Piddington has found an unusual way to fight for Britain: by leaving it. Armed with patriotic slogans and a recent taste for independence, the Oxfordshire village has declared itself a principality to protest plans for a nearby asylum accommodation centre.
On 16 September, Susannah Parden, vice-chair of Piddington Parish Council, announced that 285 residents had voted for independence, with only 26 against. Calling Piddington “the village that roars”, she was greeted with applause as the village celebrated its symbolic departure from the United Kingdom.
Parish council chair Tim McNally believes the people of Piddington have “given a message to the world”. Exactly what that message is, however, is harder to interpret. While it’s clear that Piddington residents resoundingly oppose the plan to house up to 1,256 male asylum seekers nearby, the symbolism of leaving the UK is puzzling.
The residents’ concerns have merit. Cherwell District Council has objected to the proposal, raising concerns about safety, local infrastructure and transport, among other issues. Piddington residents aren’t the only ones entitled to gripe: local Liberal Democrat MP Calum Miller estimates that converting the site could cost nearly £270 million, with taxpayers footing the bill. The Home Office, however, disputes his figures, describing them as speculative.
As peculiar as Piddington’s announcement was, it seems to have struck a chord in another village. On 22 September, Barnham representatives visited Piddington to find out how it had organised its referendum. The Suffolk village is also protesting plans for asylum accommodation at a nearby former RAF base, which parish council chair John Bauer estimates could accommodate 50,000 asylum seekers over ten years.
Is there a movement in the making? How many of our villages will leave us? Are we in danger of witnessing a balkanisation of the UK? Fortunately, the United Kingdom is not facing imminent disintegration, as no legal mechanism allows a village to secede from the UK. If opposition to asylum accommodation grows, perhaps these symbolic referendums will become commonplace. But does this actually accomplish anything? If the objective was to raise awareness of the issue affecting Piddington, they have undoubtedly succeeded.
The village that roars may have mistaken attracting publicity for demonstrating national solidarity. During the vote announcement, signs bearing “Battle for Britain” slogans were visible. This symbolism is clearly contradictory. Rather than suggesting that residents should argue their case, defend their country and get the proposal reversed, the symbolism seems to say: if we don’t like what Britain is doing, we’ll stop being British. For a campaign so proud of being British, symbolically abandoning Britain seems a peculiar way to defend it. And with Barnham taking notes, Britain may soon have an entire separatist movement united by its determination to remain British.
