Piddington councillor brands plan to house over 1,000 asylum seekers in sleepy village 'entirely disproportionate'

A Piddington Parish Councillor has hit out at Andy Burnham's response to the migrant crisis after calling on "wealthier areas" to house more asylum seekers.

Discussing Piddington's campaign on the People's Channel, Joe Marshall made clear that the concerns of villagers is not a matter of wealth, but a "matter of scale".

Speaking to GB News for the first time since becoming Prime Minister, Andy Burnham said he is willing to hear concerns from the people of Piddington, but made clear that wealthy parts of the country cannot dodge their share of housing asylum seekers.

He said: "I have begun to become aware of the campaign from Piddington, and I will listen to what people are saying and respond to the concerns that they are putting forward.

"I don't know the issue yet in detail, but in some ways, as I understand it, it is about creating secure space and not have the HMO issues.

"It's obviously going to be challenging, but I am prepared always to listen to people, to work with people and to pick up legitimate concerns, and I will address those concerns.

"I do have to say we cannot have a situation where it's only the poorest communities in the country that receive all of the dispersal of refugees and asylum seekers.

"I do believe all parts of the country need to work, to play their part. It's a challenging issue.

"We're working at it, we understand people's concerns, and I will look into the issues raised by the good people of Piddington."

Reacting to Mr Burnham's remarks, Mr Marshall told GB News: "I think in response to everything Andy Burnham said in the last 24 hours, obviously we're happy we're getting traction, and we've finally heard back from someone in the room making the decisions.

"But ultimately, I think we still are fairly confident that our opposition and our opinions haven't changed. This is an argument about scale, it's nothing to do with wealth."

The councillor argued: "He ultimately stands and says, well, everyone needs to do their part, but we've managed to pull out a document from the BBC in 2018, and he objected to the concept of Manchester being used for 6,681 asylum seekers.

"We're looking at 1,250 spread over an area that's got a population of 300, not Manchester, so it's entirely disproportionate."

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

• PM says wealthy areas must house more migrants after leafy village revolts over 1,250 asylum seekers
• Andy Burnham blasted by Tory MP after calling on 'wealthy areas' to house more migrants: 'No plan!'
• Andy Burnham's migrant dispersal plan handed scathing takedown by Chris Philp: 'Disgraceful!'

Offering a more detailed picture of the village of Piddington, Mr Marshall stressed that the village is so small that it is "quite normal for for children and the elderly to go out on their own".

He explained: "Piddington is a sleepy village in Oxfordshire. We don't have a huge population, I think we're around 150 households.

"We've got quiet roads, we've got a park that's incredibly quiet, we're such a quiet village that it's quite normal for for children to go out on their own, for elderly dog walkers to go out on their own.

"And I think that's the area of concern that we've got, that we're got the risk of 1,250 people that can't be contained.

"They legally can't be contained, and even if five per cent, 10 per cent want to wander through the village, then we're going to have a change in the way that we may be acting."

Having met with the rural policing services, Mr Marshall told GB News that they've been informed there is "nothing they can do" to protect residents.

He said: "We've met with rural policing locally, and they've advised that there's nothing they can do.

"The only thing that we can do is just ensure we run and hide if something happens or we change our way of life to avoid the potential risks.

"And unfortunately, the sheer quantity of 1,250 means we're at risk. That if one per cent have got convictions that the Government, the Home Office don't know about, we won't know about it.

"And it poses a direct threat to us that we feel that we haven't been listened to on."