28 Apr 2026
CIH responds to the consultation on the Home Office's engagement with local authorities in the planning and development of asylum accommodation
This is a response to the consultation by the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration on the Home Office's engagement with local authorities in the planning and development of asylum accommodation.
The Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) is the professional body for people working in housing. CIH has a longstanding interest in the support and accommodation offered to asylum seekers, and we have produced guidance on the issue. CIH also runs the housing rights website, which provides detailed information on the housing and benefits entitlements of different classes of migrant.
CIH’s evidence is as follows:
- Our basic position on asylum accommodation is that local authorities have a vital role to play, and indeed did so on a far more active basis when dispersal was first implemented and before the current contract system was put in place. Many local authorities in dispersal areas found that they were able to find accommodation for asylum seekers and – importantly – invest in communities receiving them so there was mutual benefit (e.g. in terms of community facilities) between the new arrivals and the host communities.
- Since then, it has been increasingly evident that the current contract system provides poor and expensive accommodation, often focused on hotels or otherwise distinguishable locations and therefore susceptible to racist attacks. For this reason, we have been advocating a different approach, that could begin this year by taking advantage of the 2026 break clause in the current contracts. It would involve progressive replacement of the current system with one which returns responsibility to local authorities, providing them with the resources to acquire accommodation, adapt it and provide support services to asylum seekers, as part of a portfolio of temporary accommodation (rather than as distinct properties).
- The approach was first set out – with outline costings showing its advantages over the current contracts – in a briefing paper from the UK Housing Review published in 2024 (see p.15 of the pdf). The author is Kate Wareing, chief executive of Soha housing association in Oxfordshire. She has subsequently written an update on developments with this proposal as an article, pasted below.
- Unfortunately, although a pilot scheme along these lines is supposed to be in development (see article below), progress is slow. Spending of the £500m earmarked for the pilot has not yet been decided, despite the fact that various councils have expressed a strong interest, including (for example) Brighton, Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Islington. Kate Wareing, who is engaged with civil servants in both the Home Office and MHCLG on this issue, has suggested that the grant conditions are framed to enable homes to be purchased for existing residents who are overcrowded or need adaptations and that homes released elsewhere in the stock are leased to the Home Office. However, this has received no response so far.
CIH is keen that this initiative moves forward, albeit recognising that it must be handled carefully, to take advantage of the willingness of various local authorities to assist in tackling this issue. We would therefore urge the independent chief inspector to investigate Home Office proposals in this area and encourage ministers and officials to pursue a pilot scheme while the contract break clauses provide the opportunity to do so.
Kate Wareing, chief executive of Soha Housing in Oxfordshire, comments on the government pilot scheme which she has campaigned for (see previous newsletters).
£500 million has been pledged in total by the UK government toward trialling alternatives to the current provision of asylum accommodation through hotels and private sector contracts. This is phenomenally welcome, and provides the potential to prove that investing in homes in council and housing association ownership will both save the country huge sums of money and deliver much needed additional social housing,
The first major pilot out of the blocks is trialling the provision of support to local authorities to purchase or refurbish housing to provide temporary accommodation to those awaiting asylum. This funding is part of the broader asylum accommodation strategy and is intended to enable councils to build or acquire around 900 new homes under the pilot.
The scheme at present is seen as working exclusively with local authorities; no grant conditions have yet been finalised, but the target is to have the fund up and running before the end of the financial year, with a two-year timeline for the acquisition of properties.
Around 200 local authorities are believed to have expressed an interest, and a small number will be chosen to take the scheme forward. The government is planning on basing the fund on the current conditions for the Local Authority Housing Fund. Whilst much better than inaction, I think careful thought about the design of this fund could deliver much better outcomes – both immediately and in the longer term.
There is a case for more geographically nuanced grant rates and for the money to enable new homes to be purchased and allocated at the discretion of landlords, in exchange for an equivalent number of homes (from across existing stock) to be made available for use by the Home Office/local authority as temporary accommodation. This would help both politically and in terms of management, with new homes available to meet existing housing needs of current tenants (i.e. address overcrowding, meet needs for adapted homes, etc.) and then properties for temporary use being able to be swapped in and out across the wider stock base.
As yet it is also unclear whether the existing asylum accommodation contracts mean that accommodation procured would need to be leased back to the current contractors for them to manage. If this were to be a condition, it could be a serious issue for local authorities who are potentially interested in the pilot.
Other pilot initiatives are also taking place (for example, bringing empty homes back in to use, exploring a "for profit" model of raising private finance to fund purchase). These are still being led by the Home Office.
There is also a Good Faith partnership sponsored project looking at how asylum accommodation could be delivered through Strategic Mayoral Partnerships. It's focusing on working in the South West and in the North East, and trying to both prove concept for future devolution of responsibilities, and looking at whether this shift in the accommodation model can be part of future provision. It's pulled a great group of people together, and is getting good traction at the moment.
I remain really hopeful that we can collectively remove barriers and make this new approach real – not only in terms of what this will mean for improving the lives of those in the asylum system, but also spending public money more wisely and beginning to make a real difference in terms of the way we provide temporary accommodation.
More more information on CIH's response, please contact John Perry, policy advisor at CIH, at john.perry@cih.org
