CONTROVERSIAL plans for an asylum seeker base at a former RAF site in North Yorkshire will not be taken further, the Home Office has confirmed.

Hambleton District Council has confirmed that the plans for the asylum seeker accomodation at Linton-on-Ouse will not be progressed - the Home Office said in a message to councillors.

Councillor Mark Robson, Leader of Hambleton District Council said: “Today we have finally received a response from the Home Office informing us of their decision not to progress current proposals for the use of the Linton on Ouse site as asylum accommodation.

“This follows news in August that the Secretary of State for the Ministry of Defence had made a decision to withdraw its offer for the use of the site. Our legal work on this issue will now be drawn to a close.

“It is an excellent outcome for the residents of Linton-on-Ouse and all those living in the surrounding areas as well as for Hambleton District Council, all of which fought hard to oppose these plans.

"I believe that had we as a council not intervened with this proposal and challenged the Government when we were first made aware of it, there would have been asylum seekers living on this totally unsuitable site.”

As reported in The Press earlier this week, Thirsk and Malton Conservative MP, Kevin Hollinrake, said local residents and councillors were "increasingly concerned" about a lack of formal acknowledgement that the former RAF Linton on Ouse base will not be used as an asylum seeker reception centre. The MP wrote a letter to the new Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, requesting confirmation on the decision.

The announcement of the proposals in April led to a storm of protest from local residents.

The Home Office said the site would house 1,500 ‘destitute single adult male asylum seekers’ for up to six months while their asylum applications were processed.

The plans said that the centre would provide safe and secure accommodation and would be designed to be self-sufficient to reduce the need for the inhabitants to leave the site and therefore minimise any impact on the local community.

But campaigners said it was the "wrong plan, wrong place," and packed-out public meetings and staged demonstrations against the proposals.