Posted on

Join our volunteer team! Social media volunteers needed.

Social media volunteers needed!  Deadline 2 October 2017

11 September 2017

We are looking for one to two (or maybe three) enthusiastic and curious volunteers who have a deep interest in and commitment to migrants rights movement and challenging immigration detention and can help us increase our social media presence.  

This social media role includes tasks such as:

  • making sure our Twitter account (@DetentionForum) is always actively disseminating accurate and relevant information about immigration detention
  • writing small pieces of detention-related news that we can share with others
  • collating immigration detention related news
  • attending detention-related events and file reports about such events

You need to have;

  • Solid experience of working or volunteering in a NGO or in a team
  • General understanding of immigration detention in the UK (you don’t need to be an expert!)
  • Experience of Internet-based research to find information
  • Solid experience of using Twitter (you need to have actively used Twitter at least for three months)
  • Demonstrable ability to communicate clearly in English
  • Ability to work on your own initiative and complete tasks on time
  • Access to a computer and Internet connection
  • Any design / art / creative skills are a big plus – let us know what skills you have.  We are always struggling to have enough visual material to share over social media: are you the one who can help us with this challenge?

Above all, you need to have desire to communicate well with a wide range of audience, in order to challenge immigration detention.  

You don’t need to be in London but you need to be able to communicate with us over emails and Skype as and when necessary.  We are especially keen to hear from people who can report how their local communities are affected by immigration detention.  

Please do not apply if you do not meet these criteria. 

The Detention Forum currently has one part-time Project Director who works one to two days a week and five part-time volunteers.  Our team is proudly diverse and multinational, made up of people coming from different countries, cultures and background.  We do not have an office so we all work form home.  On a day to day basis, we work largely independently and communicate each other via Skype and emails as and when necessary.  This is the reason why you need to be a self-starter and reliable if you want to join our team!

Due to our limited resources and time, the only tools of communication we have with the outside world are emails, our website and Twitter (soon Facebook as well) – therefore for us, social media work and how we communicate using these platforms is very important.

We would like the volunteers to be available at least one day a week for at least five months.  From our experience, it takes a while before new joiners understand our key messages, how we communicate about immigration detention and why.  We occasionally arrange social events/meetings in London.  

The Detention Forum also runs an exciting social media project, Unlocking Detention, every year, in which our social media volunteers play a key role.  This year’s “tour” will start from October and end in December.  You can find more about last year’s #unlocked at www.unlocked.org.uk

If you are interested in volunteering for us, please send the following to detentionforum@gmail.com by 2 October 2017:

  • your CV
  • a short covering letter addressing the above points, confirming that you are available for the training and interview, if recruited/shortlisted
  • details of your Twitter account
  • a short written piece, up to 300 words, on immigration detention (you can write about any topic and theme relating to immigration detention)

We will contact those who are shortlisted.

Volunteering at the Detention Forum can be a lot of work.  However, you will get to learn more about immigration detention and you also have a chance to learn how groups like the Detention Forum, its members and other groups around the UK are challenging the government to reduce and end immigration detention.

We look forward to hearing from you.

The Detention Forum team

Posted on

Responses to the Panorama documentary on Brook House Immigration Detention Centre – will the government be let off the hook again?

Responses to the Panorama documentary on Brook House Immigration Detention Centre – will the government be let off the hook again?

10 September 2017

The undercover Panorama documentary on Brook House Immigration Detention Centre prompted a range of reactions and comments from all quarters.

While there has been much focus on whether the G4S’s detention management contract should be terminated, some looked beyond individual allegations of abuse to a wider question of the UK’s use of immigration detention as a whole and the government’s continuing failure to reform UK’s dysfunctional and harmful detention system despite severe criticisms it has received over the years.

As expected, Immigration Minister’s response to the programme was restricted to the operational issue of G4S ‘ handling of the abuse allegations and made no mention of the detention reform that his department promised in January 2016 and still not delivered.

However, writing for the Huffpost, Diane Abbott, Shadow home secretary, Labour MP for Hackney North, squarely laid the blame on the government’s policy and practice of immigration detention.  She said ‘Conditions in Brook House, as revealed in the Panorama programme, are shameful. It may have been G4S guards carrying out the brutal acts, but it is this government that is ultimately responsible.’  At the same time, she stopped short of outlining what policy changes she considers to be necessary to resolve what she calls ‘Britain’s Brutal Immigration Detention System’.

