Relocating UK asylum seekers from hotels will not save money, watchdog says

The British government's decision to reduce the use of hotels to house asylum seekers by moving them to sites such as military bases will end up costing taxpayers more money, parliament's spending watchdog said on Wednesday.

The finding, which undermines the official basis for using the sites, comes as ministers grapple with how to reduce the spiralling costs of housing the growing backlog of more than 100,000 asylum seekers.

As part of its strategy, Britain's Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's ruling Conservatives are pushing ahead with contentious plans to deter new arrivals crossing the Channel on small boats by trying to deport some migrants to Rwanda.

Wrangling over legislation to overcome legal challenges which have stalled that effort returns to parliament on Wednesday.

The growing numbers of migrants landing on the shores of southeast England in recent years have prompted the interior ministry to increase its use of hotels for housing, leading to escalating costs.

By last December, the ministry was providing accommodation for around 106,500 people, with 45,800 in hotels, according to the National Audit Office (NAO).

The ministry expects that to cost £4.7 billion ($6 billion) in the financial year to the end of this month, including £3.1 billion on hotels, the watchdog reported in its "value for money" review of the spending.

In a bid to lower the bill, the ministry has turned to converting former military bases and leasing an accommodation barge called the Bibby Stockholm to house asylum seekers.

But in trying to "rapidly" switch to these "large sites," it had incurred unnecessary costs as well as risks and ultimately failed to reduce the eye-watering spending totals, the NAO found.

The watchdog said the latest estimates suggest the sites will cost £46 million more than using hotels.

A UK government spokesperson said the reduction in the use of hotels had benefits including minimising the impact on local communities. While, the opposition Labour Party called the NAO's report "staggering."

(With input from agencies)