Select committee: Public Accounts Committee
Conclusion 13
Thirty-Fourth Report - Asylum Accommodation and UK-Rwanda partnership
Published 29 May 2024
Addressed to HM Treasury
Public Accounts Committee Asylum Accommodation and UK-Rwanda partnership All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
We were concerned by the Home Office’s assessment of the set-up costs to convert the two former RAF bases to accommodation. At the outset, the Home Office estimated that such costs would be £5 million for each site, but the costs increased to £49 million at Wethersfield and £27 million so far at Scampton. We asked the Home Office how it got its estimates so wrong. It told us it was dealing with a “national emergency” and that it considered that it “should be doing what our colleagues during Covid had done”. It explained that it had decided to “press on quickly” to increase its stock of accommodation and to take a “novel and creative” approach to setting up the sites. The Home Office acknowledged there was “a very significant optimism bias” in its estimates and some unforeseen costs, but repeatedly stated that the Home Office was working “at pace”.20 The Home Office listed some of the unforeseen costs that arose, such as gas and electrical requirements, and fire requirements, remedial works, improving security and installing CCTV. We questioned why these elements had not been foreseen. The Home Office stressed again that the government needed to find accommodation that was not previously available because it was spending too much on hotels. It told us that it only carried out non- intrusive surveys and pre due-diligence checks before purchasing the sites. We reflected that if a similar sort of assessment were produced in the private sector, such shortfalls might have resulted in negligence claims. The Home Office acknowledged its mistakes, and said that it did not have the right expertise on the programme at the time, and that some of the problems were “definitely avoidable at the time”. It said it had now recruited very experienced programme directors and sought more external advice.21
From: Public Accounts Committee, Thirty-Fourth Report - Asylum Accommodation and UK-Rwanda partnership (HC 639), 29 May 2024
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 11 July 2025 (deadline 29 July 2024).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government states that it agrees with most of the Committee's recommendations, says it will end the Rwanda partnership with "no removals to Rwanda under the MEDP", and only notes two recommendations that it describes as no longer relevant or not proceeding.
- On the Rwanda partnership, the government notes the recommendations on quarterly updates and on an evaluation strategy, saying the first is "no longer relevant" and that evaluation of deterrent impact and value for money "will not proceed".
- On large accommodation sites, the government agrees and lists measures including restructuring the programme to deliver smaller sites and earlier due diligence; it says an Infrastructure and Projects Authority review found successful delivery "appears feasible".
- The government agrees to write to the Committee quarterly on service credits applied for accommodation safety KPIs, with a target implementation date of October 2024.
- On Accounting Officer Assessments, the government agrees but gives no date, saying dates are "dependent on project development". It will not yet publish one for the large sites programme, and will write to the new Committee "in due course" on third country negotiations.