In their letter published in the Guardian, Freed Voices, a group of migrants who have lost over 20 years of their lives to immigration detention, stressed that what was revealed by the Panorama documentary is ‘neither unique nor isolated – but routine’. Freed Voices asserted how UK’s practice of indefinite detention ‘undermines the whole immigration system’ and ‘allows staff to act with impunity, as though they have licence to assault and abuse’ and called for a time limit on immigration detention.  They concluded their letter by saying ‘The government promotes the British values of fairness and human rights around the world. It’s time to practice what it preaches at home.’

In a separate development, 17 Bishops of Church of England together with representatives from the Church of Scotland and Methodist and Baptist churches jointly called on the government to end indefinite immigration detention.  In their letter to the Telegraph, they maintained that indefinite detention and abuses in detention centres are ‘symptomatic of a rhetoric fostered by some politicians and sectors of the media that dehumanises immigrants and paints the public as ‘victims’ of immigration’ and described indefinite detention as ‘against the core fundamental principles which British law is based on.’

Two Early Day Motions have also been tabled in response to the documentary, displaying mixed responses from MPs.

EDM 257 PANORAMA PROGRAMME ‘BRITAIN’S IMMIGRATION SECRETS’, tabled by Keith Vaz MP, is entirely focused on the issue of whether asylum seekers should be detained in the same space as migrants who have finished their prison sentences.  On the other hand, EDM 293 IMMIGRATION DETENTION, tabled by Stuart McDonald MP, ‘calls on the Government urgently to implement reform of the use of immigration detention, introducing the introduction of a 28 day time limit and greater use of community-based alternatives to detention.’

With a death of a Polish individual after suicide attempt at Harmondsworth Detention Centre confirmed only days after the Panorama broadcast and the second Shaw Review starting at the same time, more questions are likely to be raised about the government’s role in perpetuating this harmful practice. At the same time, there is no guarantee that the government will not be let off the hook yet again: while there is a high level of expectation for the second Shaw Review among NGOs, inquiries and reviews can also be used as opportunities by the government to kick the problem into the long grass.  Without strong and sustained pressure on the government and a clear accountability mechanism, the promised detention reform might never be delivered.  We should not forget the urgency with which migrants, their families and communities need a radical detention reform now, not in years’ time, and start taking action now.

At the Detention Forum, we believe that the government should, as a matter of urgency, commit to:

  • the introduction of a 28 day time limit
  • the implementation of automatic bail hearings
  • much wider use of community based alternatives to detention
  • ending the detention of vulnerable people

We believe that these measures will result in a significant reduction in the scale and the lengths of immigration detention and will continue to advocate for these changes.

====================================================

If you are contacting your MP about immigration detention, you might find our latest briefing paper, available here, useful.

 

 

Posted on

Why you need to speak to politicians now: how to use Detention Forum’s latest briefing paper on immigration detention

4 September 2017

Our parliamentary latest briefing paper, Immigration Detention in the United Kingdom is now available.   You can download it here.

Now is the time that you speak to your MPs, Peers and your communities about the urgent need for detention reform, starting with a time limit.  Here is why.

This week, Parliament returns after summer recess.  And in the same week Stephen Shaw, who conducted the review of immigration detention in 2015, begins his second review.  This is a good news: we certainly need more scrutiny over the use of immigration detention.

However we cannot sit around, wait for Mr Shaw to finish his second review and find out what he has to say, because things are already not looking good.

We created an immense pressure that forced the Government to acknowledge for the first time ever that immigration detention is a problem and that they need to do something about it.

Under pressure, the Immigration Minister promised detention reform and said such reform would “lead to a reduction in the number of those detained, and the duration of detention before removal, in turn improving the welfare of those detained.”

The pressure came from all directions: people with experience of detention, communities supporting them and parliamentarians who could see the injustice of immigration detention and decided to act.

That was in January 2016, more than 1.5 years ago.  There is mounting evidence which shows that the government simply and quietly broke their promise.

The latest detention statistics that came out a few weeks ago revealed that since January 2016, there has been little change in the lengths or the scale of detention.  Our analysis is here.

Nearly 28,000 migrants still enter the detention estate in a year and more than one in three people leaving detention had been detained longer than 29 days.  And 52% who left detention were returned back to the community and not removed, raising questions over the necessity of their detention.

Only last week, we heard the news of G4S suspending its staff members working at Brook House detention centre over allegations of abuse.  Such allegations must be properly investigated and any form of abuse is totally unacceptable.  However, improving staff conduct in detention centres is not enough to address the UK’s systemic overuse of immigration detention.  

