A BID to house desperate Syrian refugees has been refused after a heated debate - with angry councillors calling it "shameful" and "embarrassing".

Worcestershire County Council has decided against helping house up to a dozen despairing war-torn Syrians after it was voted out 22-28.

The County Hall vote led to some campaigners leaving the council chamber in tears today, with the Conservative leadership arguing that it had too many concerns over the scheme's costs.

The Home Office launched a nationwide plea to councils to help take part in a project to house Syrian refugees for five years, but central Government funding is currently only guaranteed for the first 12 months.

During today’s debate despite support from Labour, Lib Dem, Green, independent and even UK Independence Party councillors, it was rejected.

The vote follows concerns from the Conservative cabinet last month that a motion to introduce it was too risky, which led to Ruth Forecast, from the Malvern branch of Amnesty International, turning up at County Hall today to plead for a reprieve.

"These refugees will not have fled for economic betterment, but for their lives," she said.

“No-one can be unaware of the situation facing tens of thousands of Syrian refugees globally.”

Councillor Adrian Hardman, the leader, said: “The cabinet has clearly come to a decision on this for a selection of reasons, which are in the report and I don’t intend to rehearse them.

“It’s more than just a question of cash, we have to operate this on a county-wide basis .

“We continue to do our best for refugees, political or otherwise – and operate a policy which is inclusive, and welcoming to all regardless of where they come from.”

But Councillor Fran Oborski said: "Surely 'world class' Worcestershire (the county's marketing motto) implies that we understand the wider world we live in - these refugees are literally fleeing for their lives."

Fellow Lib Dem Councillor Liz Tucker said: "This is about humanity, it's not about 'can we afford it'. "What is is about us that we can't just do it? I don't think it's time to be the accountant, I would ask that members go with their hearts on this one."

Labour Councillor Graham Vickery called the stand-off "appalling, shameful, an embarrassment" for the county while his group leader Peter McDonald said "an entire generation of schoolchildren" are at risk in Syria, adding: "Surely it's not too much to ask that this county takes in a dozen families."

During the heavy criticism, he called the stance "uncivilised" while Councillor Chris Bloore said: "As important as tarmac and lampposts are, this is a direct challenge to our moral compass."

Green Councillor Matthew Jenkins said: "We should be ashamed of ourselves if we cannot help in this small way."

But the Tories disagreed, with Councillor Liz Eyre saying the backers were "ignoring the expense involved", which led to cries of "shame" across the chamber.

Councillor Hardman said it wasn't only the cost which concerned him, but managing the logistics with other partners like the health service - and said other councils were sceptical about the project's sustainability.

"It's more than a question of cash, we have to operate on a county-wide basis," he said.

"We have talked to other authorities on this, some are very nervous and asked us not to name them in the paperwork."

The bill for housing 12 families is estimated at around £150,000 a year, according to the council, which says as well as the money factor, insists the scheme is more suitable for metropolitan areas under Home Office guidance.

The UK has provided £900 million in aid to the war-torn nation, but the Home Office project has come in for criticism nationally, with less than 200 Syrians taken in by councils under it so far, mainly because of the unanswered questions on the costs beyond the first 12 months.

Bosses at County Hall today said they will keep an eye on the project and could re-visit it should the Government position change.

* To see our report on this issue from the June cabinet meeting, go HERE.