3 VOLUNTARY REMOVALS
11. The standard letter sent by the Directorate to
failed applicants who have exhausted their rights of appeal does
not specify the action the applicant is expected to take to leave
the country, or the departure timescale. There are no procedures
in place to monitor whether recipients of the letters have made
arrangements to leave the country voluntarily, although many recipients
are subject to reporting centre arrangements.[12]
12. Voluntary removals are the best option as they
are less expensive and less problematic to arrange than enforced
removals, and with greater likelihood that failed applicants returning
voluntarily to their country of origin will be accepted than where
they have been forcibly repatriated. Voluntary removals have,
nevertheless, remained at the same level for the past two years.
With estimated savings of £9.9 million for every 1,000 additional
removals, the Directorate agreed that increasing the takeup
of voluntary removals would be good value for money.[13]
13. During 2005, the Directorate had started a programme
to promote voluntary returns, including publicising the schemes
on its website and through induction centres (Figure 3).
In addition, it has started to advise applicants awaiting asylum
decisions about the option of voluntary removal, as well as those
whose claims have already been determined as unsuccessful and
those whose support arrangements have been stopped pending removal.
Training had also been organised for Metropolitan Police custody
staff, and discussions had taken place with Probation Service
staff and the police to promote greater use of voluntary returns.[14]
Figure 3: Details of the voluntary return schemes offered in the
United Kingdom
Source: National Audit Office
14. The Directorate could not explain why the voluntary
schemes in the Netherlands and Germany achieved higher rates of
removal than those in the United Kingdom (Figure 4). Assisted
voluntary returns were not currently included in the performance
data for Local Enforcement Offices and consequently there might
be less incentive for enforcement staff to promote this method
of departure. There were also wide variations in the number of
unassisted voluntary departures recorded by the offices. In the
Netherlands, the Immigration and Naturalisation Service informs
asylum applicants about the option of voluntary return as soon
as applicants file their application, and more generous terms
are available for longer-term cases. More use could have been
made of voluntary organisations to disseminate information to
appropriate groups.[15]
Figure 4: Details of voluntary return schemes
offered by Germany and the Netherlands
Source: National Audit Office
12 Qq 58 -60 Back
13
Qq 62 Back
14
Qq 24 Back
15
Qq 130, 146; Ev 18-20 Back
| 
