The government has mounted a robust defence of its controversial policy housing asylum seekers in hotels, arguing they provide better value for taxpayers than alternative accommodation like military barracks.
In a statement addressing growing public concern, ministers acknowledged the £6 million daily cost of hotel placements but insisted they remain the most practical solution for managing the asylum system.
Addressing Public Disquiet
Officials conceded that public "disquiet" over the substantial expenditure is understandable, particularly as the government faces pressure to reduce immigration costs. However, they maintained that hotels offer superior conditions and operational efficiency compared to institutional settings.
"While we recognise public concern about these costs," a government spokesperson stated, "hotels currently represent the most viable option for accommodating those awaiting asylum decisions."
The Barracks Alternative
The defence comes amid comparisons with housing refugees in military-style barracks, which the government claims would present different challenges and potentially higher long-term costs.
Critics have questioned this assessment, pointing to the significant daily expenditure that continues to burden public finances. The debate highlights the ongoing tension between humanitarian obligations and fiscal responsibility in the UK's asylum system.
With immigration remaining a contentious political issue, the government faces increasing pressure to justify its accommodation strategy while working to reduce reliance on temporary hotel placements.
