Back to list

Date submitted

6 August 2026

Submitted by

Interested party

I object to the proposal to expand Haslar into a 600-bed detention centre, adding up to 470 additional detention places before the refurbished 130-bed centre has even reopened or been assessed, and I am concerned about immigration detention, public accountability and climate risk. Immigration detention causes serious harm to detainees, and the effects are felt by families, communities, legal and advice services, health services and local people. Expanding Haslar would have serious human and community consequences. There are major concerns about flood risk, coastal safety, emergency evacuation and climate change. I understand that Haslar is a coastal site next to the Solent, and parts of the site are in Flood Zone 3, meaning there is a high risk of flooding from the sea! Indeed, climate change makes this more serious because flood risk is likely to increase over the lifetime of the development due to sea level rise, heavier rainfall, storms, and pressure on coastal defences. The Coastal Modelling Report prepared for the application provides sea-level rise estimates from a 2017 base year to 2125: 1.093m under the higher central allowance and 1.467m under the upper-end allowance. I am also concerned about surface water flooding, including flooding on the way in and out of the site. Presumably, Haslar will be a locked, secure detention centre, and detainees would not be free to leave in the event of a flood warning, severe weather, a failure of flood defences, or other emergency. I oppose this building and believe the Planning Inspectorate should not approve this application, as there is no evidence that detainees, staff, visitors, emergency services, and escort vehicles would be safe for the lifetime of the development, especially given future climate conditions. Even the Home Office's Flood Evacuation Management Plan does not address this concern, as it shows that flood evacuation is a serious operational issue that relies on flood warnings, staff action, staged evacuation, transport arrangements, emergency services, and coordination with local bodies. Amazingly, it admits that during an extreme flooding event, the whole site would need to be evacuated, and that residents may need to be moved to another IRC or holding centre if transport is delayed. I oppose the expansion of detention and do not understand why there is a need for such an expansion of detention, specifically why existing capacity, alternatives to detention, or other estate options would not be sufficient. In addition, I am concerned about the increased traffic, parking, healthcare and emergency services, public access to the coast, ecology, heritage, lighting, noise, waste, drainage and local infrastructure. Finally, I am concerned that the Home Office has applied for outline planning permission, with only access being decided. It is clearly unacceptable that the public is being asked to respond on whether Haslar should become a 600-bed detention centre before all the practical details are finalised. Some information has also been withheld or treated as sensitive, making it difficult for the public to understand the full impact of the proposal. For these reasons, I ask that the application be refused. If it is not refused at this stage, I ask that it be examined through a full public inquiry. I do not wish to attend a hearing