Government MPs voted 8-6 against making the Home Office publish its evidence and costs for the Linton-on-Ouse asylum site. Harrogate MP Tom Gordon backed it.
Government MPs have voted down a cross-party attempt to make the Home Office publish its evidence and full costs before it uses the former RAF Linton-on-Ouse as large-scale asylum accommodation. The vote in the committee scrutinising the Immigration and Asylum Bill on Tuesday 3 November went 8 to 6.
Tom Gordon, the Liberal Democrat MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough, sits on that committee and spoke for the two amendments. His office says they won support from across parties, including from Conservative members of the committee, before Government MPs voted them down.
What the amendments asked for
The two new clauses, numbered 30 and 31, were tabled by Calum Miller, the Liberal Democrat MP for Bicester and Woodstock. Both would apply before any large asylum site is used.
- New clause 30 would make the Government publish an assessment of every large site covering transport, healthcare and policing capacity, safe pedestrian access, safeguarding, infrastructure, the alternatives considered and the impact on the local community, with local councils consulted.
- New clause 31 would make it publish the full costs: buying the site, capital spending, running costs and the cost per person, compared with other options, and revised if the estimates change materially before the site opens.
Mr Gordon’s office says the amendments respond to the Home Office’s use of the urgent Crown development route, which lets it bypass much of the usual planning scrutiny.
What is planned at Linton-on-Ouse
According to Mr Gordon’s office, the plan would house around 1,250 single adult men beside a village of roughly 600 people. The 680-acre site sits about 600 metres from the village primary school. His office describes a rural site with limited public transport, flood-prone roads and no mains gas, and says there are serious questions over water, sewerage, drainage and electricity capacity.
The Home Office tried to use the base once before, in 2022, and abandoned the plan. Mr Gordon’s office says much of the site’s infrastructure has been stripped out since then.
“It doesn’t work for anyone”
Mr Gordon said his objection is to the site, not to the people who would be sent there.
“Nobody is questioning the Government’s duty to house people seeking asylum,” he said. “What we are questioning is whether Linton-on-Ouse is the right place to do it, and on every measure, it isn’t.
“An isolated site with failing infrastructure, little transport and limited access to healthcare doesn’t work for local residents, and it doesn’t work for the people who would be sent there. It doesn’t work for anyone.
“These amendments ask two simple things. If a site is suitable, publish the evidence. If it’s value for money, publish the costs. Public money has already been spent on this site once, in 2022, before the plan was abandoned. Taxpayers deserve to know what was spent, what more it would cost, and how it compares with the alternatives.”
Council, mayor and MPs opposed
North Yorkshire Council passed a unanimous, cross-party resolution against the proposal on 15 July 2026. Mr Gordon was one of the MPs from across North Yorkshire and York who backed the council leader’s letter to the minister. The Labour Mayor of York and North Yorkshire, David Skaith, has also said the site is the wrong place for the plan.
In the debate, Mr Gordon asked the minister why she thought a Conservative-led council and a Labour mayor had both got it wrong.
“The Government talks endlessly about devolution and putting power in local hands,” he said. “Yet here we have a Conservative-led council voting against it with cross party support, a Labour mayor opposed and MPs across party lines all saying no. I asked the Minister why she thinks they have all got it wrong. And still the decision is being made in Whitehall, with no prior engagement with the council at all.
“This is about responsible decision-making and proper scrutiny of public money. Local communities shouldn’t be left dealing with the consequences of decisions they’ve had no say in. Today, Government MPs voted down a simple, cross-party request to publish the evidence and the costs. If this site genuinely stands up to scrutiny, there should be nothing to hide. I will keep pushing for this transparency as the Bill progresses.”
The Bicester comparison
The same amendments were drafted with MOD Bicester in mind, where up to 1,256 people could be housed for ten years. Mr Gordon’s office says Mr Miller’s analysis suggests set-up costs there of more than £250 million and over £1 billion across ten years, and that local people had ten days to make representations.
What it means for you
The vote does not decide whether Linton-on-Ouse opens; it means the Bill, as it stands, will not force the Home Office to publish a suitability assessment or a cost breakdown first. The Bill still has further stages to go through, and its progress can be followed on the Parliament Bill page. Mr Gordon says he will keep pressing for the evidence and costs to be published as it goes through. Residents can contact him through his website or at his constituency office at Spa Lane Studio, 1A Spa Lane, Harrogate HG2 7JF.
Have your say