At Asylum Matters, we want to provide a little insight into the lives of asylum claimants living in the UK. The asylum process is not very well known. In order to debunk a few myths you might have heard about in the press, weâd like to give you some information.
After a migrant has entered the UK and claimed asylum, they are interviewed by an immigration caseworker. This interview consists of around 200 questions, and is designed to confirm the authenticity of an asylum claim. These interviews are often hours long and can be very gruelling and confusing to the applicant, who may have travelled thousands of miles and endured many hardships before arriving in the UK. If the applicant cannot answer properly, this can prove to be quite problematic further along in the process. Â The answers to these questions form the basis of the asylum claim. It must be taken into consideration that many statements are extremely difficult to authenticate, depending entirely on the individualâs circumstance. Not every applicant will be able to provide evidence of their trauma or background, and must rely on our government to be fair, just and provide them with basic safety. Unfortunately, we have heard many stories about the harsh nature of these interviews, and the home officeâs tendency to try to use applicantsâ own answers against them to âtrip them upâ or accuse them of lying. It has also been noted that some of the questions asked are highly inappropriate, accusatory or offensive. During a conference in 2016 as part of refugee week, we heard one panellist tell the story of a lesbian asylum applicant who was fleeing a forced marriage and trafficking. It was alleged that the home office suggested the applicant was lying about her sexual orientation as it did not align with the principles of her Catholic faith. Allegedly, she was also asked whether she had ever been in a relationship with a man, and whether she could be sure she was gay if she had not. Â
If an applicant completes this interview without being detained, the next step is to be placed into a temporary, initial accommodation setting such as a hostel. Ideally, more suitable accommodation should be found within 14 days, but we have known clients who have lived in initial accommodation for weeks and weeks. These hostels are often overcrowded. When more permanent accommodation is found, the applicant is often not given much chance to prepare to move, and has no choice in where they will be taken. Often, an applicant is not told where they will be moved to and do not find out until they arrive at their destination. The impact of separation from any friend or family connections on the welfare of the applicant, is rarely taken into consideration. The accommodation providers are then allowed to move their occupants around as they see fit, to maximise space or cost efficiency. Unless an applicant provides evidence which the Home Office would consider to be a reasonable extenuating circumstance, they can be moved to another area of the country without ample notice. Again, this is despite any friends, relationships or local connections they have made.
Accommodation provided to asylum seekers is often considered âhard to rentâ. As a result, the property can be of extremely poor quality and in deprived areas. Broken down boilers, pest infestations, damp, rot, overgrown gardens and rubbish / rubble are common complaints. Most accommodation providers use contractual timeframes in which to address these issues, but addressing the issues does not necessarily mean a resolution. Addressing a broken boiler within a 24 hour contractual time frame, can mean issuing a small electric fan heater to a family of 5.
Unless local authority restrictions apply, housing may be overcrowded and barely reach minimum living standards. Adults are often expected to share rooms with complete strangers; their individual needs, preferences or circumstances are not taken into consideration, Â unless the Home Office confirm they reasonable enough to exemplify the individual. Contacting the Home Office can be very difficult, as they do not provide telephone interpreters. Their phone lines have limited access, and their contact details are unclear. Reaching the correct department can seem like an impossible task. Trying to voice concern is another matter entirely, and disputes rarely favour the applicant if ever resolved or even addressed.
Asylum seekers cannot claim benefits. A person seeking asylum in Britain has no access to public funds; instead they receive a standard amount of ÂŁ36.95 per week, per person. That works out at roughly ÂŁ5-6 per day. If an asylum applicant has previously had their claim dismissed and apply for an appeal, they are often placed on âSection 4â support. This prevents the applicant from having any cash whatsoever, instead using an Azure Card which is swiped and credit is deducted from it. Most large supermarkets accept Azure Cards, but it takes a lot of freedom away from the user. Azure cards cannot be used on public transport, in small vendors or shops, and supposedly cannot be used to purchase alcohol or cigarettes. Before an applicant receives the card, they are provided with supermarket vouchers. If an applicant is found to be swapping the card or interim payment vouchers for cash, the home office may treat this as fraud. Azure cards are not always sent to the applicant directly, they can be sent instead to the accommodation provider. Similarly, if there is a delay in payment to the applicant, whether they receive cash (section 95) support or section 4 support, it is for the accommodation provider to step in and issue emergency support. This can be hugely problematic if the accommodation providers, who are NOT welfare providers, prioritise key performance indicators, profit margins, business tasks and time constraints above the needs of their occupants.
An asylum seeker must use an HC2 certificate in order to avoid prescription charges which would be otherwise too expensive to afford on a tight budget. It is the responsibility of the Home Office to send these certificates to applicants and manage the renewals. Often, there are huge delays in the receipt of renewals, meaning applicants can go for weeks without a valid certificate, and consequently cannot pay for medication. We have met clients who have gone over 4 weeks without access to medication. Applicants often rely on multilingual friends or charities to help them complete forms for new certificates. This can cause duplications and further delays.
Supposedly, asylum seekers are not allowed to have bank accounts and direct debits. This can make access to the internet, or phoning family and friends back home, difficult and very expensive. The home office encourage accommodation providers to report any suspicion of âwealthâ back to them. This can include evidence of internet access. We have even encountered allegations of vandalism by the accommodation provider if internet cables are found. Other âsigns of wealthâ may include new clothing or shoes, beauty products, furnishings or anything that is not âofficiallyâ issued by the home office or accommodation provider. In addition to savvy spending, many asylum seekers will use clothes banks or receive gifts and donations from friends and churches to supplement the lack of affordable items. An unfounded allegation of âwealthâ can be investigated by the Home Office as fraud, and can be detrimental to an applicantâs claim. This process is evident of an unsettling invasion of privacy and should not be permitted. Throughout an asylum applicantâs entire claim, they are liable to be detained at any time, and often fear detention when making regular âreportingâ visits to the home office. T detention of migrants is a horrific act, and is extremely traumatising to the detainee and their children, who are not always exempt. We will focus on detention in greater details in a future post.
Britain does not receive nearly as many migrants as other companies in Europe, despite the negative and unclear media portrayal. The small amount of benefit paid to asylum seekers and their placement in undesirable accommodation (provided by private companies) means that as a group, they barely effect our economic resources. Even if they did, the oppressive nature of the asylum process is telling of a much larger and darker side to our government and social attitudes. Asylum seekers are often victims of political, criminal or sexual violence and have travelled to the UK to flee slavery, oppression and / or conscription. Many of the socio-economic difficulties faced by non-western countries are the long lasting ripple effects of colonialism, war and terror, which were often inflicted upon these countries by the west in the first place. It is an ugly and inconvenient truth, and yet migrants face further oppression by us in the form of our attitudes, media, and education.
It is time we re-considered our attitudes towards the treatment of migrants, and think about what we deem to be acceptable. It is time to address this unconscious sense of western supremacy in order to educate and evolve our society. You can help us expand this blog and raise awareness to our cause by getting in touch and telling us your story. We MUST expose unfair treatment of migrants and asylum seekers, in order to improve the system.