It is clear that we can’t trust the Home Office to take seriously the task of detention reform.  In the words of Joe from Freed Voices who experienced immigration detention, ‘The fact that the Home Office makes promises they don’t keep is not really news to me.’

One of the ways to put pressure on the Home Office is to urge parliamentarians to seek accountability for the broken promise of detention reform.  Without a radical reform, this system will continue to detain people indefinitely without a time limit, harm people’s health and well-being and separate people from their friends, families and communities.

It’s important to always remember that it is people and communities’ voice that has been the driving force for change.

It was people and communities affected by immigration detention that convinced the first parliamentary inquiry into immigration detention that the whole detention system must change immediately, starting with the introduction of a 28 day time limit.

This prompted a cross-party group of parliamentarians to try to introduce a time limit in law.  This call for a time limit was formidable and the government were defeated twice through the Immigration Act 2016 progress.  As a compromise measure, the government offered an automatic judicial oversight of detention after four months for some people: though this has not been enacted yet.

Now is also a good time to be approaching MPs and peers.

Some MPs have been newly elected in June 2017 and haven’t had a chance to learn about immigration detention and its devastating impact on people.  Many are also unaware of the parliamentary inquiry, the first Shaw Review or what positive legislative changes were secured in Immigration Act 2016.  They need to know these things if they were to confidently speak up for the need for detention reform.

Political parties will be having their conferences in autumn, and some of our colleagues will be out there speaking to them about the need for detention reform.  It helps if MPs and peers have already approached by their constituents and contacts who are deeply troubled by the UK’s use of immigration detention: they will know that it is an issue that they must pay attention to.

Some parliamentarians are already speaking up (see here, here and here) and we need more of them.  Our setback has been that some of the most supportive MPs lost their seats after the last election: we need new voices.

We know that some NGOs are planning to publish their reports on immigration detention over the next few months.  It helps if parliamentarians are already familiar with immigration detention and its impact when these reports come out, to encourage them to take a greater interest in what these reports have to say.

Our new briefing paper summarises all the key points that MPs and Peers need to know about immigration detention.  We hope you can use it to make sure much-needed detention reform actually happens.

If you have any questions about how to approach or engage your MPs, do get in touch.  We are also compiling a parliamentary contact map so we can pool our knowledge and intelligence.  If you want to contribute to this or want to get some information from us, please get in touch too.  You can contact us at detentionforum@gmail.com – we don’t work everyday, so it might take some time before we can reply.

And don’t forget our annual Unlocking Detention will be starting in October 2017.  Stay tuned!

 

 

Posted on

Our response to Brook House G4S staff abuse allegations

1 September 2017

The Detention Forum statement in response to the news of G4S suspending its staff as part of abuse investigation.

‘We welcome the news that G4S has suspended nine staff members who are being investigated over allegations of abuse. We understand that this action was triggered by BBC Panorama’s undercover documentary which will be aired on Monday next week.

Such allegations must be thoroughly investigated. Any form of abuse is unacceptable. 

However, scrutiny over immigration detention must not stop at improving how centre staff behave towards people held in immigration detention centres. We are deeply concerned about the lack of scrutiny of the UK government’s routine use of indefinite immigration detention.  We should not forget that Brook House is only one of nine such detention centres in the UK, which lock up migrants without a time limit. 

Deprivation of liberty must be an exceptional measure of last resort: yet the UK detains migrants routinely, locking up nearly 30,000 people a year for administrative reasons in prison-like conditions. UK is also the only country in Europe to detain migrants without a time limit, a practice that has been repeatedly criticised by monitoring bodies, including Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons. 

Anyone who does not have a secure immigration status is at risk of detention. Detention separates families, including parents from their children. 

More than two years ago, a cross-party Parliamentary Inquiry into the use of the immigration detention concluded that the UK detains far too many people for far too long and told the government to introduce a 28-day time limit and a wider range of community-based alternatives to detention. The government-commissioned report by Stephen Shaw which followed also urged the government to reform its detention system ‘boldly and without delay’. 

While the Minister promised to implement reform in response to these reports in January 2016, disappointingly, the latest statistical information shows that there has been no change in the scale or the lengths of detention. As of the end of June 2017, the longest time a person had been detained was 1,514 days, in excess of four years. 

There is a human cost to such incarceration. Self-harm and suicide attempts in detention centres are a direct consequence of this government policy of mass, indefinite, detention.  There is a clear consensus amongst all practitioners that detention has a devastating impact on individuals’ well-being, regardless of the reason why the person finds himself/herself in immigration detention. 

