CROWN/2026/0000004 Written representations
Showing 101 to 116 of 116 representations, newest first.
Results per page 25 | 50 | 100Dear 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. I am concerned that the expansion would make the site more built-up, harm the openness of the Green Belt, and add pressure to local roads, services and infrastructure. The Home Office has not clea... Read more
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 1 July 2026
The Home Office plan to use a Crown Development Order to expand Campsfield House Immigration Removal Centre (IRC) 1. On 29 June, I attended a briefing and Q&A with Calum Miller, the Bicester & Woodstock Member of Parliament, about the Home Office Consultation plan to expand Campsfield House Immigration Removal Centre in his constituency. 2. The expansion of Campsfield House IRC would be 1) wrong and 2) ineffective in various ways. 3. Better, more humane and more effective solutions, community... Read more
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 30 June 2026
Lisa Gaskill on behalf of Planning Gateway One
Dear Sir/Madam, Thank you for your email in relation to the above application. The BSR is the statutory consultee for planning applications for development that includes a relevant building or development within the curtilage of a relevant building. Relevant building is defined as: • contains two or more dwellings or educational accommodation and • meets the height condition of 18m or more in height, or 7 or more storeys. “Dwellings” includes flats, and “educatio... Read more
Submitted by: Consultees
Date submitted: 30 June 2026
Good evening, I am writing in response to the Government's planning application to expand Campsfield House Immigration Removal Centre (CROWN/2026/0000004) In 2025, despite opposition from communities, local authorities and MPs, the government reopened Campsfield House, near Kidlington, as an immigration removal centre for up to 160 men. And despite the opposition at that time, the Home Office has now applied for planning permission to expand the facility to 400 places. The system of ... Read more
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 28 June 2026
I have not been able to see the application documents include floor plans and the traffic assessment, which makes it difficult if not impossible to comment on relevant detail. The immigration detention centre is not needed, better decision making, getting decisions right first time so no need for appeals, and the use of tried and tested was of Community Alternatives to Detention mean less not more immigration detentention centres, and much less cost.
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 26 June 2026
I represent the city centre of Oxford on Oxford City Council and my residdents are overwhelmingly against this application, as am I. The need for this expansion has not been proven or evidenced as required. This development is deeply inappropriate for an area designated for science and technology which is crucial to Oxford's and the UK's future. It will cause significant infrastructural stress to the city. The application is hugely costly with no benefit to the local area or country. Immig... Read more
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 23 June 2026
Victoria Green on behalf of Oxfordshire County Archaeological Services
Dear Sir/Madam, Application no: CROWN/2026/0000004 Campsfield House IRC, Langford Lane, Kidlington, OX5 1RE The site lies in an area of archaeological interest and potential, in an area which has a range of features recorded in recent archaeological investigations. c. 550m to the southeast of the proposal site, cropmarks depicting probably late prehistoric settlement remains were recorded. These have been investigated as part of a recent archaeological evaluation and were found to contain ... Read more
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 23 June 2026
Stop forcing unwanted decisions on those you didn't even have the decency to consult. Sidelining local councils and the views of residents is the complete opposite of transparency and accountability. Nothing that is ever forced on the public is for their benefit. You only have to look at the recent tyranny of forcing(mandates) immune system damaging convid jabs. Coercion is NEVER consent. You're all sorry now but unfortunately it's the ordinary people who always pay the price for your id... Read more
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 21 June 2026
Please see response letter
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 15 June 2026
Contains attachment(s)
As a local resident, I am extremely against this development. All relevant local elected councils, including the planning authority Cherwell have made it clear that the Oxfordshire people do not want the expansion or the immigration detention centre at all, yet these local authorities have been bypassed. This is a sneaky move and is immoral. This project is not at all for national importance. Campsfield is run for profit by Mitie. This does not benefit our citizens, only shareholders.
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 15 June 2026
I wish to object to the planning application on the following grounds:- 1. Mitie provides poor value for money and in the past has cost the public purse i.e. abandoning it's contract with the John Radcliffe Hospital. 2. The adjacent Oxford University project was set up in the Greenbelt and its planning was allowed because it provides," High Quality jobs". This expansion provides low quality jobs even providing employment to inmates for very low pay. 3. Public Transport to the site is poor fo... Read more
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 15 June 2026
I object to the proposed expansion of Campsfield IDC. This would be a complete waste of money when the Home Office's own latest figures show there are vacant beds at Campsfield and throughout the system. In addition to the harm done to individuals by locking them up indefinitely, there would be harm to the surrounding area by increased traffic in a residential area and the visual impact of such an unwelcome facility in an area which aspires to be a beacon of innovation, technology and science. T... Read more
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 14 June 2026
All relevant local elected councils, including the planning authority Cherwell, have made it clear that Oxfordshire people do not want this expansion or indeed the immigration detention centre
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 14 June 2026
This facility needs to somewhere else. It is close to a residential area and will be detrimental to both social and environmental needs.
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 14 June 2026
As a nearby resident, I am commenting only on the local effects of the development. I do not intend to comment on the principle of immigration detention or the wider policy issues associated with the site. My observations relate solely to the impact on neighbouring residents and the opportunity to address existing amenity issues as part of the proposed development. My main concern is that the expansion should not increase existing impacts on neighbouring residential properties and, where poss... Read more
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 10 June 2026
This expansion gets my vote 100%. The UK is over-populated and personnel who have no legal right to be in the UK need to be removed from our territory. As they would be a flight risk it is correct to hold them in a secure centre until such time as they are deported. Absolutely this project should go ahead.
Submitted by: Interested party
Date submitted: 8 June 2026