Memorandum submitted by the NSPCC
A EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A.1 The NSPCC is concerned that trafficked
children are not being identified and protected and in this response
we have sought to highlight some of the key weaknesses of the
current system.
A.2 Our concerns relate to the lack of awareness
and identification of trafficked children, and the lack of support
and care available to them. In general we have found that without
specific advocacy children who have been trafficked do not trigger
an appropriate child protection response.
A.3 Trafficked children will include those
who are separated children, crudely defined as "unaccompanied
minors"—many of whom may still be controlled by their
traffickers as well as other trafficked children who are hidden
in private fostering arrangements. The NSPCC considers that there
is an urgent need to improve the immediate response to children
who are identified as having potentially been trafficked to stop
such high numbers of these children going missing. The NSPCC is
also concerned that the long-term recovery of those children who
have been identified is marred by an unsympathetic and punitive
asylum process which discounts much of their evidence of trafficking
when they turn 18. We have supported a number of trafficked children
who have needed to claim asylum in order to remain in the UK and
who have had their claims rejected.
A.4 The NSPCC recommends:
— The appointment of an independent
guardian or advocate for any child who may have been trafficked
as soon as possible in order to provide emotional, practical and
legal support to the child.
— Full care status for trafficked children
and the development of specific specialist services for child
victims (including access to safe accommodation).
— The introduction of a system of renewable
residence permits for children who have been the victim of trafficking
and sufficient time to recover before having to make an asylum
claim.
— Children have great difficulty establishing
claims for asylum under the 1951 Refugee Convention and as such
if a child has been trafficked or indeed experienced other child
specific forms of persecution they should be given leave to remain.
It may be appropriate to return a child to their country of origin
but this should not be carried out unless the return is the child's
"best interests".[36]
— That in considering any return there
should be a determination of the `best interests' of the child
in terms of finding a durable solution for that child. This "best
interests" assessment should look carefully at issues of
security, safety, and welfare and any NGO's or advocates supporting
the child should be fully involved.
— An improved system for referring
information and tracking trafficked children and an improved operational
police response to cases where children may have been trafficked
and are likely to go missing
— The appointment of a "National
Rapporteur"[37]
to act as a central point of data collection for information about
trafficked children and to provide independent scrutiny and review
of progress on child trafficking
— While the NSPCC welcomes some of
the government's recent reforms aimed at identifying trafficked
children we urge the Government to reconsider the changes in policy
that will enable the BIA to consider forcibly removing children
before they reach 18. We consider that this will undermine attempts
to protect trafficked children. Children should not be forcibly
returned under any circumstances.
— That the UK Government should integrate
children's rights within domestic legislation and promote it within
EU legislation which impacts on trafficked children. The UK Government
should also participate actively in measures at EU level which
contribute to the protection of child victims of trafficking.
B INTRODUCTION
B.1 The National Society for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) is the UK's leading charity specialising
in child protection and the prevention of cruelty to children.
The NSPCC aims to end cruelty to children by seeking to influence
legislation, policy, practice, attitudes and behaviours for the
benefit of children and young people. This is achieved through
a combination of service provision, lobbying, campaigning and
public education.
B.2 The NSPCC purpose is to end cruelty
to children. In order to achieve this, it is vital that all children,
whatever their needs, have a range of services that are flexible
and offer them support and protection. The NSPCC has more than
180 services in the UK and the Channel Islands. These services
aim to:
— Prevent children being abused by
working with parents and carers in vulnerable families to improve
their knowledge and skills in safeguarding, and giving children
and young people someone to turn to through the provision of our
Listening Services.
— Protect vulnerable children and young
people from abuse by providing direct services in a number of
settings, including schools and young people's centres. We also
protect them by providing Listening Services for adults to ensure
they have someone to turn to with their concerns; by ensuring
that abused children and young people are identified and effective
action is taken to protect them, and by working with young people
and adults who pose a risk to children and young people to reduce
the risk of abuse.
— Help children and young people who
have been abused overcome the effects of abuse and achieve their
potential.
