Background Briefing. Asylum destitution. Glasgow City Council Meeting 28 June Councilor Susan Aitken:

Transcription

1 27 June 2012 Background Briefing Asylum destitution Glasgow City Council Meeting 28 June 2012 Councilor Susan Aitken: Council condemns the United Kingdom Border Agency policy of destitution and the eviction of refused asylum seekers that is increasing the strain on the charities and communities supporting their most basic needs. Council believes that the numbers of destitute asylum seekers now living on the streets of Glasgow represents a humanitarian crisis that requires an urgent response. Council endorses the Scottish Refugee Policy Forum conference report recommendation that all asylum seekers should be provided with UKBA cash support until they are granted status or leave the country. Council therefore demands that the UK Government change existing rules which severely restrict local authorities in the support they can provide to failed asylum seekers. Council calls on the Chief executive to write to the UK Government, seeking a change in policy to allow local authorities to assist refugees in danger of destitution. Introduction Scottish Refugee Council is an independent charity which provides advice and information to men, women and children seeking asylum and refugees living in Scotland. We also campaign for fair treatment of refugees and people seeking asylum and to raise awareness of refugee issues. Scottish Refugee Council welcomes this Council debate on such a critical and important issue. This briefing provides background to the issue of asylum destitution, the extent of destitution in Glasgow and the solutions that are needed to ensure that people who have fled persecution and conflict and are seeking safety in our city are not forced into abject and unacceptable poverty. Why are people seeking asylum destitute? Asylum destitution refers to the absolute and severe poverty that is experienced by people seeking asylum who have no money and / or accommodation or the right to work and support themselves. The majority of people who flee their country and seek sanctuary in Scotland arrive with few or no possessions and are destitute. Most have had to abandon property and assets, leaving everything behind including family and friends, and often every penny of their life savings are spent on paying people smugglers to secure their journey out of danger. On arrival in the UK, they have no choice

2 but to rely on financial support and accommodation from the UK Border Agency as they are forbidden to work and support themselves. Accommodation is provided on a no-choice basis and those who apply for accommodation will be dispersed to one of six regions in the UK. Since 2001 at any one time there have been between 2,000 and 6,000 people seeking asylum living in Scotland, primarily in Glasgow. In 2011, 25,455 people applied for asylum in the UK, of this just under 10% are in Scotland. At the end of 2011 there were 2,066 in people seeking asylum being accommodated in Glasgow. Key countries of origin include Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Eritrea. 1 People can become the victims of destitution for a number of administrative reasons and at particular points through the complex asylum process and asylum support system. 2 Between 2003 and 2008 the Refugee Survival Trust gave out 3,000 destitution grants with a total value of over 250,000 to people seeking asylum in Scotland, the majority of whom were eligible for financial support from the UK Government. 3 People who have reached the end of the asylum process and are appeals rights exhausted are at the greatest risk of experiencing entrenched and abject destitution. 4 Scottish Refugee Council witnesses every day the suffering and human cost of people who have been refused asylum and are forced into destitution. If a claim for asylum is fully refused, then accommodation and financial support (which is below 70% of basic income support or around 5 per day) will be withdrawn after 21 days. The UK Government s position was and is that restrictive measures that it has introduced will deter people from seeking asylum in the UK and force refused asylum seekers to return home. These polices have included a narrower interpretation of who should qualify for protection and withdrawing permission to work. All of the available evidence, including from the Home Office itself, indicates that these policies have not had the intended effect. There is insurmountable evidence 5 however from Scottish Refugee Council and many others of the appalling impact that they have on people. They have to give me money for bras and pants. Its very difficult because nobody gives me any money. I have to ask the Red Cross for sanitary wear. To get some money maybe I can do prostitution? First of all, they must bear in mind you are also human beings. They must know you are human beings rather treating us like you are nothing, 6 What is the extent of destitution of refused asylum seekers in Glasgow? Earlier this month the Scottish Poverty Information Unit at Glasgow Caledonia University published interim findings from research into asylum destitution 7. The research found that over 1 in 4 refugees and people seeking asylum who approached Scottish Refugee Council, the British Red Cross and four other charities across Glasgow over a one week period in March 2012 were destitute. (88 people out of a total of 364) 115 completed surveys with destitute clients (78 male and 33 female) across a wider number of agencies in the city, including some GP surgeries, found that the main countries of origin of destitute asylum seekers are: Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Zimbabwe, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Two thirds of people who are destitute have been refused asylum (78 out of 115). The research acknowledges that that this figure is likely to be an underestimate of the true extent of the problem. The average time destitute was one and a half years, though one man had been

