Britain’s Asylum Seeker Hotspots MAPPED: The Areas Housing 1,000+ Migrants
Britain’s asylum accommodation system is undergoing a major transformation as the Labour government attempts to close hundreds of costly asylum hotels and move people seeking protection into cheaper forms of accommodation.
But the changes are exposing a long-running geographical divide: asylum seekers are not distributed evenly across Britain. Instead, large numbers have historically been concentrated in particular towns, cities and local authority areas — many of them already facing significant economic and housing pressures.
The latest figures and government plans provide a revealing picture of where asylum accommodation has been concentrated, and why ministers are now under growing pressure to spread the responsibility more evenly.
Where are Britain’s biggest asylum hotspots?
One of the clearest concentrations has been in west London, particularly around Heathrow Airport.
Official figures reported in August 2025 showed that Hillingdon had 2,238 asylum seekers living in hotels, the highest number of any UK local authority at the time. Nearby Hounslow had another 1,536. Manchester was the largest hotspot outside London, with 1,158 asylum seekers in hotel accommodation.
The concentration around Heathrow is not entirely new.
Hounslow Council previously reported that more than 2,300 asylum seekers were living in the borough in March 2023, including 1,591 people in contingency hotel accommodation. The council noted that hotels around Heathrow had become an important part of the Home Office’s accommodation system because they offered large amounts of capacity in a relatively small geographical area.
The pattern highlights a fundamental feature of Britain’s asylum dispersal system: accommodation is strongly influenced by availability and cost.
Areas where rents are lower and large properties or hotels are available have historically been more likely to receive asylum accommodation. This has contributed to a concentration of asylum seekers in some less affluent parts of the country.
The Migration Observatory at Oxford University has similarly documented significant geographical variation in where migrants live across Britain, including differences according to whether people arrived for work, study, family reasons or to seek asylum.
The major hotspots
While the exact number of people accommodated in each area changes as hotels close and contracts are altered, several places have repeatedly appeared prominently in discussions about asylum dispersal.
Hillingdon: The west London borough surrounding Heathrow has been one of Britain’s largest centres of asylum hotel accommodation. Its position near a major airport and the availability of large hotels have made it a significant location for Home Office accommodation.
Hounslow: Also close to Heathrow, Hounslow has hosted large numbers of asylum seekers in hotels. In March 2023, the council recorded 2,302 asylum seekers across all forms of accommodation, with the majority of those in hotels.
Manchester: The city has historically been one of the largest asylum dispersal locations outside London. In June 2025, more than 1,100 asylum seekers were reported to be living in hotels there.
Other northern and coastal communities: Towns such as Burnley, Middlesbrough and Blackpool have also been identified as areas with relatively high levels of asylum accommodation. Recent political debate has focused on whether the reliance on lower-cost accommodation in such areas has created an unfair geographical burden.
The argument is now becoming a major political issue.
The government wants to shut asylum hotels
Labour has made ending the use of asylum hotels a central part of its immigration strategy.
The government argues that hotels are exceptionally expensive and represent an unsuitable long-term solution. According to Parliament, the number of people accommodated in hotels has fallen dramatically from around 56,000 in 2023 to approximately 21,000 in June 2026.
The number of hotels has also fallen from a peak of roughly 400 to fewer than 170 by June 2026.
The government’s objective is to move away from expensive hotel accommodation towards more basic facilities, including former military sites.
This could significantly change Britain’s asylum map.
Instead of hundreds of hotels scattered through towns and cities, the government is considering larger accommodation centres capable of housing hundreds or even thousands of people at individual sites.
Two large sites are already operating: Wethersfield in Essex and Crowborough in East Sussex.
Parliament was told in June that the two sites together had capacity for up to 1,340 people, with additional contingency capacity at Wethersfield.
But three much larger proposals have generated considerably more controversy.
Three new military sites could house 3,750 people
The government has identified three former military sites for possible asylum accommodation:
- Bicester, Oxfordshire
- RAF Barnham, Suffolk
- RAF Linton-on-Ouse, North Yorkshire
Together, they could eventually provide accommodation for approximately 3,750 asylum seekers, although the government stresses that the sites remain subject to feasibility assessments, planning permission and other approvals.
The proposals have triggered fierce opposition because of the size of the planned facilities compared with the populations of nearby communities.
At Piddington in Oxfordshire, residents have been particularly vocal about plans connected to the Bicester site. The village has only around 370 residents, while the proposed accommodation could house about 1,250 single adult male asylum seekers.
