New Home Office data reveals stark disparities in how asylum seekers are distributed across the UK, with a small number of local authorities housing thousands of individuals each, while approximately half of all councils accommodate very few or none at all.
According to official Home Office statistics, a total of 97,519 asylum seekers were receiving government support. Of these, 20,885 individuals, representing 21%, were housed in hotel contingency accommodation, marking a substantial decrease from previous peaks as efforts continue to reduce reliance on hotels.
Regional distribution remains heavily uneven across the country. The local authorities accommodating the highest numbers of supported asylum seekers include Glasgow City (3,870), followed by Birmingham (2,142), Liverpool (2,053), Coventry (1,712), and Belfast (1,607), according to the UK-based reports.
Conversely, out of 361 local authorities across the UK, roughly half (181 councils) had fewer than 100 supported asylum seekers, highlighting ongoing imbalances in regional dispersal and local housing pressures.
Which Councils Are Housing The Most Asylum Seekers?
In terms of sheer numbers across the UK, Glasgow City accommodates the largest total number of supported asylum seekers (3,870), followed by major English urban centres such as Birmingham (2,142) and Liverpool (2,053).
Meanwhile, outer London boroughs such as Hillingdon and Hounslow have consistently recorded some of the highest concentrations relative to local population size in England. These elevated rates are driven heavily by the use of contingency hotel accommodation near major transport corridors like Heathrow, with local rates scaling upwards of 60 to 70 supported individuals per 10,000 residents depending on quarterly Home Office data releases.
Where Are Supported Asylum Seekers Less Present or Absent Entirely?
The latest figures highlight sharp geographical imbalances in how government-supported asylum accommodation is distributed across the UK. While major urban centres and more economically deprived local authorities accommodate higher numbers, a small minority of council areas across England report having zero supported asylum seekers, and many rural and affluent districts house very few.
Disparities remain pronounced between predominantly urban regions, where housing stock and support infrastructure are more heavily established, and more affluent rural districts, where lower housing availability and different local service pressures often result in minimal or zero placement numbers.
Meanwhile, ongoing shifts in government accommodation strategies continue to reshape local authority distributions, as temporary contingency hotels are progressively phased down in favour of dispersal housing and alternative regional sites.
What Has UK Government Said About Fairness and Accommodation Closures?
Government officials have acknowledged the uneven distribution of asylum accommodation across the country and pointed to ongoing efforts to phase out contingency hotels entirely.
Following the announcement to close a further 13 asylum hotels, bringing the total shut to 44 under the current push, Immigration Minister Anna Turley stated: “For too long, communities have watched hotels at the centre of their towns and cities become symbols of a broken asylum system. We are turning that around by ending the use of asylum hotels for good and moving people into larger, basic accommodation like former military sites.”
The closures form part of broader government reforms aimed at restoring border control and bringing fairness to the immigration system, with officials committed to ceasing hotel use completely by the end of this parliament while expanding alternative regional dispersal and basic site capacity.
How Has The Debate Over Dispersal Played Out Politically?
The uneven spread of asylum accommodation has become a recurring flashpoint in Britain’s local and national politics, with several councils, including Epping in Essex, pursuing legal challenges over whether hotels used to house asylum seekers required separate planning permission.
UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham, who led Greater Manchester as mayor before taking office in July, has previously argued that the poorest parts of the country should not be left to shoulder a disproportionate share of the burden alone, a position echoed by campaigners who argue that wealthier areas with greater capacity should take on a larger role in future dispersal plans.
What Does This Mean for the System’s Overall Cost and Future Policy?
Beyond the question of geographical distribution, the overall financial scale of the asylum support system remains a central point of public and political debate. While the phased closure of contingency hotels aims to curb heavy reliance on temporary commercial lodging—which previously accounted for multibillion-pound outlays—the broader asylum support bill continues to draw intense scrutiny from campaigners, local leaders, and fiscal watchdogs alike.
As the Home Office presses ahead with plans to phase out hotel use entirely in favour of alternative dispersal housing and basic regional sites, officials stress that ongoing adjustments will continue to reshape how local authorities across the UK manage housing provisions and community integration in the months ahead.
