Last week the government dropped plans to build a series of controversial 'accommodation centres' to house refugees and asylum seekers whose claims were being processed in rural locations throughout the country. Now the future of the only centre that has received planning permission – near Bicester in Oxfordshire – is also uncertain as another public inquiry has been called for early July. The Bicester centre has received much speculation in the local press and been criticised by campaigners both on humanitarian grounds and by Nimbys.

The accommodation centre scheme was first announced in 2002 by David Blunkett. The plan was that the centres would hold asylum seekers for up to six months, rather than dispersing them in urban communities. From the start, it was unclear what the benefits of this expensive and bureaucratic scheme would be, as it looked set to further alienate and institutionalise a lot of people who would already be having a difficult time. However, as late as last autumn the then immigration minister, Des Browne, was insisting that it was a key part of immigration strategy.

If it is built, the Bicester centre will house 750 people, mainly single men but also women and families with children. In 2004 a contract was awarded to Global Solutions Ltd (GSL) to run the centre, and one to Carillion to build it. Work has begun on site, an ex MoD base, including the building of a new perimeter fence, but as yet no serious construction has started.

Local campaigners speculate that even if the accommodation centre proposal is entirely dropped, some sort of detention facility will be built at Bicester. According to a statement from Bicester Refugee Support (BRS):

'Although the plans to build a detention centre are not yet definite, the government has already spent 18 million pounds on the centre and the plans as developed so far would need very little alteration for this change in use.'

Planning permission was refused last year to expand the nearby detention and removal centre, Campsfield House, so it is possible that this proposal could be relocated to Bicester. Although refugee applications have fallen considerably in recent years – from 84,130 excluding dependents in 2002 to 33,930 in 2004 – government policy still focuses on increasing removals rather than giving more people a chance to live in this country.

GSL runs four out of the six existing immigration detention centres in England and Wales, and all of Australia's immigration detention centres. It is also at the forefront of prison privatisation, running South Africa's first privatised prison. It is a member of PPP Forum, a lobby group set up specifically to promote the use of Private Public Partnerships (PPPs), and also of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), which recently produced a report highlighting the benefits of privatisation in the prison industry. GSL also has a 2.2% stake in Partnerships UK, the agency that promotes PFI/PPP projects in the UK.

Carillion is a construction company, formerly part of Tarmac, and another member of the PPP Forum. It is currently involved in a variety of projects including building and maintaining infrastructure in MoD bases around the UK and building PPP schools in Glasgow and Leeds.

Especially worrying about both the accommodation centre proposal, and the immigration detention centres that already exist, is the lack of recognition, from either the government or GSL, that they are in fact prisons. This pattern is repeated in the Australian system. Euphemistically calling something an 'accommodation centre' or a 'reception centre' does not alter the fact that someone is being kept there against their will and away from the rest of society, unable to get on with their life. One of GSL's websites casually states that 'mandatory detention is not imprisonment', and an Australian minister was heard to say in a radio interview, that 'detention centres are not prisons. They are administrative detention.' However, to anyone who has ever been inside one of these institutions, it is not very clear exactly what the difference is.

While Blair and Brown call for debt relief for the world's poorest countries, they simultaneously implement policies which lead to further privatisation of services both at home and abroad, destroying local economies and creating more reasons for 'economic migration'. In the upcoming G8 Summit it is likely that poor countries who have just had their debts cancelled will come under increased pressure to open up markets to foreign investors and consider privatising more public services. Corporations like GSL and Carillion will either profit from going into the newly opened economies, or profit through locking up the poor who try to make a life in this country.

For more information see www.bicesterrefugeesupport.org.uk/index.html , also look out for Corporate Watch's new profile of GSL, coming soon. See also Corporate Watch Newsletter 21 for an earlier installment of the Bicester centre story.