The Government has agreed to reconsider the deadline for public representations on the MOD Bicester asylum accommodation proposal following a meeting with Bicester and Woodstock MP Calum Miller.
Mr Miller met yesterday with Anna Turley MP, Minister of State for Border Security and Asylum, and Luke Pollard MP, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, where he raised the strength of local opposition to the proposal and concerns surrounding the planning application.
Following the meeting, Minister Turley agreed to look again at the current deadline for representations to ensure residents have sufficient time to make their views heard.
Mr Miller has since formally requested that the consultation period be extended to a full 21 days.
The current deadline remains midnight on Thursday 17 September, unless the Government confirms an extension.
More than 1,100 objections copied to MP
In an update sent to constituents today, Mr Miller revealed that more than 1,100 people have copied him into objections submitted against the proposal.
He described the response as an “amazing demonstration of the strength of local feeling” surrounding the Government’s plans.
The proposed site would accommodate up to 1,256 male asylum seekers, a figure that Mr Miller says has now been formally confirmed by ministers.
He has tabled a total of 55 written parliamentary questions about the proposal since June, including a further 11 questions answered by ministers this week.
MP asks Prime Minister to withdraw application
Mr Miller has also written again to the Prime Minister following their exchange in the House of Commons on 1 September.
In the letter, he calls on the Government to withdraw the application entirely, or, if it refuses to do so, extend the consultation period and address what he describes as serious outstanding concerns.
He argues that the application contains unresolved issues relating to drainage, electricity supply, flood risk, transport and ecology.
His letter says that nine ecological surveys remain outstanding, including surveys for bats and great crested newts, and questions whether the environmental impact of the development can therefore be properly assessed on the Government’s proposed timetable.
The MP also highlights the absence of safe pedestrian and cycling infrastructure around the site, noting that the Home Office’s own application acknowledges nearby bus stops cannot currently be safely reached on foot.
Other concerns include the absence of a confirmed long-term foul drainage solution and uncertainty surrounding the site’s electricity supply.
Mr Miller told the Prime Minister that these were not minor matters that could simply be resolved later and argued that the application should be withdrawn.
Calls for normal 21-day consultation period
One of the central concerns throughout the process has been the exceptionally short period residents have been given to study the application and respond.
The Home Office application runs to hundreds of pages but the public was initially given just 10 days to submit representations.
In his letter to the Prime Minister, Mr Miller points out that normal planning applications and non-urgent Crown Development Orders provide a minimum 21-day representation period.
He describes giving residents only 10 days for a development of this scale as “wholly unreasonable”.
Wrong Plan. Wrong Site. has also previously called for the representation period to be extended to the full 21 days.
Two days left to object
Unless an extension is announced, there are now just two days remaining for residents to submit their objections.
The current representation period closes at midnight on Thursday 17 September.
If you have concerns about the proposal and have not yet made a representation, please do so now.
SUBMIT YOUR OBJECTIONDo not wait for a possible extension to be announced.
The fact that more than 1,100 objections have already been copied to the local MP demonstrates the extraordinary level of engagement across Bicester and the surrounding villages.
Every objection ensures that local concerns are formally recorded and must be considered as part of the process.
