham from Reform UK’s Chair, Zia Yusuf, calling for local communities to have a say over the placement of asylum accommodation.

The council’s Deputy Leader, Coun Paul Hawkaluk (Reform UK, Salterhebble, Southowram and Skircoat Green) said he wanted to be clear the motion was about financial restraint and control, arguing the Sanctuary status committed councils to promise resources and opportunities for people seeking asylum without confirming they had the resources to deliver – amid a time when many councils struggle to deliver housing for existing residents and other related demands on schools, GPs and more.

He said these services relied on local budgets and the Sanctuary status was not a legal requirement.

“Withdrawal for what is in effect prioritised support for a minority of people superseding our Calderdale residents shows that we are actually committed to fairness in the borough and its residents.

“The strongest arguments against the Sanctuary model don’t focus on the refugees or asylum seekers themselves, and nor do I.

“The focus is, and should be, on local governance, resource allocation and public trust,” he said.

Supporting him, Coun Jay Shaban (Reform UK, Halifax Town) said Calderdale would continue to treat all people with dignity – but the status was not a statutory duty it was a political choice which had consequences for Calderdale taxpayers and local services.

Coun Sarah Courtney (Lab, Hebden Bridge and Todmorden East) strongly disagreed.

Concerns about cost and service pressures were valid but removing the status would not address them with support delivered through ring-fences central government funding and existing partnerships.

“This is not about prioritising one group over another, it’s about ensuring that all residents, long-established and newly-arrived, can access support fairly, integrate successfully and contribute to out beautiful valley,” she said.

Supporting her, Coun Ann Kingstone (Lab, Wainhouse) said the motion asked to withdraw “not form an expensive programme or a statutory obligation, but from a statement about the kind of community we aspire to be.”

Pressure on services was only one side of the story, she said, and gave examples of people who had become dentists, care workers and other roles contributing to society – “they’re our neighbours,” she said.

Labour group leader Coun Adam Wilkinson (Sowerby Bridge) said: “It’s another divisive, totemistic measure designed to get headlines and signal that some people are not welcome in our community.”

Nationally under Labour numbers of people seeking asylum had fallen and locally asylum hotels had closed – “so why the hostility?” he said.

Liberal Democrat and Green councillors also opposed the motion, arguing costs were not incurred, but councillors from one of Calderdale’s poorest wards, Park in Halifax, were split, with Coun Shakir Saghir (Workers Party) and Coun Mohammed Shazad Fazal (Lab) opposing the motion but Coun Osman Khalil (Ind, supporting it).

Coun Khalil said he was sympathetic to refugees who had experienced hardship and suffering “but if we cannot provide a service to our very own constituents how can we expect to keep welcoming more,” he said.

Coun Mike Payne (Reform UK. Sowerby Bridge) said the status was “virtue signalling.”

“I’ve been enraged by some of the comments thrown at this side here, trying to make out that Reform are not humane or caring.

“All we are doing is removing the virtue signalling, we intend quite wholeheartedly to remain humane and also to discharge our statutory obligations,” he said.

The Green Party’s Coun Sarah Goodfellow (Todmorden West) and Liberal Democrat Ashley Evans (Warley) both questioned the claimed issues of cost.

Coun Hawkaluk said there was a cost – he had looked at the council’s accounts which showed between April 2025 and May 2026 a total just in excess of £380,000 was paid to Halifax’s St Augustine’s Centre, which is the Calderdale Valley of Sanctuary’s registered address.

“Payments from seven different council budgets. I was surprised to say the least,” he said.

Related to the scheme £63,000 had also been spent on providing free Passport to Leisure passes, said Coun Hawkaluk.

Coun Courtney had spoken of her grandparents who sought refuge, including fleeing Sudetenland in the 1930s when Nazi Germany invaded and they had integrated, contributed and rebuilt their lives.

Coun Hawkaluk said he had no issues with the notion that people contributed – his own parents were immigrants after the second world war and he also had first hand experience.

“It is not political posturing for all that you might say,” he said.

Coun Sutherland said wards like Park and his own Illingworth and Mixenden had received the largest proportion of asylum seekers and residents were struggling to get housing, to get into schools and GPs, and they looked at the issue differently.

“Maybe if you live in some of the leafy suburbs where you’re not affected by these things, maybe up in the hills above Hebden Bridge, this doesn’t affect you, you don’t look at it in the same way.

“Are you naively thinking that by putting more people into the system, more demand for housing, more demand for the doctors, that it isn’t going to have an impact on local people,” he said.

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