It does not have to be like this: the UK government can introduce a wider range of community-based alternatives to detention as recommended by, amongst others, UNHCR and the Commissioner for Human Rights at the Council of Europe. It can also introduce a 28 day time limit on detention.

Stephen Shaw, who conducted the review of immigration detention in 2015, begins his second review on Monday next week, as Parliament returns. We urge Mr Shaw and parliamentarians to seek accountability for the broken promise of detention reform that continues to put lives at risk today.’

 

 

Posted on

The latest detention statistics show the Government’s detention reform remains undelivered

24 August 2017

The latest detention statistics released today reveal that the Government is failing to drastically reduce the use of immigration detention as recommended by the Parliamentary Inquiry and the Government-commissioned Shaw Review.  Nearly 28,000 migrants are still entering detention a year and the number of people in detention in any given time has remained stable.

The Government promised reform more than 18 months ago, in response to the Shaw Review which urged the Government to take action ‘boldly and without delay’.  The second Shaw Review is scheduled to start on 4 September.

 

The statistics show no change in the UK’s trend of long-term detention.  More than one in three people leaving detention had been detained longer than 29 days, a trend that has remained for years.

Parliamentary Inquiry to the Use of Immigration Detention in 2015 concluded that UK detains far too many people for far too long and urged the government to radically reform its detention system, starting with an introduction of a 28-day time limit.  The government has repeatedly resisted attempts by parliamentarians to introduce a legal time limit, most recently during the passage of Immigration Act 2016.

As at 30 June 2017, the longest length of time a person had been detained for was 1,514 days, in excess of four years.

In the last quarter, 52% who left detention were returned back to the community and not removed, raising questions over the necessity of detention.  Again, the proportion of those who are released back to the community after detention has remained stable over time.

Eiri Ohtani, the Project Director of the Detention Forum said:

‘Overall, what we see in today’s detention statistics is that, despite ministerial commitment to reform, little has changed on the ground for thousands of people and their families and communities who are caught up in this damaging and distressing detention system.

New policies, procedures and processes have been ineffective in reducing the  reliance on detention.

The Government should concede the futility of tweaking the system and instead implement radical and fundamental change, to create a fair and humane migration governance system.

We believe it is possible for the system to change.  There should be a 28-day time limit on detention, automatic judicial oversight for everyone in detention, a robust screening and assessment that ends detention of vulnerable people and a wider range of community-based alternative to detention. Such measures will lead to a drastic reduction of detention and improve the fairness and trust in the system.

The Detention Forum and our partners stand ready to advise the Government on how  these steps can be implemented.’

END.

 

Posted on

Have you read the latest CPT factsheet on Immigration Detention?

Have you read the latest CPT factsheet on Immigration Detention? 

In March 2017, the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhumane or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) published a useful factsheet on immigration detention.  Its secretariat forms part of the Council of Europe (which is sometimes confused with the European Union but is distinct from it), to which the UK is a member state.  This article briefly explores potential relevance of this factsheet for the UK’s immigration detention policy and practice.

Who is CPT?

According to their website;

  • The CPT was set up under the Council of Europe’s “European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment”, which came into force in 1989.
  • It builds on Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights which provides that: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.
  • The CPT is not an investigative body, but provides a non-judicial preventive mechanism to protect persons deprived of their liberty against torture and other forms of ill-treatment. It thus complements the judicial work of the European Court of Human Rights.
  • Practically, the CPT conducts regular monitoring visits to places of detention, such as prisons, secure mental health units and immigration detention centres.  These visit usually take place every four years per country.

The factsheet

This particular factsheet is a short, nine-page document.  This and other factsheets ‘present the CPT’s standards on key issues’ but are not intended to be exhaustive. These standards have been developed through the CPT’s concrete experience of numerous monitoring visits to places of immigration detention.  The CPT also has a large volume of other resources, available on this webpage.

(Separately, the Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT), UNHCR and International Detention Coalition published a very practical manual on monitoring places of immigration detention which is widely used by Civil Society Organisations across the world.)

The factsheet is divided into the following sections, after the section called ‘introduction’:

  1. Detention as a last resort
  2. Safeguards during detention
  3. Suitable premises
  4. Additional material conditions for longer stays (over 24 hours)
  5. Open regime
  6. Qualified staff
  7. Discipline, segregation and means of restraint
  8. Monitoring and complaints mechanisms
  9. Adequate healthcare
  10. Care of vulnerable persons (in particular children)

Below is a non-exhaustive list of notable sections of the factsheet which might have direct relevance in the UK context.  Other sections also are also likely to prompt lively discussions on the gap between these standards and the UK’s practice, but are not elaborated in this article.

