Somerset’s housing crisis sparked a fiery debate at the annual full council meeting on May 21, as councillors clashed over the role of asylum seekers in the county’s strained housing market. The Conservative group introduced a motion urging the council to prioritize local residents for housing “wherever legally and practically possible” and to ensure asylum seeker resettlement does not disadvantage locals. However, the motion was decisively rejected amid accusations from Liberal Democrat and Labour councillors that it unfairly blamed refugees and asylum seekers for Somerset’s housing challenges.
Asylum seekers and refugees are housed by the UK government while their claims are processed, typically in hotels or hostels managed through contracts with third parties. Government funding supports local authorities in purchasing private properties for refugees, which then revert to council housing stock once occupants’ status is resolved. Somerset Council received £3.5 million from the Local Authority Housing Fund in January 2024 to purchase 31 homes for refugees from Afghanistan and Ukraine.
The motion, proposed by Conservative Councillor Lucy Trimnell and seconded by Conservative group leader Diogo Rodrigues, highlighted pressures from infrastructure projects like Hinkley Point C and the Gravity enterprise zone, alongside national asylum resettlement targets. Somerset has been allocated 826 asylum accommodation spaces—the third highest in the South West—including support under the Afghan resettlement program.
READ MORE: Yeovil Nursery Earns ‘Good’ Ofsted Rating for Fostering Independence and Nurturing Environment
READ MORE: Maps Reveal UK’s Top Areas for University Attendance
Councillor Trimnell pointed to nutrient neutrality regulations slowing housing developments and Somerset’s desirability as a tourist and retirement destination, factors she argues exacerbate housing shortages. Conservative MP Sir Ashley Fox echoed these concerns in a letter calling for a reassessment of asylum seeker allocations, worrying about local residents being displaced by rent hikes or long waiting times for social housing.
During the public question segment, Sajjad Jabarkhel, an Afghan refugee, challenged the motion’s framing of refugees as a burden. He emphasized the sacrifices made by many Afghans supporting British forces and urged investment in refugee training to help them contribute economically and socially. Jabarkhel highlighted his own contributions as a university-educated professional and community volunteer, urging the council to continue Somerset’s proud tradition of welcoming those in need.
Liberal Democrat Councillor Sarah Wakefield and Labour group leader Leigh Redman strongly opposed the motion, attributing housing pressures to factors such as nutrient neutrality restrictions, material shortages, high interest rates, and insufficient affordable housing investment, rather than asylum seekers. Wakefield noted that refugees and asylum seekers make up a tiny fraction—0.038%—of Somerset’s population. Labour emphasised that government ring-fenced funding exists to prevent local displacement.
Councillor Federica Smith-Roberts accused the Conservatives of using the motion to sow division and fear, calling for cross-party cooperation to tackle underlying housing issues. Meanwhile, Councillor Val Keitch described the motion as “racist,” a charge disputed by its proponents.
Reform UK’s Marcus Barr supported the motion, warning that mainstream parties’ failure to address residents’ concerns risks electoral backlash. Conversely, Conservative Councillor Bob Filmer sought a more measured approach, focusing on raising awareness about the county’s hidden housing pressures without vilification.
After an intense hour-long discussion, the motion was overwhelmingly defeated, with opposition from Liberal Democrat, Labour, Green, and some Conservative and Reform councillors alike. The debate underscored deep divisions on how best to address Somerset’s complex housing challenges without scapegoating vulnerable groups.