C THE NSPCC'S
EXPERIENCE IN
RELATION TO
TRAFFICKING
C.1 The NSPCC's experience and knowledge
of trafficking comes both from policy work and the NSPCC's services.
The NSPCC's Sexual Exploitation Service (SES) service, which is
based in East London, works with children who have been sexually
exploited and are separated or "unaccompanied" children.
The NSPCC's Special Investigation Service (SIS) (now known as
the Independent Enquiry and Assessment Service IEAS) also works
on issues related to child trafficking and has supported the police
and other agencies in this area, most notably on Operation Paladin
Child with the Metropolitan police in 2003.
C.2 Recently the NSPCC has launched a new
Child Trafficking Advice and Information Line (CTAIL). The aim
of CTAIL is to help immigration officers, the police, social workers,
and others working or volunteering with children to identify and
protect victims of trafficking. It is also hoped that the advice
line will shed light on the scale of child trafficking in the
UK. The service has been set up with funding from the Home Office
and Comic Relief, and runs in partnership with the Child Exploitation
and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) and End Child Prostitution,
Child Pornography and the Trafficking of Children for Sexual Purposes
(ECPAT UK).
C.3 At a policy level the NSPCC is a member
of ECPAT UK and has worked alone and collectively as an ECPAT
UK[38]
member on child trafficking at both national and European level
for several years. Jointly with ECPAT, the NSPCC has also taken
on the role of "National Advocate" to act as a first
point of referral following the identification of children in
the recent police Pentameter 2 operation.
D ESTIMATING
THE SCALE
AND TYPE
OF ACTIVITY
D.1 It is still not possible to develop
an overall picture of the scale and nature of child trafficking
in the UK. There is a low level of awareness of trafficking among
many practitioners and a failure to identify those who may have
been trafficked. We have found that professionals are often not
equipped to recognise child trafficking and may be unsure of how
to act on any suspicions or concerns that they have in order to
protect the child and they may also be unaware of how information
can and should be passed on or to whom. There is also a lack of
any systematic collection and analysis of data about trafficked
children. The NSPCC recommends the appointment of a "National
Rapporteur"[39]
to act as a central point of data collection for information about
trafficked children and to provide independent scrutiny and review
of progress on child trafficking
D.2 The high numbers of known and suspected
cases of trafficked children who go missing from care and the
failure to protect these children makes it difficult to assess
or track patterns of child trafficking.[40]
The recent CEOP scoping report, based on information gathered
from statutory agencies, identifies 330 known or suspected trafficked
children.[41]
However, this report is a one-off "snapshot" of trafficking
victims who have been identified at one particular point in time
rather than an attempt to provide an overview of the nature and
extent of child trafficking. The report found that 56% of these
children had gone missing without proper efforts to try and locate
them, and highlights the failure of social service and immigration
teams to provide proper safeguards for these children: care provisions
are poor and they are often placed in unsupervised Bed & Breakfast
or hostel accommodation. This happens despite recommendations
made as long ago as 2003.[42]
D.3 A recent report by ECPAT UK offers a
similar picture.[43]
This study over three regions identified 80 reported cases of
known or suspected child victims of trafficking. A similar proportion
60% (48) of these children went missing from social services care
and have never been found. We consider that children and young
people who may have been trafficked need direct support services
and a key worker to be identified immediately who will give support
to the young person and keep in contact with them. The NSPCC's
involvement as a `National Advocate' in Pentameter 2 was designed
to ensure that children who have been identified were provided
with support straight away. The challenges we have faced in this
role reflect the difficulties of getting information and support
through to trafficked children even when they have been clearly
identified, suggesting again a lack of awareness and understanding
of the specific needs of these children.