Time limit?

‘The CPT is of the view that the prolonged detention of persons under aliens legislation, without a time limit and with unclear prospects for release, could easily be considered as amounting to inhuman treatment.’ (page 2 of the factsheet)

In their latest UK visit report in 2016 (see page 93), the CPT was particularly critical of the UK’s practice of indefinite detention and stated:  ‘The CPT reiterates its recommendation that the United Kingdom authorities reconsider their policy of indefinite immigration detention. Further, it would like to receive detailed information on the measures taken to address the Shaw Review recommendations.’ This is not the first time the CPT raised the issue of indefinite immigration detention in the UK, and the tone of their remark appears to be getting firmer.

Carceral environment and prisons?

‘Persons detained under aliens legislation should be accommodated in centres specifically designed for that purpose, offering material conditions and a regime appropriate to their legal situation. Care should be taken in the design and layout of such premises to avoid, as far as possible, any impression of a carceral environment.’ (page 4 of the factsheet)

Prison-like conditions inside the UK immigration detention estate is well-noted by people with experience of detention, the UK’s own monitoring bodies such as HMIP, visitors’ groups and Civil Society Organisations. Two of the detention centres, the Verne and Morton Hall, were originally used as prisons.  Some of the more recently built centres, such as Colnbrook and Brook House have been built to the equivalent of Category B prisons.  Many are also held in ordinary prisons under immigration powers.  It would require a complete overhaul of the physical detention infrastructure – possibly including demolition of many – before this standard can be met in the UK.

Access to computers and the Internet?

‘Immigration detainees should have access to computers along with Voice over Internet Protocol or Skype facilities and basic internet access.’ (page 5 of the factsheet)

Much has already been said about certain websites blocked in detention centres. Those in immigration detention face particular difficulties in maintaining close contact with their friends, families and supporters because of isolated location of many of the detention centres. While people are allowed to carry mobile phones (without cameras) inside the centres, they are denied access to a number of alternative communications methods that are widely available in the community such as Facebook, Skype and Twitter.  It is encouraging to see the CPT advocating access to VIP and Skype facilities in the detention centres.

Use of batons?

‘The ethos of an immigration detention setting should not be carceral, which means that staff working within immigration detention facilities should not be equipped with batons, handcuffs or pepper spray.’ (page 6 of the factsheet)

According to the HMIP’s inspection report published in March 2017, the guards in Morton Hall detention centre, where there has been a threefold increase in self-harm and a decline in safety, carry batons.  The report also highlighted that the centre, which holds up to 392 men battling with anxiety and stress caused by the uncertainty of indefinite detention, ‘looks and feels like a prison’.  The use of baton has also been repeatedly criticized by the HMIP’s inspection team however no assurance has been given that this practice would be discontinued.

Vulnerable people and alternatives to detention?

‘Specific screening procedures aimed at identifying victims of torture and other persons in situation of vulnerability should be put in place and appropriate care should be provided. In this context, the CPT considers that there should be meaningful alternatives to detention for certain vulnerable categories of person. These categories include inter alia victims of torture, victims of trafficking, pregnant women and nursing mothers, children, families with young children, elderly persons and persons with disabilities.’ (page 8 of the factsheet)

Whether the recently implemented Adults At Risk Policy in the UK is reducing the number of vulnerable people and people at risk in detention is being contested.  What is clear, however, that no attempt has been made so far by the Home Office to develop ‘meaningful alternatives to detention for certain vulnerable categories of person.’, despite a call by a number of politicians and substantial evidence, practice and willingness of the civil society organisations to support such a process.

How can we use this factsheet and other CPT material?

In the eyes of the government, the CPT’s unique credibility as an independent monitoring body belonging to the Council of Europe should give their recommendations the level of authority that Civil Society Organisations’ evidence might struggle to achieve.  Yet, to this date, at least in the UK, the CPT’s standards and visit reports alone have not been sufficient enough to convince the UK government to change their detention policy and practice.  Advocates and campaigners should consider how the CPT and other monitoring bodies’ work can be best incorporated into their plan to influence detention policy and practice, alongside other tools for change that they have at their disposal.

 

Posted on

What will the next Government do about immigration detention?

What will the next Government do about immigration detention?  Who is going to be your next MP?  Ask your parliamentary candidates if they agree it’s #Time4aTimeLimit!

