Home Secretary failed to act on advice that £40.85 per week is no longer sufficient to meet basic living needs
In a court order made last week and a judgment handed down today, the High Court ruled that the Home Secretary has unlawfully failed to provide enough support for the essential living needs of asylum seekers in the cost of living crisis.
Image credit: UK GovernmentNews of the Court's decision was first announced last week by Greater Manchester Law Centre and Doughty Street Chambers.
Mr Justice Fordham stated last week in the court order: "The Secretary of State for the Home Department has since at least 14 September 2022 acted unlawfully in failing (i) to review the rate of asylum support under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 and (ii) to ensure that the rate of asylum support under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 is adequate to meet the essential living needs of asylum seekers."
Today's judgment further adds that the Secretary of State's decision to set the rate of asylum support at £40.85 from 21 February 2022 was unlawful.
Greater Manchester Law Centre and Doughty Street Chambers noted that internal Home Office advice to the Home Secretary revealed that the current asylum support rate of £40.85 per week is no longer sufficient to meet basic living needs due to rising inflation. While officials repeatedly recommended that the rate must be increased in order to protect asylum seekers from destitution, the Home Secretary did not act on this advice. No reasons were provided for the failure to act.
Today's judgment notes that advice given to ministers on 21 September 2022 and 15 November 2022 presented a compelling picture to the Home Secretary to increase asylum support. Mr Justice Fordham stated: "Again, no decision was taken, no reasons provided. Again, there is no evidence of the 'process of considering'."
Referring to the advice given to ministers on 15 November, Mr Justice Fordham added: "It also identified the 'do nothing' option, where the rate 'remains £40.85' as being 'unlawful'. And yet the [Secretary Of State for the Home Department] has done 'nothing'. Mr Thomann for the SSHD, again, was unable to put forward any possible defence of the failure of the SSHD to make a decision, or the failure of the SSHD to increase income support. Again, there is none."
Last week's court order stated that unless and until the Home Secretary increases the rate of asylum support by policy and/or by amendment to the Asylum Support Regulations 2000, she will be acting unlawfully and in breach of her statutory duty.
According to today's judgment, the rate of asylum support has now been increased by 10.1%.
In the judgment, Mr Justice Fordham states: "After the deadline I had set for submissions on consequential matters, Mr Thomann communicated to the Court (at 14:58 on 20 December 2022) that: 'the SSHD has agreed to an immediate increase in the asylum support rate by 10.1% on an interim basis'. This was confirmed, in the same terms, in a letter from Natalie Crooks at the Government Legal Department to the Court (provided at 16:55 on 20 December 2022)."
Josie Hicklin of Greater Manchester Law Centre, who was solicitor for the claimant in the case, said last week: "Whilst we welcome the finding of the Court, this is not a day for celebration. The Home Secretary was warned by her own officials that over 50,000 people were receiving less than required to meet their most basic needs and she chose to do nothing. The court has merely confirmed what she already knew – her failure to act was unlawful. Without the bravery of our client, the Home Secretary's failing would have gone unchallenged. But until the Home Secretary agrees to act her situation remains unchanged. She is caring for young children, on a level of support far too low to meet their most basic of needs. There are thousands of others in the same situation, all in need of urgent help."
The Secretary of State has seven days to decide whether to appeal the Court's decision.