Terneuzen gives green light to Neckermann building asylum centre
After a political U-turn, the municipal council backs a regional reception centre for up to 200 asylum seekers.
On Thursday evening, Terneuzen municipal council voted by 16 to 14 to issue a positive recommendation on the permit for a regional reception centre in the former Neckermann building at Handelspoort 1. This gives a new twist to a dossier the council had previously rejected, although the permit has not yet been formally granted.
According to the plans, the site may accommodate up to 200 asylum seekers for a maximum of ten years. The current emergency accommodation in the former library, where 104 people are staying according to Omroep ZVL, must close when Handelspoort opens. The residents would move to the new building as far as possible.
The decision includes additional agreements on safety and integration into society. Fourteen councillors submitted an amendment to give future residents faster access to, among other things, work and education. COA has strengthened its safety plan; the municipality wants to formalise its implementation through conditions attached to the permit.
In November 2025, the council had still issued a negative recommendation on the same application. The executive then decided to continue the permit procedure, assessed the submissions received and sought external legal advice. It subsequently resubmitted an amended proposal to the council.
The vote once again divided local politics. Supporters pointed to the statutory duty to organise reception places and the need for more stable accommodation. Opponents from PVV, Hart voor Terneuzen and Sociaal Terneuzen said the consequences for social safety, traffic and liveability had not been worked out sufficiently. They also questioned the capacity for oversight.
The decision does not yet mean that COA can immediately carry out renovations or place residents. The municipal council issued a weighty recommendation; the executive must then take the formal decision on the environmental permit. Interested parties who previously submitted a view can subsequently lodge an appeal with the court within the statutory period.
The issue touches on a broader question of distribution. The Spreidingswet obliges municipalities to make reception possible and is intended to distribute available places more fairly among provinces and municipalities. Terneuzen sees the 200 places as part of Zeeland’s reception obligation, but the political dispute shows that national responsibility and local concerns do not automatically coincide even after a decision.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- Terneuzen municipal council issued a positive recommendation, by 16 votes to 14, on the regional reception centre at Handelspoort 1.
- The site is planned for a maximum of 200 residents.
- The executive still has to formally finalise the environmental permit.
- The municipal council had previously issued a negative recommendation in 2025.
- The Spreidingswet assigns municipalities a duty to make reception possible.
Left
Arguments A balanced distribution of reception requires municipalities to take responsibility, even when this prompts local opposition. In this view, permanent accommodation with work, education and proper guidance is more humane and administratively sustainable than continual emergency accommodation.
Values Solidarity, equal responsibility, human dignity and equal access to services.
Consequences Not proceeding could increase pressure on temporary reception sites and further concentrate reception in municipalities that are already doing a great deal. Good local integration could instead reduce nuisance and distance.
Centre
Arguments The reception centre can proceed if the permit is issued with due regard to the law and safety, oversight, traffic and public participation are arranged concretely. The council’s recommendation is then a political decision, but not an endpoint: verifiable agreements and evaluation points are needed.
Values The rule of law, feasibility, transparency and administrative continuity.
Consequences A careful process can strengthen support, but additional conditions may delay the opening or increase costs. Both reception capacity and local liveability must be monitored measurably.
Right
Arguments A municipal council should not approve a site under national pressure when, in opponents’ view, concerns about safety and liveability have not been sufficiently resolved. Local democratic choice and the ability to determine the scale or location of reception itself come first.
Values Local control, public order, limited migration and direct accountability to residents.
Consequences Proceeding without broad local support could damage confidence in government and cohesion within the municipality. At the same time, rejecting the proposal could lead to legal disputes and put additional pressure on other reception sites.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The article’s core has been confirmed by Terneuzen municipality and an independent regional broadcaster. The formal permit and opening date are explicitly presented as not yet final.
- confirmed The municipal council issued a positive recommendation on the reception centre by 16 votes to 14. — Reported by Omroep ZVL in its account of the council meeting. source
- confirmed The site is intended for a maximum of 200 asylum seekers. — The municipality gives a maximum of 200 residents. source
- confirmed The municipal council had previously issued a negative recommendation on the permit application. — The municipal project page describes the earlier negative recommendation of November 2025. source
- confirmed The executive still has to take a final decision after the council’s recommendation. — This follows from the municipality’s description of the permit procedure. source
- confirmed PVV submitted a motion of no confidence after the vote, which was rejected by 12 votes to 18. — Reported by Omroep ZVL. source
- confirmed The Spreidingswet obliges municipalities to arrange reception places. — Explanation of the statutory duty by the national government. source
Editor's note
The council vote, the positive recommendation, the maximum capacity and the next steps in the permit procedure are certain. The executive’s final decision date and the site’s opening date are uncertain.Sources
- College legt vergunningaanvraag Handelspoort opnieuw voor aan raad — Gemeente Terneuzen
- Regionale opvanglocatie Handelspoort — Gemeente Terneuzen
- Toch asielzoekers voormalige Neckermann-pand — Omroep ZVL
- Motie van wantrouwen PVV van tafel geveegd — Omroep ZVL
- Spreidingswet: informatie voor overheden — Rijksoverheid