The General Election is going to take place on 8 June 2017.

This is an opportunity to ask those who are standing in this election their views on immigration detention, if they will support a 28-day detention time limit and begin the process of developing a fair and compassionate immigration system.

Would you like to find out where your Prospective Parliamentary Candidates (PPCs) stand on these issues?  Are the candidates in your area happy to support #Time4aTimeLimit campaign?

Some of the PPCs might be completely unaware of what immigration detention is.  If so, this will be your perfect opportunity to help them understand what it is and what harm it is causing.

What’s happening when?

  • After 3 May 2017, your MP, if s/he is standing for the election, becomes a Prospective Parliamentary Candidate. Therefore you will no longer be able to contact your MP at their parliamentary address (xxxxx@parliament.uk) after this date.  However, MPs usually have another email address linked to their local constituency office, and it should be easy for you to find out how to contact them by doing a quick Internet search.  You can find out Twitter addresses of your candidates here, where known.
  • 12 May 2017 is the deadline for PPC nomination. After this date, the details of all your local candidates will be made available on your local council’s website and also from your local elections office (find their contact details here).  You should also be able to find out your candidates here after 12 May.
  • We think party manifestos will be published in mid May but we do not know this for sure. Don’t forget that you can ask PPCs questions about topics that are not contained in their manifesto documents.  The more PPCs are asked about immigration detention and if they support #Time4aTimeLimit, a stronger message we will be sending to all the political parties that this is an important issue.
  • 8 June – Voting day.
  • 9 June – We will know the results!

Write to them! 

You can write to your PPCs using the sample letter here (link to the sample letter).

Finding who your PPCs are can be a bit tricky, because there is no central list of all the PPCs’ contact details.  However, after 12 May, the details of all your local candidates will be made available on your local council’s website and also from your local elections office (find their contact details here).  You should also be able to find your candidates here after 12 May.

Tweet at them!

You can tweet at your PPCs and ask if they support #Time4aTimeLimit campaign.  You can  their Twitter address through this helpful website where known.

Here are some sample tweets.

  • (Dear xxx,) Did you know that UK locks up migrants indefinitely? If elected, will you support a time limit on immigration #detention? #Time4aTimeLimit 
  • (Dear @XXX,) As a PPC in my constituency, I want to know whether you think it’s #Time4aTimeLimit on immigration detention in the UK?
  • (Dear @XXX,) Have you read the #DetentionInquiry report & if elected, will you ensure its recommendations are implemented? #Time4aTimeLimit
  • (Dear @XXX,) Immigration #detention harmful and expensive. UK doesn’t even have a time limit. Do you agree it’s #Time4aTimeLimit?

Speak to them!

Find out where the General Election hustings are taking place in your local area and ask the candidates if they support #Time4aTimeLimit.  You can read our briefing papers here (see, for example, ‘Why UK must end its practice of indefinite detention – May 2017).  You might also be canvassed – if that happens, ask what your candidate’s position on indefinite detention is and ask if they support #Time4aTimeLimit.

Ask your friends and family to do the same!

Election is all about what happens at local level.  Can you ask your friends and family members to do the same?

Speak to us!

Did you get a positive or a negative response from your PPCs?  Do you need help?  Contact us on Twitter using a hashtag #Time4aTimeLimit or email at detentionforum@gmail.com We will do our best to respond to you.

Good luck!

selfie card photo 

 

Posted on

Westminister Hall debate on Detention of Vulnerable Persons 14 March 2017

11 April 2017

At the last Quarterly Meeting of the Detention Forum in April 2017, we had a chance to reflect on the recent Westminster Hall debate on Detention of Vulnerable Persons, led by Anne McLaughlin MP (SNP) on 14 March 2017.  

So what did we do for the debate?  Some of our members spent a busy week prior to the debate preparing briefing papers, urging MPs to attend the debate and planning communications work to promote the debate.  On the day of the debate itself, many did live-tweeting.  Several blogs about the debate were also published by members.  We would like to thank everyone who supported and took interest in the debate, and please see the bottom of this article for links to various material relating to the debate. 

DetentionDebate

This was a much needed debate, in light of the Government’s failure live up to the promise of detention reform which was made more than a year ago.  The Immigration and Enforcement Business Plan 2016/17 was never published during the financial year, raising questions as to whether such plan actually existed in the first place.  Statistical information shows no sign of significant reduction in the scale of the use of immigration, and many people continue to be detained for years on end.  How does the Minister account for his failure to deliver what was promised?  

