Back to list

Date submitted

28 July 2026

Submitted by

Interested party

I am writing as someone who works supporting people navigating the immigration and asylum system. Through my professional experience, I have seen the significant human impact that detention can have on individuals, families and communities. Immigration detention does not affect only the person who is detained. It can abruptly separate people from their partners, children, friends, support networks, legal representatives, healthcare providers and community organisations. Individuals may be detained with little warning, leaving families distressed and struggling to understand what has happened or how to maintain contact. The uncertainty of detention, often combined with concerns about removal, legal proceedings and family separation, can have serious effects on mental health and wellbeing. Many people detained have complex vulnerabilities, including experiences of trauma, displacement, homelessness, poor mental health, physical health conditions or exploitation. Detention can exacerbate these vulnerabilities and create additional barriers to accessing legal advice, healthcare and support. When people are eventually released, the consequences of detention are often felt long afterwards, with community organisations, local charities, health services and migrant support services required to help individuals rebuild stability. The proposed expansion of Haslar would increase detention capacity from 130 to 600 places before the refurbished centre has even reopened and been assessed in practice. This raises concerns not only about the direct impact on those detained, but also about the wider impact on legal services, healthcare providers, voluntary organisations and community groups that support people affected by detention. I understand that the Planning Inspectorate's role is to consider material planning considerations. However, the human consequences of detention should form part of the public record and should inform consideration of issues such as healthcare provision, safeguarding, access to legal representation, pressure on local services, emergency planning and the overall justification for a development of this scale. This proposal is not simply an expansion of ordinary infrastructure. It is a substantial increase in the capacity of a secure detention facility that will have significant human consequences for those detained, their families and the wider community. I do not believe the application has adequately addressed these impacts or demonstrated why such a large expansion is necessary. For these reasons, I object to the application and ask that it be refused. If the application is not refused, I request that it be subject to a full public inquiry so that the evidence and impacts can be properly scrutinised. I do not wish to attend a hearing in the event that one is scheduled.