Isle of Wight could house asylum seekers under wider UK dispersal plans

The Isle of Wight could be in line to house asylum seekers and refugees, following statements by the Prime Minister that all parts of the country must play their part in wider dispersal plans.

Andy Burnham said this week that the burden should not fall only on “poorer” communities, and stated: “I do believe all parts of the country need … to play their part.”

While the Island is one of 17 local authority areas currently without adult asylum seekers living locally, the IW Council already supports people seeking sanctuary in the UK under specific schemes. As we reported in March, when asked about a report from the Taxpayers’ Alliance showing the IW Council spent £2.6 million providing asylum support in 2024/25, a spokesman initially denied funding any asylum seekers. However, following confirmation that the figure came from from the council’s own financial returns, the authority clarified the figure related to individuals covered by the UK Resettlement Scheme, the Afghan Refugee Scheme, and Homes for Ukraine – as well as funding 21 unaccompanied asylum-seeking children aged between 11 and 17.

While the adult support costs of £565,000 were covered by government grants, child support funding left a £365,000 shortfall, a bill picked up by local council tax payers, and projected to rise to £548,000 in 2025/26. These figures relate to social care, and do not include healthcare, education, welfare benefits, and other services.

If the Prime Minister’s plans proceed, it risks creating an additional headache for our cash-strapped local authority. Although direct housing costs and cash support for asylum seekers would be funded by central government, the council would have to provide social care and support needs not covered by the Home Office.

This would include physical, mental, or disability-related needs, even if an asylum claim is ultimately refused. Local authorities must also provide specialised residential and supported accommodation outside the standard Home Office provision, as well as social work support and welfare assessments for asylum-seeking children and their families. According to the Taxpayers’ Alliance, government grants routinely fail to cover the full costs of providing those services, leaving local taxpayers to fund a £744 million deficit in 2024/25.

The Island’s two MPs had very differing responses when asked for their views. West Wight MP, Richard Quigley, agreed with Mr Burnham.

He said: “He’s right, dispersal of people across the country makes much more sense than keeping people in concentrated areas with little support. I look forward to a day when we concentrate on the big issues that actually affect us all, such as climate change and the cost of living, rather than trying to fabricate division between fellow humans.”

Joe Robertson, who represents Isle of Wight East, said: “The Isle of Wight already pays more than its fair share. It is not a suitable place for asylum seekers to be accommodated so we pay for them to be housed elsewhere.

“The Island has already had local authority funding reduced by £50 million over three years by the Labour Government, with increasing focus on supporting the north. The IW Council should not be asked to pay a penny more towards asylum accommodation – indeed our contribution should be reduced so that we can focus on all the public services that are more expensive to deliver on the Island because of our connectivity issues, which the Government still refuses to acknowledge.”