96-page report highlights concerns about “unnecessary risks” to vulnerable asylum seekers presented by recent legislation
The House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee has today published an important new report looking at issues around equality in the UK asylum process.
Image credit: UK GovernmentYou can download the 96-page PDF report here or read it online here.
Today's comprehensive report presents the results of an inquiry that began in 2021 to examine fairness in the asylum system and the experiences of asylum seekers with protected characteristics as defined in the Equality Act 2010.
Summing up the findings of the inquiry, Committee chair (and former immigration minister) Caroline Nokes MP said: "We were disturbed by the Home Office's inadequate management of risks of harm to asylum seekers with protected characteristics, including women, LGBT people, children and disabled people. Alarmingly, these risks will increase under the Government's recent and planned reforms."
The report sets out the Committee's concerns in detail.
It states: "The asylum system is undergoing substantial reform, in part due to the Home Office's inability to process the volume of asylum claims it receives effectively and expeditiously. The Government is now seeking to reduce the ability of people to claim asylum in the UK despite recent figures showing the majority of those seeking to do so will have a genuine claim and would, in all likelihood, meet the criteria to be accepted. As this Report will set out, people with vulnerabilities arising from Equality Act protected characteristics are particularly affected. This cohort is experiencing unnecessary risks under the Home Office's current management of the asylum process, and recent and proposed changes to the system may lead to those risks increasing."
Of particular concern to the Women and Equalities Committee is the treatment of children within the asylum system. The Committee says plans to detain and remove child asylum seekers under the Illegal Migration Bill must be abandoned. The report notes: "The risk of harm to children outweighs any perceived damage to the effectiveness of the Government's policy agenda."
The report highlights the many challenges that people with vulnerabilities arising from protected characteristics face when they claim asylum in the UK.
It notes with regard to women who have experienced gender-based violence: "The Home Office's heavy reliance on a single substantive asylum interview disadvantages women with histories of sexual and gender-based violence and abuse. These women will invariably be experiencing the effects of trauma and related mental health issues, with potential effects on memory and their ability to provide a cogent, chronological narrative of what has happened to them. This can unfairly harm their claim. We recommend the Home Office establish a specially trained team to determine the claims of women with histories of sexual and gender-based violence and abuse. It should not rely on a single substantive interview to determine such claims. Women should be afforded sufficient time and space to recount distressing and traumatic experiences in a safe and supportive environment. They should be supported in all aspects of the process by an independent specialist advocate."
On LGBT asylum seekers, the Committee finds: "The Home Office should demonstrate it is taking effective steps to mitigate the risk of unequal effects in the asylum process. There is a range of distinct difficulties faced by people claiming asylum on grounds of sexual orientation or gender-identity. These claims are difficult to evidence, legally complex and difficult to determine accurately. They are not determined consistently well, leading to expensive appeals and overturned decisions. We were disappointed that the [Minister for Immigration, Robert Jenrick] was unable to set out in any detail the steps the Department has taken since the internal review it conducted in 2019–20 to improve the accuracy of its initial decision-making in such cases. In response to this Report the Home Office should set out the main findings of the 2019–20 review and the steps it has taken to improve decision-making in cases involving sexual orientation and gender identity-based claims."
Access to legal representation for asylum seekers is also a concern for the Women and Equalities Committee:
"There is a lack of access to expert legal representation for people claiming asylum in the UK. This is particularly problematic in relation to complex claims, often involving sexual orientation or gender identity, religious belief or renunciation of belief, and sexual and gender-based violence and abuse. There is evidence that lack of legal representation during the initial claim determination phase leads to poor initial decisions and unnecessary and expensive appeals later in the process. We agree with expert witnesses that an overhaul of legal aid for these types of complex asylum cases is needed. We recommend the Government increases funding for asylum legal aid to ensure specialist support is available for claimants across the UK during the initial determination process, particularly for sexual orientation and gender identity, sexual and gender-based violence and abuse, and religious belief and apostasy-based claims."
With regard to the asylum backlog, the Committee says the Home Office will need many more highly-trained decision-makers making initial decisions faster. More training is also needed for Home Office staff.
The report states: "The Home Office must establish a new programme of training for Home Office decision-makers and presenting officers particularly on matters concerning gender, sexual orientation and gender identity-based asylum claims. Training should be delivered by independent expert stakeholders, drawing on lived experiences of refugees. The Home Office must also improve the timeliness of its actions once notice of an appeal has been served and when an outcome is known. It is simply unacceptable, as well as unnecessarily costly for the taxpayer, for successful appellants to then have to wait months for their leave to be granted."
The Committee is further concerned by inadequate levels of asylum support and substandard asylum accommodation.
On the former, the Committee says: "£40 per week was clearly inadequate to meet the essential living needs of people seeking asylum in the UK. Women, including those with children, face particular difficulties and near-impossible choices about how to provide for themselves and their families. It is unsurprising that the High Court ordered an immediate increase to £45—the 'minimum legal action required' for the Home Secretary to meet her legal duty. It is clear that a long-term solution is required after many years of below inflation increases to asylum support have left people facing severe poverty. We believe the simplest, fairest and most sustainable solution is to link the rate of asylum support to that of the main annually uprated mainstream social security benefit. In the context of the asylum system, this would also be relatively inexpensive, at a likely initial annual cost in the low tens of millions of pounds."
The Committee also considers the specific risks to asylum seekers with protected characteristics that were introduced by the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 and will be exacerbated by the Illegal Migration Bill.
The report notes: "We agree with legal and policy experts that the Government's equality impact assessment of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022's asylum provisions is inadequate. There are clear risks, acknowledged by the Government, of unequal effects on asylum claimants with vulnerabilities related to Equality Act protected characteristics. These include women and girls with histories of sexual and gender-based violence and abuse; LGBT people who have complex sexual orientation and gender-based claims; and disabled people. Without effective mitigations, these groups are likely to be disadvantaged by the new procedures. It is unacceptable that the Home Office remains unable to set out a clear plan to monitor and mitigate unequal effects."
It continues with regard to immigration detention and the Illegal Migration Bill: "The prolonged detention with no certainty of release of asylum-seeking people who pose no threat to the public and for whom there is little prospect of removal from the UK is potentially harmful, impractical and costly. We are deeply concerned that current and planned reforms in the Nationality and Borders Act and Illegal Migration Bill risk turning back the clock on policies intended to ensure detention is used only as a last resort, and to reduce the risks of harm to vulnerable people. We recommend the Government set out in response to this Report its planned approach to mitigating risks of harm to vulnerable adults in detention under Nationality and Borders Act and Illegal Migration Bill provisions, including whether it remains committed to the Adults at Risk in detention policy established after the Shaw reviews in 2016 and 2018. The Government has not yet set out its planned approach to the detention of children under Illegal Migration Bill provisions. We strongly believe the Government should abandon any intention of detaining asylum-seeking children under those provisions."