E THE DIFFICULTY
OF FINDING
THOSE WHO
HAVE BEEN
TRAFFICKED; AND
THE ROLE
OF NGOS
IN HELPING
TO IDENTIFY
AND ASSIST
VICTIMS;
E.1 Our experience is that it may take a
long time for trafficked children to disclose their experiences
and to come to a realisation of what has happened to them. In
recent years our sexual exploitation service started to accept
referrals of very vulnerable girls who had arrived in Britain
from different parts of Africa and were susceptible to sexual
exploitation because of their previous experiences and level of
isolation. All were initially housed inappropriately, and given
a lower level of support than most looked after children who are
born in the UK. Over the last few years sustained work with these
girls and young women has led to them sharing their histories
with staff and what has emerged from all the histories are quite
clear indicators of trafficking for sexual purposes and in one
case for domestic work. Initially all of these girls were orphaned
migrant children from Africa brought to the UK who had either
been abandoned by their adult traffickers on arrival or they had
managed to escape their traffickers at a later point. They were
all trafficked following armed conflict and/or destitution[44]
and were unaware that their experiences constitute "trafficking"
until made aware of it by our project.
E.2 Most of the children involved were exploited
in their countries of origin, and again here in the UK, due to
their extreme vulnerability and inappropriate housing. Several
have received social services support with housing, but little
else, and all have looked to the NSPCC for emotional and practical
support. The Sexual Exploitation Service was not designed to deal
with trafficking and has had to develop knowledge and expertise
rapidly. The group that was set up, "From There 2 Here",
is still running, and now acts as an advisory group to the NSPCC's
new Child Trafficking Advice and Information Line Service. The
group also continues to accept new members. Currently the girls
come from Angola, Kenya, Burundi, Rwanda, Guinea, Uganda, Eritrea,
Sierra Leone and other African states as well as more recently
from China and Romania.
E.3 We are greatly concerned by the lack
of resources for the child victims of trafficking. The Government
has yet to provide any specific services for child victims of
trafficking and makes no reference to this in their UK Action
Plan on Tackling Human Trafficking published in March 2007. The
experience of the Sexual Exploitation Service over the past four
years has been that even when young people who have been trafficked
are accorded Social Services support under s20 of the Children
Act 1989, this support is minimal. Support typically consists
of low-quality, semi-independent accommodation where the young
people have very little contact with the social worker.[45]
Most of the young women known to the Sexual Exploitation Service
have been placed in this kind of semi-independent accommodation
from the age of 16. These placements have proved inadequate for
these young people who have experienced trauma and abuse and who
often do not have sufficient English language skills or understanding
of how things work to cope in semi-independent living. The service
has found that it is unusual for foster care to be considered
as a placement option for trafficked children, despite their high
level of vulnerability and need. The service reports that there
is insufficient expertise, care and attention directed to children
who have been the victims of trafficking due to the lack of capacity
within front-line Children's Services teams. We reiterate that
trafficked children should be accorded full care status under
s20 of the Children Act 1989 and the support they are given must
fully meet their needs. We also recommend that the government
develop specialist services for child victims (including access
to safe accommodation).
E.4 Although the children in our Sexual
Exploitation Service are at a stage where they are able to be
supported by the NSPCC group, some trafficked children will still
be being controlled by their traffickers and will be confused,
isolated and frightened. As soon as trafficking is suspected,
an independent guardian should immediately be identified who can
advocate for the legal, practical and emotional needs of the child.
This advocate needs to be independent of Government agencies.
Our own experience of running a National Advocate scheme (jointly
with ECPAT UK) in relation to the victims of Pentameter 2, has
also met with considerable difficulties in arranging support and
advocacy for individual children due to a confusion of responsibilities
and a failure to share information and to make referrals. The
Government also needs to provide resources for specialist support
services that can provide immediate protection (including access
to safe accommodation) to children and young people arriving in
the UK who are at risk of trafficking.
F THE TREATMENT
OF THOSE
WHO HAVE
BEEN TRAFFICKED
BUT HAVE
NO LEGAL
RIGHT TO
REMAIN IN
THE UK, INCLUDING
THE REQUIREMENTS
IMPOSED BY
THE COUNCIL
OF EUROPE
CONVENTION ON
COMBATING HUMAN
TRAFFICKING;
F.1 There continue to be tensions in the
Government's approach to child trafficking between their acknowledgement
of the need to protect child victims and their concerns about
border control and immigration. This is clear in the ways the
safety, security and welfare of trafficked children is routinely
undermined by the asylum process. We welcome the Government's
recent commitment to ratify the Council of Europe Convention on
Action against Human Trafficking by the end of 2008 for victims
of trafficking. We recommend that in ratifying the European Convention,
the UK government introduce a system of renewable residence permits
which would allow trafficked children space to recover from their
experiences and we consider that these children should have a
right to remain in the UK if it is in their best interests to
do so.
