In a quiet (for now) town in rural Oxfordshire, something strange is happening. Piddington – a village of 400 people near Bicester – has decided to hold a referendum to leave the United Kingdom. Residents are taking this action in response to the Government’s plans to house up to 1,256 male asylum seekers in a Ministry of Defence site up the road. The referendum might be purely symbolic in its legal weight, but the political consequences of this tiny revolt could be very heavy indeed.
Piddington has been quietly grumbling for a while about plans to turn an old army site into new housing for asylum seekers, with no real traction except on social media. Now those grumbles are headline news, with residents posing with custom-made signs declaring them “the village that roars”. Reform UK has promised to back any other area that wants to hold a similar vote and Reform MPs Suella Braverman and Sarah Pochin have been to visit some of the villagers. Joy Morrissey, the shadow minister for women and equalities, took a walk up to the site gates with female villagers alongside fellow Tory MP Chris Philp to listen to their concerns about safety. So far, no Labour representatives seem keen for a trip.
The case of Piddington is fascinating – voters there and throughout Bicester and Woodstock voted in the Liberal Democrat MP Calum Miller back in 2024. You don’t vote in a Lib Dem if you’re agnostic on the issue of immigration. Back in 2023, Miller was boasting on social media that he supported a fellow councillor’s motion to make Oxfordshire “a place of sanctuary for those fleeing torture & death” and that “Oxfordshire County Council is proud of our history of welcoming people seeking safety in our country”. Be careful what you wish for, you might say.
And yet, Piddington seems to think differently. Miller has been criticised by residents who say he hasn’t met with Piddingtonites in person, although he has created social media posts, including one on X with details of the letter he sent to the Government opposing the new plans. Miller is not the only political representative to find himself between the rock of his “refugees are welcome” pledges and the hard place of local opposition to the welcome mat being rolled out in their constituency. When protests broke out in Crowborough, East Sussex, over the housing of 500 migrants in the town, local Green councillor Rachel Millward – who is also deputy leader of the Green Party – joined in the opposition, telling the BBC that it would bring “tension” and “disruption to daily life”. This is the same Millward who supposedly backs her Party policy of “a fairer, greener welcome”.
The Government has tried to make a big deal out of its plans to stop housing asylum seekers in hotel rooms – instead spreading placements to sites across the UK including old army barracks. It’s as if the Government thinks the only problem people ever had with the asylum system was that migrants were taking up all the beds in the local Premier Inn. It’s clear that most people see the issue of housing thousands of foreign young men as a burden – even the Government is talking in these terms. Back in 2024, deputy leader Angela Rayner told us that “every borough has an obligation to take on their fair share of asylum seekers”, like a dose of unpleasant but necessary medicine. Whatever your opinion in the abstract about immigration, when it comes down to the practicalities of how to deal with the human beings behind the headlines, most people begin to feel less effusive in their welcomes.
The Piddington referendum is important because it’s not just about a village – perhaps even a hypocritical one – objecting to where migrants are housed. Instead, it has opened up a much bigger question of what is at stake with the issue of immigration. Whereas 10 years ago during the Brexit referendum, even using the I word was enough to get you the label of racist in some Remainer circles, concerns about cultural tensions, NHS waitlists and even crime rates are now pretty commonplace across the political spectrum.
What Piddington has done is give a real-life example of what those concerns look like, perhaps given more weight because all the residents are very polite and posh, unlike some of the more unruly objections across the country. More than a thousand men, with different cultural backgrounds, languages and customs, landing in a sleepy rural town where they’re not wanted isn’t the makings of a happy ending.
Andy Burnham has sold himself as the “I hear you” Prime Minister, keen to be all ears to all people. Will he listen to the Piddington Poll?
Key context
Shabana Mahmood, the Home Secretary, announced in March that refugee status would become temporary and subject to review every 30 months for all those adults who were claiming asylum. The Government promised to close all asylum hotels by the end of Parliament. Reform have announced they would leave the European Convention on Human Rights and make anybody entering the country ineligible for asylum. They also say they would detain and deport all irregular migrants over a five-year programme. In a July IPSOS survey, 73 per cent of Britons said people should be able to take refuge in other countries, including this one; 60 per cent said most refugees were actually economic migrants; 46 per cent thought we should close our borders entirely to asylum seekers.Hence then, the article about the polite posh revolt exposing britain s immigration hypocrisy was published today ( ) and is available on inews ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( The polite, posh revolt exposing Britain’s immigration hypocrisy )
Also on site :