Read Full Visit Report Here


On 7 April 2022, the APPG on Immigration Detention published the report of its Members’ visit to Napier Barracks, which took place in early February this year.

An inquiry undertaken last year by the APPG found that being accommodated at Napier left many people seeking asylum feeling dehumanised and suffering a profound deterioration in their mental health, in some cases to the point of attempting suicide.

The APPG Members visiting in February found that little had changed at the site. They said they remain “deeply concerned” for the individuals accommodated there, calling for Napier to be closed with “immediate and permanent effect”.

A ruling by the High Court in June 2021 found that Napier Barracks did not meet minimum standards for asylum accommodation. The parliamentarians’ report warns that changes introduced by the Home Office after the ruling have failed to address the fundamental problems at the site, with serious concerns continuing in relation to:

  • inadequate safeguarding of vulnerable people, such as victims of torture and trafficking, with little being done to identify residents who are in need of support
  • the physical environment of the site, which was run-down, isolated and bleak, with many buildings in an extremely poor state of repair
  • a near total lack of privacy and private spaces at the site, with residents continuing to be accommodated in dormitories of up to 12-14 people and having to share showers, toilets, and other facilities
  • noise levels in the dormitories, and the sleep deprivation and the negative impact on residents’ mental health resulting from this
  • inadequate access for residents to healthcare and legal advice, and the difficulties they face in engaging with their asylum claim at the site
  • the site’s prison-like nature and military features, including security checks upon entering and the presence of security guards patrolling
  • the lack of autonomy, choice and control over their daily lives that residents experience at the site.

Alison Thewliss MP for Glasgow Central and Chair of the APPG, who took part in the visit, said:

“It was deeply concerning to see how poor the conditions in the Napier Barracks were.

“Residents in the barracks are living in the most dreadful of circumstances, and this must end.

“Many of those living in the barracks have fled conflict and have suffered unimaginable trauma – they should be treated with dignity and respect, and allowed to rebuild their lives.”

The publication of the report came on the same day as a debate on Napier in the House of Lords. The debate was seeking to challenge legislation brought in by the Home Office last year granting itself planning permission to use Napier Barracks until at least 2026.

Lib Dem peer Lord Paddick, who organised the debate, referenced the findings from the APPG’s visit and inquiry in his speech. You can read the full debate transcript here.


Media coverage


Former residents at the barracks said:

“It would be difficult to design a system that more perfectly delivers despair and deteriorating human health and mental capacity than these ‘asylum camps’

“My initial reaction was shock as I was driven through the barbed-wire-topped gates of an army camp and faced with a black metal firing target of a soldier. … Between us we had fled torture, false imprisonment, war and civil conflict. We now found ourselves inside exactly the sort of institution many of us had already experienced in our home countries and which brought back terrible memories and stirred up traumas.

“There have protestors outside of the camp gates. They shout and set off fireworks. It is terrifying as it sounds like gunfire. … they were there they took photographs and videos of me. I have seen that some videos of residents in the camp have been posted on YouTube … it might put my family in Syria at risk because the government in Syria may then identify me as an asylum seeker.”

– Kenan describing Penally Barracks


“Places like Napier barracks do not represent the values of the people of this country. It encourages discrimination, hostility and hate. Vulnerable people have been suffering mentally and physically by staying there. The ones who were moved out from Napier barracks are still dealing with the mental health consequences of it. their rights were harmed and their dignity was disrespected and it all happened while they were present in the country and they had legal support. I cannot imagine how worse it can be if they were processed offshore without anyone to assess and observe”.

– Erfan, describing Napier Barracks


APPG press release

Cross-party call by parliamentarians to end dehumanising quasi-detention of people seeking asylum

In the wake of the Channel crossing tragedy, where 27 people lost their lives trying to reach the UK, a cross-party group of parliamentarians has today published a report calling on the government to end its use of Napier Barracks in Kent to accommodate people seeking asylum. The report also recommends the scrapping of government plans for more large-scale accommodation based on Napier as a pilot.

The quasi-detention sites examined in the report replicate many of the features found in detained settings – including visible security measures, surveillance, shared living quarters, lack of privacy, poor access to healthcare, legal advice and means of communication, and isolation from the wider community.

