Back to list

Date submitted

24 July 2026

Submitted by

Interested party

Dear Planning Inspectorate, I am writing to object to the proposed expansion of Campsfield House Immigration Removal Centre. The application reference is CROWN/2026/0000004. I object because the proposal would more than double the size of Campsfield, from 160 to 400 places, on Green Belt land - which should not have such a large development on it. I am concerned that the expansion would be a huge eyesore in the local area and landscape, harming the Green Belt, having a negative impact on the environment, the local ecology and protected species, as well as causing more traffic, buildings, light and noise pollution. It would also cause undue pressure on local roads, services and infrastructure. The Home Office has not shown clearly why 240 additional detention places are needed at Campsfield, or why existing capacity, alternatives to detention or other options would not suffice. This is especially important because the proposal would involve permanent development on protected land. I am also concerned because key information has been withheld or redacted, including details of the layout, transport, lighting, landscaping and how the site would operate. This makes it almost impossible for us, the public, to understand the full impact and scale of the proposal. How can we properly consider the proposal and , if we wish to, object, without full information? This makes a mockery of the consultation process and full information should be made public as a matter of urgency. Immigration detention is a form of inhumane treatment given to vulnerable people that are fleeing, war, torture, chaos and fear. These people are NOT offenders, they have not committed a crime for which they have been incarcerated. It causes serious mental harms to the people detained, and its effects are felt by families, communities, legal and advice services, health services and local residents. Expanding Campsfield would therefore have significant negative human and community consequences. For these reasons, I ask that the application is refused. If it is not refused at this stage, I ask that it be examined through a full public inquiry. Yours sincerely