Residents have even voted to hold a symbolic referendum on declaring independence from the United Kingdom, an extraordinary protest against what they see as a lack of local consultation.
The scale of the proposed change explains why the issue has become so emotionally charged.
A village of several hundred people could suddenly find itself located next to an accommodation centre containing more than three times its existing population.
Linton-on-Ouse: another flashpoint
The proposed site at RAF Linton-on-Ouse has produced a similar controversy.
Government plans could eventually place around 1,200 asylum-seeking men at the former airbase, close to a village with a population of only about 600.
Labour MP Rachael Maskell has raised concerns about the demographic and infrastructure implications of the proposal, including the large imbalance between the number of men who could be accommodated and the size of the surrounding community.
Local opposition has focused on more than immigration itself.
Residents and politicians have questioned whether rural roads, public transport, healthcare, policing and other services can cope with a large new population.
The proposed site is also close to schools, adding another layer to the controversy.
The government insists that services will be provided at the sites and argues that moving asylum seekers out of hotels is necessary both to reduce costs and create a more sustainable accommodation system.
Why are asylum seekers concentrated in poorer areas?
The geographical imbalance has been a feature of Britain’s asylum system for years.
Asylum seekers are generally accommodated under a dispersal system. Unlike ordinary private renters, they do not normally choose where they are housed. Accommodation is allocated according to availability and the government’s contractual arrangements.
This has historically meant that places with relatively cheap housing have carried a disproportionate share of the accommodation burden.
That creates a political problem.
A town with lower property prices can become an attractive location for asylum accommodation precisely because the government can house people there more cheaply. But those same towns may already have stretched public services and significant housing pressures.
In contrast, some wealthier areas have historically hosted comparatively few asylum seekers.
That disparity has become a central argument in the current debate.
Calls for richer areas to “share the burden”
The issue has attracted criticism from politicians who argue that responsibility for asylum accommodation should not fall primarily on poorer communities.
Andy Burnham has said that more affluent areas should participate in the dispersal system rather than leaving poorer parts of Britain to accommodate disproportionate numbers of asylum seekers.
The government is also considering changes that could make accommodation more widely distributed.
One proposal involves paying higher rents in areas where accommodation is currently more expensive. The theory is straightforward: if the government is prepared to pay more for private accommodation, asylum seekers could potentially be housed in a broader range of locations instead of being concentrated in low-rent areas.
Supporters argue that this would create a fairer national system.
Critics, however, warn that increasing rental payments could add to government costs and potentially make already competitive local housing markets even more difficult for ordinary residents.
From hotels to “large sites”
The shift away from hotels creates another dilemma.
Hotels are expensive, but they spread asylum accommodation among existing urban communities. Large former military sites can be significantly cheaper and easier to manage because accommodation, security, catering and other services can be concentrated in one location.
However, the model also creates much larger local concentrations.
Parliamentary evidence describes Crowborough as a “large site” even though its planned population is comparable to that of some large hotels. Officials have said the key difference is that former military facilities can provide more self-contained services and accommodation arrangements.
The government therefore faces a choice between two imperfect systems.
The first is a dispersed network of hotels and houses, which is expensive and often unpopular with businesses and local communities.
The second is a smaller number of large centres, which can reduce costs but potentially create enormous population concentrations in individual communities.
Britain’s asylum map is changing
The next few years could therefore radically reshape the geographical distribution of asylum seekers.
Some traditional hotspots may see their numbers fall as hotels close. At the same time, new concentrations could emerge around former military bases and other large facilities.
The government says the strategy will save money and help end the dependence on hotels.
But the political battle will not end simply because the hotels disappear.
If anything, the debate may become more concentrated.
Instead of asking why a particular town has 500 asylum seekers spread among several hotels, residents could soon be asking why their small community has been selected to host 1,000 or more people at a single former military site.
That is why the map of Britain’s asylum accommodation has become such an important political story.
The argument is no longer simply about how many asylum seekers Britain accommodates. It is increasingly about where they are accommodated, who pays the cost and which communities are expected to shoulder the responsibility.
As Labour attempts to fulfil its promise to end asylum hotels, those questions are likely to become even more prominent.
For ministers, the challenge will be to create a system that is cheaper and faster while convincing communities that the burden is being shared fairly.
For local authorities, the priority will be ensuring that housing decisions are matched by sufficient investment in infrastructure and public services.
And for asylum seekers themselves, the outcome will determine whether they are moved from expensive hotels into accommodation that is cheaper for the taxpayer — but potentially much more isolated from the communities and services they need.
Britain’s asylum map is changing. The question now is whether the new map will look fairer than the old one.