In her opening speech, Anne McLaughlin MP cogently captured our shared sense of frustration as follows.

‘The most soul-destroying thing about being in detention is the unlimited nature of it – not knowing when or whether you will be released; the most soul-destroying thing for campaigners, many of whom have been in detention or are still at risk of detention, is not knowing when the Government will do as they promised.’

 

The Detention Forum has been monitoring how politicians talk about immigration detention over many years.  What was very evident during this debate was that the strength of cross-party support for urgent detention reform has not dissipated.  Before the parliamentary detention inquiry, few politicians talked about immigration detention.  Even when they did, often, there were not clear, sustained demands.  During the Westminster Hall debate, however, the key changes that the Detention Forum has been demanding, such as introduction of a time limit over immigration detention, ending of the detention of vulnerable people, automatic judicial oversight and developing and implementing community-based alternatives to detention were repeatedly and confidently mentioned by those MPs who participated in the debate.  

DetentionDebate8

Although the Immigration Minister faced sharp questioning by the MPs, his concluding response was, again, unsatisfactory and lacked substance.  In response, Anne McLaughlin MP said ‘One of the fundamental things he has not addressed is the gap between stated policy and practice. Policies are not being carried out in practice, and we have given numerous examples of that’.

DetentionDebate2

Concluding the debate, Anne McLaughlin MP asked the Minister ‘Will the Minister have a meeting with me and some of these groups, which have a lot of experience of detention and a lot of valuable information about the alternatives? He has not answered why we are not using all the alternatives that are far cheaper and far more effective. Why are we not looking at following those? Will he agree to that meeting?’.  We are, of course, ready to meet with the Minister but there has been no word from his office.  

Parliamentary debates are never conclusive events: they are simply one of the opportunities available for parliamentarians to scrutinise the government’s action, seek clarification from the Minister and put further pressure when the promised outcome has not been delivered.  From our point of view, they are also vital tools to keep the issue alive and involve ever increasing number of parliamentarians to take an active interest in the issue.  This Westminster Hall debate made clear that a broad consensus for detention reform exists in parliament and, however much the Minister wants to turn his blind eyes, this desire for detention reform is not going to disappear.  

===============

You can read the Hansard record of the debate here.  You will be able to find out which MP spoke at the debate and what they said.  If your MP was not speaking at the debate, perhaps you want to contact them to remind them how important this is?

The Detention Forum made a storify of the live-tweets on the day here.  A big thank you to everyone who took part.  Feel free to retweet if you wish.  

Freed Voices at Detention Action produced this blog before the debate.  Mishka’s words were read out by Anne McLaughlin MP who was leading the debate.  

Right to Remain’s blog about the debate is here.  It features images created by Sylvia, one of the Detention Forums’ social media volunteers.  Thank you Sylvia!  

Briefing papers for the debate were prepared by Scottish Detainee Visitors, ourselves, Detention Action, AVID and others.  

By the Detention Forum team

 

 

 

Posted on

Morton Hall detention centre – a threefold rise in self-harm, increased safety concerns and continuing long-term detention

Morton Hall detention centre – a threefold rise in self-harm, increased safety concerns and continuing long-term detention

21 March 2017

There has been a threefold increase in self-harm and a decline in safety in Morton Hall immigration detention centre, according to the inspection report published today.  The report also highlights that the centre, which holds up to 392 men battling with anxiety and stress caused by the uncertainty of indefinite detention, ‘looks and feels like a prison’.

Morton Hall centre, near Lincoln, is one of two immigration detention centres run by HM Prison Service. In January this year, a young Polish man at Morton Hall took his own life, leaving his baby and his partner behind.  The baby was born on the day of the man’s death.

The inspection report links ‘the very high levels of frustration’ with the experience of unending long-term detention, and observed that for many ‘there was no clear pathway towards release’.

Just as in Brook House immigration detention centre earlier this month, the inspection team found evidence of routine long-term detention at Morton Hall.   The average length of detention was over three months, and the inspection found 31 men who had been detained over a year, including two who had been detained for over two years.  Two other men had been detained cumulatively for a total of more than three years.

The report is also critical of centre management’s use of ‘procedural and physical security measures, supported by a punitive rewards system’, without conducting any analysis as to the reasons for the high number of security incidents in the centre. The inspection team observes that ‘This approach was clearly not working’, with 38% of those surveyed saying that they did not feel safe at Morton Hall.

In addition, the standard regime was described as ‘exclusively punitive – which was inappropriate and unusual to see in an IRC (Immigration Removal Centre).’  The inspection team also repeated their earlier recommendation that officers stop carrying batons.

