Clause 15 - Support for destitute asylum-seeker
Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill
12:45 pm
Mr Humfrey Malins (Woking, Conservative)
My hon. Friend's experience is not unique; it must be shared by many members of the Committee. Where does that leave our debate on attendance at accommodation centres? How long will asylum seekers spend there? The Government propose that asylum seekers will remain at a centre throughout the process. If that is not the case, I should like to know. Otherwise, I should like confirmation that the Government believe that the initial decision will be made and, if it is unfavourable, the appeal lodged and determined while the applicant is in the centre.
How long will applicants wait in accommodation centres? It has been remarked that the centres will take only a small proportion of applicants per year, and 70,000 or 80,000 people apply. According to the Government's figures, if an applicant remains at a centre for six months, 6,000 will go through the centres per year—a very small proportion of the total.
If order is to be reintroduced to the system, my hon. Friends and I believe a one-stop shop to be essential. We shall come to amendments concerning the presence of adjudicators, but decisions can be reached quickly in a one-stop shop. There seems to be no reason for an asylum applicant not having their application decided in one, two or three weeks by an official or for the adjudicator not hearing the appeal within weeks thereafter. If the process were completed speedily, which later amendments, through a one-stop shop, would encourage, a much higher percentage of asylum applicants would go through the accommodation centres each year. If, however, initial decisions and appeals still take months, applicants will be left in accommodation centres for a very long period, which cannot be right.
That is the background and context of my amendment, which would limit to three months the presence of an applicant in an accommodation centre. I picked that figure to encourage the Government to make it clear that they intend to apply a distinct time framework from the moment an application is made right through to the conclusion of an appeal. That would enable them to catch up with the appalling mess of case arrears that has prevailed over the past three or four years. That position shows little or no sign of improving, and it will improve only if people are in accommodation centres for a very short time.
Justice delayed is justice denied. It is simply not fair to asylum seekers to allow them to stay in this country not just month after month, but year after year before the final conclusion of their appeals is arrived at. People put down roots and families quite naturally become absorbed and entrenched in communities. It is therefore chronically unfair to tell someone who has lived here two or three years, entirely through the fault of the Government's system, under which appeals are not heard quickly enough, that the system has caught up with them, so they have to go.