The report is the result of an inquiry by the APPG on Immigration Detention into the use of the sites. Led by a panel of 10 parliamentarians from both government and opposition parties, the APPG Inquiry gathered written and oral evidence from over 30 participants – including people accommodated at the sites and charities working directly with them, medical and legal experts, and on-site contractors.

The report explains how features of the sites – including their prison-like conditions – make them “fundamentally unsuitable” as asylum accommodation. For survivors of torture, trafficking or other serious forms of violence – as many asylum-seekers are – such conditions can cause them to relive past abuses and be highly re-traumatising.

The report also documents serious operational failings by the Home Office and its contractors in their running of the sites. It details how people accommodated at the sites have been subjected to “appalling treatment and conditions” which has left them feeling “dehumanised, exhausted and suffering a profound deterioration in their mental health, in some cases to the point of attempting suicide”.

In August this year, the government extended its use of Napier Barracks until 2025 without consultation. The High Court has now granted permission for a judicial review challenging this decision. The government has also confirmed that Napier may act as a pilot for the new asylum accommodation centres proposed in the Nationality and Borders Bill currently making its way through Parliament.

In its report, the APPG Inquiry Panel makes clear its opposition to these centres. It urges the government instead to ensure that people seeking asylum are housed in decent, safe accommodation in the community that supports their well-being and recovery from trauma, facilitates their engagement with the asylum process, and allows them to build links with their community.

In March this year, the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration & Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) found two of the sites, Napier Barracks and Penally Camp, to be “impoverished, run-down and unsuitable for long-term accommodation”.[1] Similarly, in a high-profile case the High Court ruled in June that Napier Barracks failed to meet minimum standards of accommodation for asylum seekers, and that for a period residents were unlawfully detained there under purported Covid rules.[2]

Evidence submitted to the APPG Inquiry demonstrated that few improvements had been made by the Home Office since these serious concerns were raised.



Alison Thewliss (right), MP for Glasgow Central and Chair of the APPG on Immigration Detention, commented:

“The report makes for sober reading. It has highlighted the myriad ways in which the Home Office is comprehensively failing some of the most vulnerable people in society. Those forced to stay in quasi-detention accommodation have included children, people who have survived torture or trafficking, and other at-risk groups

“Our worst fears have been confirmed that this type of accommodation is not only inappropriate, but downright harmful.

“The Home Office have presided over a litany of failures- not only are the sites themselves unsuitable, but their running and mismanagement of Napier Barracks and other large scale accommodation units has actively contributed to poor mental and physical health outcomes for residents, with barely existent safeguarding.

“The accounts of witnesses were heart-breaking and painted a picture of misery and a disregard for medical and legal rights. It is even more worrying that the Home Office themselves described this situation as a ‘pilot project’, suggesting this is the beginning of a new approach. Plans for ‘offshoring’ in the Nationalities and Borders Bill being debated this week certainly imply that there is worse to come, and we should not stand for it.

“The Home Office must listen to experts and survivors of this disastrous scheme and put a stop to quasi-detention once and for all.”



  1. For media enquiries, please contact Elspeth Macdonald on / 07784 034660.
  2. Former residents at Napier and Penally have kindly offered to be interviewed. Please contact Elspeth Macdonald (contact details above) if this is of interest.
  3. The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Immigration Detention comprises over 40 parliamentarians from across all main political parties who share concerns about the use of immigration detention in the UK. More information about the group, including its full membership list, is available at
  4. More information about the inquiry, including links to the written and oral evidence collected, are available at
  5. The inquiry panel members were:Alison Thewliss MP (SNP) – APPG chair
    Paul Blomfield MP (Labour)
    Wendy Chamberlain MP (Liberal Democrat)
    Mary Foy MP (Labour)
    Richard Fuller MP (Conservative)
    Helen Hayes MP (Labour)
    Anne McLaughlin MP (SNP)
    Bell Ribeiro-Addy MP (Labour)
    Lord Roberts of Llandudno (Liberal Democrat)
    Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour)

[1] See:

[2] See: R (NB & Ors) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 1489 (Admin)