The report puts further pressure on the Government to deliver its promised detention reform.  During Westminster Hall Debate last week, the Immigration Minister was heavily criticized for ignoring many of the recommendations made by the Parliamentary Inquiry into Use of Immigration Detention and the government-commissioned Shaw Review.  While both inquiries concluded that UK must immediately reform its current practice of detaining far too many people for far too long, the latest statistical information shows no change.

The UK remains as an outlier in Europe and is the only country with no time limit over immigration detention.  Recently, the Council of Europe´s anti-torture committee (CPT) clarified its view in its fact sheet on standards on immigration detention that ‘the prolonged detention of persons under aliens legislation, without a time limit and with unclear prospects for release, could easily be considered as amounting to inhuman treatment.’

Lisa Matthews, Coordinator at Right to Remain said:

“The harm and uncertainty of detention rings out clearly in this carefully worded report. All of the people we work with who have experienced detention are marked by it: the harm does not end with release.  The policy of detention is proof of a society harming itself – locking tens of thousands of people up every year, with many more living in constant fear this will happen to them.  Every day that the government stalls on its promised fundamental reform of detention is another day of uncertainty, fear and harm for those at risk of detention and those detained right now.”

Eiri Ohtani, Project Director of the Detention Forum said:

“The inspection report shows an abandoned group of people held under a punitive regime behind razor wire. Despite immigration detention’s colossal human and financial cost, many centres’ remoteness lets the government continue to regard them as ‘out of sight, out of mind’. Just last week, a group of cross-party MPs challenged the Immigration Minister on his inaction.  It’s time that the Minister sits up and starts developing community-based alternatives to detention.”   

You can read our live Q & A session with ‘Dave’ at Morton Hall in November last year here. 

Posted on

Long-term detention of migrants remains unaddressed at Brook House detention centre

10 March 2017 (updated at 11:40am 10 March 2017)

In the report published today, the Prison Inspector urges the Home Office to take a ‘remedial action’ to address continuing long-term immigration detention of migrants, after finding a number of cases of excessive detention at Brook House Immigration Removal Centre.

During the inspection of Brook House Immigration Removal Centre near Gatwick Airport in October and November 2016, the inspection team found 23 individuals who had been detained for over a year.  Four of these had been detained for over two years and the longest period of detention they found was two and a half years.

With a major Westminster Hall debate on immigration detention taking place in a few days’ time, the report provides further proof of the government’s failure to deliver detention reform, more than a year later after it was pledged by the Government. 

While acknowledging general improvements in detention condition at Brook House, the inspection team is critical of the fact that no analysis has been conducted by the Home Office on why average length of detention increased from 28 days to 48 days since the previous inspection in 2013.  The report states ‘(i)n the absence of such analysis, it was hard to see how detention periods could be systematically reduced and the inevitably negative outcomes for detainees mitigated’.  The inspection also found that the average cumulative length of detention was three months, which was described as ‘too long’. 

The UK remains the only country in Europe that detains migrants without a time limit.  Over the years, this policy has received severe criticism by a number of bodies, including the Shaw Review, the government’s own review of immigration detention which published in January 2016 and the cross-party Parliamentary Inquiry into the Use of Immigration Detention who produced their report in 2015.  The UK’s National Preventative Mechanism, to which the Prison Inspector belongs, also called for a time limit on immigration detention.   

Eiri Ohtani, Project Director of the Detention Forum said:

‘That the UK detains migrants without a time limit for administrative convenience is shameful.  That the UK has been failing to address this damaging and expensive practice is doubly shameful.  The UK has been able to introduce a time limit for families with children and pregnant women: it must be possible to introduce a similar policy for other categories of individuals.’

‘Jon’ who took part in Unlocking Detention’s live Q & A session last year from Brook House where he had been detained described his experience of indefinite detention as follows:

James Wilson, Director of Gatwick Detainee Welfare Group which regularly visits Brooks House IRC said:

“We welcome this detailed report by HMIP and the progress detention centre staff have made since the last inspection.  But the underlying picture remains disturbing.  As one of those held in detention is quoted as saying in the report: ‘I feel like a prisoner without a crime’.  This is precisely what Brook House and other UK detention centres are: prisons without criminal convictions, and without the safeguards and time limits that protect the rights of those in prison. “

 =================================================

You can read ‘Jon’s Q & A session here.

The Detention Forum’s analysis of the latest immigration detention statistics is here.