UK Residents Living Near Britain’s Biggest Asylum Seeker Camp Raise Serious Safety Fears After Discovering Something Shocking About What Is Happening in Their Community

A council in Essex has come under serious criticism after it was revealed that millions of pounds given by the Home Office to help communities affected by a large asylum seeker centre have not been spent.

Braintree District Council received more than £3.8 million in government funding between July 2023 and June 2026. However, around £2.7 million of that money is still sitting unused, despite growing concerns from some local residents about safety and crime.

The money was provided to help the council deal with the impact of RAF Wethersfield, a former military base that was turned into accommodation for asylum seekers in July 2023.

The centre is described as Britain’s largest asylum accommodation site. It can house up to 1,245 people, with the possibility of increasing that number to 1,700 during periods of high demand.

Some people living in nearby communities have complained about feeling unsafe, particularly in Braintree town centre, which is about eight miles from the site.

Residents have raised concerns about harassment, intimidation, theft and violence. Some have also called for more police officers to patrol the streets, especially in areas where asylum seekers regularly visit.

Despite these complaints, documents obtained by the Daily Mail through Freedom of Information requests show that the council allocated only £40,000 to Essex Police for additional community patrols.

The money was intended to help officers maintain a stronger presence in the town and reassure residents who had expressed concerns about their safety.

Police records also revealed that there had been 232 emergency and non-emergency calls connected to the Wethersfield site since 2020.

Of those calls, 192 were made after asylum seekers began living at the centre.

The reported incidents included 31 calls concerning assaults, three involving rape, two involving other sexual offences, nine concerning theft, one involving a stabbing and two linked to human trafficking or modern slavery.

Police records also showed that people living at the centre had been recorded in connection with 62 crimes, with 13 resulting in charges or cautions.

However, these figures do not mean that every police call resulted in a confirmed crime or that everyone living at the centre was involved in criminal activity.

Robert Bates, from the Centre for Migration Control, strongly criticised the situation. He argued that residents were suffering because of the continued operation of the asylum centre and accused government officials of failing to take their concerns seriously.

He questioned why so much public money remained unused when some people in the community were asking for greater protection.

Bates also suggested that if the government insisted on keeping the centre open, it should be turned into a detention facility to prevent residents from moving freely around the surrounding communities.

However, Braintree District Council has defended itself, saying the Home Office is responsible for the delays in spending the money.

According to the council, the funding comes with strict conditions, meaning it cannot simply decide how to spend the money without government approval.

Council officials said they were extremely frustrated because they had repeatedly tried to secure permission to use more of the funding for local projects.

They explained that the Home Office had not clearly told them which projects would qualify for financial support.

The council said it took more than a year of submitting applications and making changes before it was allowed to release even a small amount of money for community activities.

It also explained that the funding could not be used to cover ordinary council spending or close gaps in its budget.

Conservative MP for Braintree, Sir James Cleverly, has also criticised the situation.

He called on the Home Office to explain exactly how the council could use the money and allow local officials to spend it on protecting residents.

Cleverly has repeatedly opposed the decision to use RAF Wethersfield as an asylum accommodation centre.

He said that when he was Home Secretary, the number of people allowed to live at the site was limited and plans were made to close it by 2027.

However, he accused the Labour government of changing those arrangements by extending the centre’s operation and increasing its capacity from 800 to 1,245 people.

He described the decision as unacceptable and said it showed a lack of respect for people living in the surrounding communities.

Meanwhile, some women in Braintree have spoken publicly about feeling frightened when walking through the town.

During a visit by the Daily Mail in August, a charity shop volunteer named Hannah said she no longer felt comfortable working alone.

She claimed that Thursdays were particularly difficult because minibuses transported asylum seekers from the accommodation centre into the town.

According to her, large groups of men could sometimes be seen around the area, making some local women and families uncomfortable.

Another business owner, Susan Doan, who runs a beauty salon in Braintree, also expressed concerns about the situation.

She said some of her workers and customers felt nervous about leaving the salon after dark.

Doan claimed that groups of men sometimes gathered outside the business and made gestures towards female staff.

She also described an incident in which one of her customers reportedly returned to the salon after becoming frightened when a group of men followed her.

The business owner questioned what steps were being taken to make women and children feel safe in their own community.

In response to growing concerns, Reform UK-controlled Essex County Council has introduced a new security scheme called Operation Vanguard.

The programme involves hiring private security officers to patrol town centres and provide a visible presence.

The guards are employed through a company called My Local Bobby. Although they do not have the same powers as police officers, they can carry out citizens’ arrests in circumstances permitted by law.

The scheme is initially running for three months and is expected to cost around £118,000 plus VAT.

The money is coming from a council fund set aside for community improvements.

Essex County Council said the programme was introduced in response to concerns about people travelling from the Wethersfield asylum centre into nearby towns.

Officials said the aim was to reassure members of the public by having security staff present seven days a week.

However, Essex Police have also provided information that presents a different picture of crime in the area.

Chief Inspector Martin Richards, who oversees policing in Braintree, said the district had recorded the biggest reduction in crime among all 14 districts in Essex over the previous 12 months.

He also stated that Braintree now had less crime than when the asylum centre first opened three years ago.

According to Richards, police had arrested 23 people living at the Wethersfield centre so far in 2026.

Four arrests were connected to incidents in the wider Essex community, five happened outside Essex, and 14 related to incidents at the accommodation centre itself.

Many of the incidents at the centre reportedly involved alleged offences between people living there.

These police figures suggest that while some residents have serious concerns about safety, overall crime in Braintree has fallen rather than increased.

Financial records also show that Braintree District Council has already spent around £960,000 of the Home Office funding on services connected to the asylum centre.

This included safeguarding, care services, translation support and staffing costs.

One of the payments was £139,000 for a communications officer.

Earlier reports also revealed that a separate £50,000 government grant had been spent on activities such as gardening, art classes, dance lessons and cricket coaching for asylum seekers.

These spending decisions have attracted criticism from people who believe more money should be directed towards improving safety and supporting the wider community.

Braintree District Council has maintained that it opposed the asylum centre from the beginning.

The authority said it had objected to the plans when they were first announced in March 2023.

However, the government used its powers to approve the development without going through the council’s normal planning process.

The disagreement has now become part of a wider argument about how the government manages asylum accommodation and how much influence local communities should have over these decisions.

The Home Office has defended its wider approach to asylum accommodation, saying the government remains committed to closing asylum hotels and moving people into alternative facilities, including former military bases.

It also confirmed that additional money was being provided to Essex Police to cover policing costs connected to Wethersfield.

However, the department did not directly answer the questions raised by Braintree District Council about the restrictions preventing it from spending more of the grant.

For many people in Braintree, the biggest question remains why millions of pounds intended to help their community have still not been used.

The council says it wants to spend the money but is being held back by government rules, while critics argue that residents should not have to wait for improvements to local services and public safety.

With the government extending the use of RAF Wethersfield despite earlier plans to close it, the disagreement over funding, policing and the future of the centre is likely to continue.