Moscow-on-the-Wold: new £600m theme park for kids to be built in the Cotswolds but fears grow over possible links to Putin and his deadly regime
A £600million medieval-themed park proposed by French firm Puy du Fou for a 400-acre site near Bicester, Oxfordshire, has run into controversy over alleged links between the company's founder, Philippe de Villiers, and Vladimir Putin. Backed by VisitBritain and nearby Blenheim Palace, the project promises hundreds of jobs, but residents fear it will overwhelm local infrastructure with traffic, and are now also questioning where the funding is coming from and whether de Villiers' past dealings with the Kremlin should disqualify the scheme.
The concerns stem from a 2014 meeting in Crimea, shortly after Russia's annexation, at which de Villiers reportedly discussed building a theme park with Putin and praised him for having "grand vision and charisma". De Villiers' Russian business partner, oligarch Konstantin Malofeev, financed that earlier project and has been accused by the EU and US of funding pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine; Malofeev's wife, Maria Lvova-Belova, is subject to an International Criminal Court arrest warrant over the unlawful deportation of children from Ukraine to Russia. Local residents in Bucknell say they are worried about the true source of funding and want more transparency before the Oxfordshire park proceeds.
- £600m Puy du Fou theme park planned near Bicester, Oxfordshire
- Founder Philippe de Villiers allegedly met Putin over Crimea park plans in 2014
- Locals fear Russian money links and infrastructure strain
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters argue that the proposed park could bring substantial investment, skilled jobs and visitor spending to Oxfordshire, while offering families an educational and entertaining way to engage with history. They would say a company should be assessed on its present conduct, governance and compliance with UK law, rather than judged by unproven or indirect associations, provided any security and ownership checks are carried out rigorously.
The case against
Critics argue that a project of this scale warrants especially careful scrutiny when there are credible concerns about links to people or institutions associated with the Russian state. They would say public confidence, national security and the ethical implications of doing business connected to an aggressive authoritarian regime should take precedence over promised economic benefits until the ownership, financing and relationships involved have been independently clarified.