Written evidence submitted by Anonymous (AAC0033)

My experience working as a volunteer specialising in asylum support.

I am a full time, unpaid volunteer for Care4Calais.  I work in Direct Aid; however, I work remotely, predominantly using Whats App to communicate with people in the asylum system.  My expertise is in asylum support – people’s entitlements and how to communicate with Migrant Help and the Home Office.  I also provide wellbeing support.

I deal with people with problems, rather than the entirety of the cohort of asylum seekers, therefore I assume I see a higher percentage of problems than actually exist in fact. 

I do also work in person with two other charities provide wellbeing activities in two hotels in Scotland, and I provide one to one in person assistance to people seeking asylum and recently recognised refugees in dispersal accommodation in Scotland.

I am submitting evidence to this inquiry because I think that the Home Office generally has cloth ears when it comes to being told what the problems are with asylum accommodation.  They create systems that work internally for them (although their internal communication processes are worse than awful) and refuse to entertain that real life is different than whatever they have modelled as being the process. 

The entire system appears from the outside to be designed to maximise profit for private companies, to meet minimum standards under legislation, to dehumanize and force everyone into something designed to  be easy to administer but which actually causes immense problems for the people being housed, the staff dealing with the people being accommodated and those who wish to support them or provide services to them.

The delivery of asylum accommodation

The Home Office’s use and management of asylum accommodation contracts, including in response to growing demand and changing needs

Contracting and subcontracting (food, security, hotel management) leads to lack of accountability and ‘creaming off’ of funding for profit at multiple levels. 

Typical example:  a hotel with a public restaurant owned by a private company who were diverting food delivered for asylum seekers to the public restaurant meaning that there was no fresh fruit available, and other meals were smaller than recommended.  Complaint by two asylum seekers led to changes.

Given that asylum processing times appear to be speeding up, it’s time to end mass accommodation sites, that don’t allow for people to integrate into society in preparation for moving out of the asylum system should they be successful in gaining refugee status. 

The performance of providers delivering the current contracts on:

Identifying and delivering appropriate accommodation

Definition of ‘appropriate’ is unclear.   A major problem is the new dispersal model where people are being sent to very remote and isolated areas with no established support networks.  Travel expenses to nearby major centres are prohibitive.  Example:  someone sent from Wethersfield camp to Askern near Doncaster.

Engaging and working with stakeholders

It’s extremely difficult for third sector organisations to work with accommodation providers who tend to view us as nuisances.  After proving our ‘worth’ it is possible to build up excellent and productive relationships with local staff to provide useful services that improve the wellbeing of people being accommodated and benefit the staff working for accommodation providers.  There are multiple examples of local charities and local authorities providing drop in and welcoming services to people in hotels and in dispersal areas.

Safeguarding and supporting the welfare of people in asylum accommodation

It is difficult to generalise but from my experience this is appalling.  In my work I frequently come across people with severe needs who have not been referred to social services or council safeguarding.  There is no responsibility for doing care referrals in spite of this being mentioned in Home Office guidance.  Example:  man with only one leg who was visited by the local council care team only after my referral one year after he arrived at the hotel – local care team called me immediately after the visit in shock at the conditions in the hotel and particularly for this man who was being forced to share a room in spite of being unable to dress himself in the bathroom in privacy, needing the entire room floor space to lie on to dress. 

Safeguarding responses, from my experience, are extremely poor with a few exceptions.  Often local staff have the same poor outcomes reporting to their internal safeguarding as I have reporting to the Home Office and Migrant Help.  Example:  blind man housed in initial accommodation without care referral, without any aids such as a white stick (purchased by me in the end), for several months until the local MP became involved.  The hotel manager was similarly frustrated by the complete lack of response.

Even when needs are recognised the accommodation provided is generally subpar.  Example family with two children with severe disabilities, one with a wheelchair, sent to a hotel with no lift to access the room.  The hotel manager had only been asked if they had accessible rooms and not if they could deal with someone in a wheelchair nor the extent of the other needs.

To counter this I have also witnessed exceptional care for wellbeing and safety by some local staff.  It very much depends on the ethos and attitude of the accommodation provider, subcontractor, and local managers.

Managing and sharing data

As a third party I don’t have data shared with me.

How the Home Office works with other Government departments and local authorities on housing supply issues

This doesn’t appear to be very joined up however I’m not party to this.

The impact of current arrangements for asylum accommodation on local areas

The sudden arrival of asylum seekers into areas is very disturbing and distressing both for the people themselves and the local residents.  Whether you want to support the people or oppose them being there, the lack of advance notice and sufficient information as to preparations that have been made eg negotiations with local health services, police, etc causes discontent.

The Home Office’s approach to the distribution of asylum accommodation at a regional and local level

While it seems fair to ‘share the load’ there is so much regional disparity for example in types of property, local support, cost of living, integration opportunities that the new dispersal model is very unfair.  It seems to me that better communication with councils, or contracting asylum accommodation provision to councils, would be a much better solution than the current one.

The Home Office’s engagement and joint working with local authorities, local health services, NGOs and other local partners 

I’m not party to this at all.

The impact of the current approach to delivering asylum accommodation on local services

I believe there is funding to the local council for each person that is housed in their area, however it’s not always easy to see how that funding has been spent on improving services that directly impact the asylum seeker population AND the local community.

The biggest problem is with ESOL provision in colleges.  Availability of dentists has been a problem for years and affects everyone.  Doctors and medical services seem to have improved in becoming more accessible to asylum seekers (fewer issues with being turned away for not having the correct documents).

Also transport – if asylum seekers were given free bus travel, they would be much better able to help themselves, locate cheaper goods and services, etc.

In addition, local councils and other organisations in new dispersal areas often don’t have any understanding of asylum and the associated restrictive conditions on rights.

The Home Office’s approach to working with local partners to support people who have been granted refugee status and are leaving asylum accommodation

It was extremely frustrating when the large number of asylum claims suddenly started being approved and we were warning of a huge increase in homelessness presentations and no one listened or, if they listened, no-one did anything.  I believe that there have been improvements, and the temporary extension of eviction from Home Office accommodation to 56 days helps, however it still seems very disconnected.  The Home Office don’t even know where people are and they can’t communicate effectively internally, let alone with external parties.  I’m frequently helping people to find out how to update their address details with the Home Office having been moved by the Home Office to Home Office accommodation and receiving a letter at the new accommodation.  Asylum support has one address, and the case team have another.

Feb 2025