3 destitute for as long as six and a half years. Asylum destitution is sadly not a new phenomenon and charities across the city as well as local faith and community groups, have had to and continue to pick up the pieces. The people are very nice really, they are really nice I would say because, I also can imagine just looking after somebody, if someone is come in to my premises, they don t have anything, you provide food, you provide bedding for them they don t have their own bedding, you provide them with shelter, you provide everything they are dependent on you. Even when they go to the bathroom they have to use your things. So, you know... Some of these people are not that well off. Again, they don t also have much. Some, they can only accommodate you for a while because they ve got families. However, the recent change in UKBA accommodation provider from Y People to Serco plc. has brought the issue into sharp focus as over 70 refused asylum seekers will be evicted from Y People accommodation as the new provider takes over. (Scottish Refugee Council has produced a detailed briefing on the contract change: _Refugee_Council_April_2012.pdf) Y People maintained a policy of not seeking immediate evictions and allowed people to stay in its properties at its own expense. When Glasgow City Council itself held the accommodation contract it interpreted UKBA s 21-day move-on period humanely by implementing standard Scottish eviction procedures for social housing tenants, thus allowing people to stay longer in their properties. These practices have masked the true extent and mitigated to a degree the impact of destitution experienced by refused asylum seekers in Glasgow compared to other parts of the UK. It is unlikely that Serco will follow the same practice of accommodating refused asylum seekers beyond the statutory requirements imposed by the UK Border Agency. What can the Council practically do? Despite asylum seekers being denied access to public funds, local authorities have a duty to provide accommodation (and therefore welfare support) to adult asylum seekers where they have a need for care and attention which has not arisen solely because of destitution or because of the physical effects or anticipated physical effects of being destitute. Asylum seekers in this position are referred to as having a care need. (As amended by Section 120 of the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act). This has been upheld by the English courts and although contested in a Scottish context, has never been subject to formal legal challenge. Thus, under section 12 of the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968, refused asylum seekers with care needs may in certain cases be eligible for local authority support. There are a number of refused asylum seekers that have been identified amongst those to be evicted as particularly vulnerable, due to ill mental or physical health, disability or old age. Scottish Refugee Council is working with Y People and Glasgow City Council Social Work Services to assess all of these cases. We anticipate that a small minority of those currently facing eviction may be judged to be vulnerable enough to meet section 12 criteria and Social Work Services have committed to actively ensuring that Community Care Assessments are carried out in these cases. We hope that this approach is adopted for all future vulnerable cases prior to or after people are

