Asylum 'Hotels' - Let's Empower Local Communities & Refugees

Asylum ‘hotels’ are bad for everyone.

And the reason we’re in this mess in the first place is decades of neglectful under-investment in the forms of accommodation needed by everyone across the UK. This is the responsibility of successive governments of every colour. 14 years of Tory administration has compounded this through a massively under-resourced asylum system, leading to huge delays and a backlog entirely of their own making.

The Tory government tried to contain people in large camps / build additional temporary accommodation on detention centre sites or commandeer army barracks, only to cause illness and death through easily preventable disease outbreaks in horrific conditions.

I have first-hand experience of supporting families living in the so-called ‘hotels’, and the horrendous impacts of this policy:

• These places are far from luxurious - you would never choose to stay anywhere like this. The ‘hotels’ being used in this way have opted to take the Home Office contracts because they’re unable to fill their rooms in a normal manner and this is easy money.

  
  

• This perversely disincentivises accommodation providers to adhere to normal legal standards (as they are paid regardless of conditions) so it is very common for there to be pest control issues and dangerous disrepair.

  
  

• Regardless of the quality of the ‘hotels’, when you’re forced to live with your family in the same tiny room for years on end, it becomes a prison rather than a provision. Such conditions have been proven to stunt children’s development, with nowhere for them to play / do homework, etc.

  
  

• You aren’t provided with money to purchase any food for yourself, and are instead reliant on the awful, entirely beige sub-standard food (think chips and burgers) that you wouldn’t choose to eat. There are no cooking facilities or opportunity to prepare culturally appropriate food.

  
  

• The awful ‘maximisation’ policy meant that 6+ unrelated individuals were made to share small bedrooms with strangers, with no thought to the trauma people have experienced (including torture), their mental health needs, not to mention cultural and religious differences.

  
  

• A constant threat of invasion of privacy with staff entering rooms for ‘inspections’, with many complaints of inappropriate / illegal behaviour by staff.

  
  

  

  
  

• Home Office accommodation is provided on a ‘no choice basis’, so families have no say in where they live / when or where they might be moved to at extremely short notice.  This is incredibly challenging for anyone, but especially traumatic for children who have made friends and settled into local schools.

  
  

• The ghettoisation of placing people seeking asylum in ‘hotels’ marks out a vulnerable group of people as highly identifiable, putting them at greater risk (especially in these febrile times) from bad actors.

  
  

• Hyper-diverse towns and cities have often been used as a ‘dumping ground’ to accommodate far more people seeking asylum than they were ever intended to (and a great deal more than less diverse neighbourhoods), with the cynical thinking that it will go unnoticed and no-one will complain.

  
  

• A complete lack of connected support services for people living in this accommodation means that many vulnerable people, (including children wrongly assessed as adults) are left stranded without any recourse / advocacy.

What should we do instead?

Give people the right to work

People seeking asylum would much rather be given the right to work in order to support themselves and their families, and contribute to the economy, rather than receive hand-outs. However, this government, as with all before it, refuse to allow this. The economic case for giving the right to work has been proven again and again. This would significantly reduce the costs of the asylum system and allow people some dignity. And it would provide those who can work with the choice of where to live, according to their means.

Comprehensively assess local suitability

As with well-run resettlement schemes, any locations being considered to accommodate people seeking asylum must be comprehensively assessed for their appropriateness in terms of local amenities, infrastructure / support services for refugees, local receptivity / deprivation, school places, etc.

Empower local communities

The policy change from ‘dispersal’ by consent of local authorities to ‘full dispersal’ (meaning that local authorities have no say and are not consulted by the Home Office when new accommodation contracts are signed in their areas, has been a disaster. The government should return to the previous consensual process, empowering those local authorities who are willing (with expert local knowledge) with the budget they need to procure appropriate accommodation in the most appropriate locations.

A pragmatic, considered and locally-focused approach to asylum accommodation would be so much better for everyone, for the UK economy, for people seeking safety and for the local communities that welcome them.