Clause 14 - Establishment of centres
Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill
10:30 am
Mr Humfrey Malins (Woking, Conservative)
I begin by welcoming you to the Chair, Mr. Hurst, after our short break for the bank holiday. I also welcome my hon. Friend the Member for Chesham and Amersham (Mrs. Gillan). It is important to welcome the Whip, and I make a practice of doing so. I am sure that we will be assisted by her presence.
Amendment No. 18 would limit the number of persons at an accommodation centre to 250 at any one time, and the other amendments in the group have a similar purpose. It is commonly said that small works better, and nowhere is that truer in than in a centre for the accommodation of asylum seekers. As we understand it--although this is not in the Bill--the Government propose four centres to accommodate 3,000 persons seeking asylum, with the four bases each holding 750 people. I believe that eight possible sites have been selected, and I hope that the Minister will tell us which sites are most likely to be used.
With more than 80,000 people seeking asylum per year, those 3,000 places represent a small proportion of the total. Even if the people stay in the centres for only six months—we would like to know the Minister's plans for length of stay—6,000 is still a small proportion per year. The rest will be dispersed around the country, often in unsatisfactory conditions, as has been the case hitherto. The hon. Member for Walthamstow (Mr. Gerrard) was never more right than when he said that legislation does not necessarily do the trick: it is Home Office action that causes the system to become more efficient.
Will the Minister tell us when the accommodation centres will be established? I understand that the Government have told citizens advice bureaux that it will be as soon as possible, but the pilot may not begin until the middle of 2003, and it may be 2004 or 2005 before the centres are up and running. We support the concept, but are concerned about the numbers and size.
Talking of numbers takes one's mind back to the arson and breakout at Yarl's Wood in the middle of February. When full, Yarl's Wood could take 900 persons, but only 380 people were there at the time. The Minister may say that Yarl's Wood was different from the proposed accommodation centres, because it held only those people who were being detained prior to removal. However, according to my understanding, of the 380 at Yarl's Wood, 294 were due for removal and the other 86 had current claims. They are no different from the people who will be in the accommodation centres. Undoubtedly, there will be pressures and tensions in an accommodation centre that holds as many as 750. Our amendment suggests that there should be a maximum of 250 in each centre.
The Home Secretary rightly said that we must safeguard the interests of local people. Will the Minister tell us what research the Government have done into similar centres throughout Europe? An accommodation centre or its equivalent in other European Union countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands holds fewer than 750. I understand that the Home Office considered the position in other countries when drawing up its practices and policy. The larger the number in accommodation centres, the greater the tensions are likely to be. Smaller centres in urban areas are less likely to be regarded as obtrusive to local residents, and we address that issue in later amendments.
Representatives of several organisations with experience of asylum and current detention centres say that 750 is too many to make an accommodation centre effective. My hon. Friend the Member for Banbury (Tony Baldry) has expressed concerns on behalf of local residents about a proposal for an accommodation centre at Piddington—a village in a rural area near Bicester—which we will discuss later. The proposed size of the accommodation centre is one of those concerns. An accommodation centre may be placed in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Mr. Leigh), where local residents have also expressed concern about the proposed number to be accommodated.
My remarks are intended to get the debate under way. The figure of 750 is unwieldy, and is likely to create tensions in the centre and concerns in the local community. All the organisations that deal with asylum day in and day out tell the Government that that figure is too large. Although it is early days, is the Minister able to tell the Committee that the accommodation centres in the proposed pilot schemes will be much smaller than currently envisaged? The smaller the number in each centre, the more likely it is that they would be efficient, humane, decent and safe. Local residents would find smaller centres easier to cope with and to understand.