4 refused and made destitute. Nevertheless the majority will find still find themselves unable to access statutory support, and like the many refused asylum seekers who are already currently destitute in Glasgow and the many more that will be refused asylum and made destitute in the future, they will be forced to rely on the friends, faith groups, charities and the kindness of strangers. What needs to happen? Scottish Refugee Council and others have long expressed concerns about whether some asylum seekers receive a full and fair hearing of their claim. Decision making in relation to some nationalities is particularly poor. For example, for nationalities like Eritrea and Somalia up to 1 in 2 cases have their refusals overturned on appeal. This raises serious doubts about the quality of initial decision making. For every person who successfully overturns a poor decision, many more may be falling through the net. Many of those refused and forced into destitution would have qualified for some form of subsidiary protection and immigration status had they applied for asylum in another country or had they applied in the UK in the past. Those refused include: people who would have to return to areas of armed conflict or endemic violence and people at serious risk of systemic or generalised violence of their human rights but who have not been able to establish that they, individually, are at risk. Since 2005 less than 1 in 10 people who seek asylum in the UK have been granted protection outside of the 1951 Refugee Convention whereas in 2003 this was 1 in 4. The UK Government s expectation is that those who do not qualify for international protection should return voluntarily. Yet people who are afraid to return, such as many Iraqis from Central and Southern Iraq are unlikely to consent to go, irrespective of how hard life is made for them in the UK or the level of assistance offered to encourage them to return from where they fled. Forcing people into destitution also undermines immigration control as it creates serious obstacles to both voluntary and forced returns. Asylum seekers without any means of support cannot focus on the voluntary returns process when they are thinking about how they are going to survive. In practice it is extremely difficult to forcibly remove people to countries where there may be serious safety issues, uncooperative governments, difficulties in obtaining travel documents or unreliable travel routes. I certainly get a lot of clients who attend at our offices from certain countries where there is absolutely no prospect of them being removed from the UK at this moment in time for whatever reason and they are being denied access to support. The UK Government must urgently restore faith in the asylum system by implementing solutions to more humane and effective policy to deal with refused asylum seekers. These should be: returning to a more inclusive approach to its assessment of who is in need of protection; granting asylum seekers permission to work if their case has not been resolved within six months or they have been refused, but temporarily cannot be returned through no fault of their own; and, as the motion states, providing asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute with sufficient cash support so that they can meet their essential living needs until they are returned to their country of origin or are given permission to stay in the UK. Glasgow City Council for over 10 years, with the support of all parties, has provided a welcome and humane response to the arrival of people seeking asylum. The Council, other statutory

5 agencies, voluntary, community and faith organisations have all played a role in helping refugees to rebuild their lives in safety and contribute to Glasgow s economic, cultural and social life. In supporting the motion, we believe that the Council can send a strong message to the UK Government that its inhumane and ineffective policy of forcing people who have been refused asylum into abject poverty onto the streets of our city is unacceptable to the people of Glasgow. For further information, please contact: Gary Christie Head of Policy and Communications gary.christie@scottishrefugeecouncil.org.uk Notes 1 Source: Fourth quarter asylum statistics 2011, Home Office. This does not include those who do not require accommodation, but receive financial support from UKBA. There are 35 across Scotland in this situation. These figures also do not include the numbers of people who are granted refugee status or who are refused asylum who are not supported and are destitute. 2 Critical points include: before they are able to submit their claim for asylum; when they are first dispersed and their asylum support is being set up; when they are appealing a negative decision on their asylum claim; at the end of process when transferring on to mainstream benefits; or at the end of the process when moving on to Section 4 support. Section 4 is a form of accommodation and subsistence support given to refused asylum seekers who can show that they are destitute and is, or was initially, meant as a short term mechanism for people about to leave the country. The support was established by the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act but did not begin to be widely used until some years later when it was given statutory authority in the 2004 Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants) Act. The Home Office define applicability for Section 4 thus: You must be destitute and satisfy one of the following requirements: You are taking all reasonable steps to leave the United Kingdom or placing yourself in a position where you can do so; You are unable to leave the United Kingdom because of a physical barrier to travel or for some other medical reason; You are unable to leave the United Kingdom because the UK Border Agency believes there is no safe route available; You have either applied for a judicial review of your asylum application in Scotland or applied for a judicial review of your asylum application in England, Wales or Northern Ireland and been given permission to proceed with it; or Accommodation is necessary to prevent a breach of your rights, within the meaning of the Human Rights Act One reason that people have to rely on charitable support is that asylum seekers who arrive in Scotland must travel to Croydon to make their claim for asylum 5. Between 2003 and 2008 Scottish Refugee Council helped 527 people to travel to England with grants from the Refugee Survival Trust to submit their claim for asylum. Without these grants it is very likely that these people would have remained in Glasgow with no accommodation or support, destitute, homeless and undocumented. They would not be able to submit a claim for asylum and their protection needs would never be considered. 4 Under legislation, Section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, Families (i.e. an asylum applicant with dependents under 18) will still be provided with financial support and accommodation. 5 See for example: The Second Destitution Tally: An indication of the extent of destitution among asylum seekers, refused asylum seekers and refugees, Asylum Support Partnership (2009); 6 Quotes in the briefing come from interviews conducted with support agencies and destitute asylum seekers as part of the Scottish Poverty Information Unit s research into asylum destitution. Full report to be published September Full report to be published September 2012