F.2 We also welcome the Government's intention
to review and consult on its reservation to the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) Article 22 relating
to immigration matters and we urge the Government to remove this
reservation. We consider that unless and until the treatment of
all separated children is improved, in line with the principles
of the UNCRC, it will be difficult to identify and protect those
among them who have been trafficked. Given the length of time
and level of support it took for the children in our service to
disclose their experiences of trafficking we think it is unlikely
that the majority of separated children who have been trafficked
will ever be identified as such. In this respect we have been
particularly worried by the recent announcement that separated
children's immigration decisions will be fast tracked in order
to speed up these children's automatic return. We welcome the
BIA's code of practice to safeguard children in the UK but we
continue to be concerned that the Borders and Immigration Agency
is excluded from the statutory duty to make arrangements to safeguard
and promote the welfare of children, under Section 11 of the Children
Act 2004.
F.3 Evidence from the NSPCC's Sexual Exploitation
Service highlights that children who have been trafficked into
the UK face an unsympathetic and punitive asylum process. The
service has a number of young victims of trafficking who did not
claim asylum for trafficking upon their immediate arrival (they
did not identify themselves as having been trafficked, did not
understand what had happened to them or use the word "trafficking").
This has complicated their applications for indefinite leave,
and diluted the support available to them. It now appears likely
that they will be deported and returned to countries where they
will have no support or means of survival. These young women will
therefore be vulnerable to re-trafficking and placed at risk of
further sexual exploitation in the UK or elsewhere. We are also
concerned that this situation could be further exacerbated by
the recent reforms announced in relation to unaccompanied asylum
seekers that state the intention to consider forcibly removing
children even earlier than 18. The NSPCC urges the Government
to reconsider the changes in policy that will enable the BIA to
remove children before they reach 18. We consider that this will
undermine attempts to protect trafficked children. Children should
not be forcibly returned under any circumstances.
F.4 Some of the children on turning 18 have
already been forced through the legal system three or four times
while appealing Home Office decisions to return them to their
countries of origin. The new reforms could mean that young people
whose asylum claim fails will be forced to undergo the harrowing
appeal process before they turn 18. Overall the legal advice offered
to the young people we have worked with has been difficult to
access and requires a complex and specialised response which is
unlikely to be available to those without the extra support and
knowledge offered by teams like the NSPCC's Sexual Exploitation
Service'. Our advice line identifies a particular need for greater
legal support for the more complex cases. We consider that trafficked
children should be afforded specific legal protection and that
children should be given leave to remain in the UK where there
is evidence that they have been trafficked.
F.5 The NSPCC considers it essential that
a guardian is appointed as soon as a child is identified as having
been trafficked or there are concerns that a child may have been
trafficked. In the current system these children may go unrepresented
in their asylum application and may not understand the implications
of their asylum application. We are aware that it is common for
trafficked children to be advised by non-specialist immigration
solicitors to claim asylum and that many fail to obtain protection.
Children have great difficulty establishing claims for asylum
under the 1951 Refugee Convention. The NSPCC recommends that if
a child has been trafficked or indeed experienced other child
specific forms of persecution they should be given leave to remain.
It may be appropriate to return a child to their country of origin
but this should not be carried out unless the return is in the
child's "best interests".
F.6 There are situations where it may be
appropriate and right for children to be voluntarily returned
to their country of origin. However, trafficked children must
not be sent back to a situation that places them at risk of violence,
abuse or re-trafficking. We recommend that in considering any
return there should be a determination of the "best interests"
of the child in terms of finding a durable solution for that child.
This "best interests" assessment should look carefully
at issues of security, safety, and welfare and any NGO's or advocates
supporting the child should be fully involved. An assessment of
the child's best interests should examine and balance a variety
of factors including: safety, family reunification, age and maturity
of the child, the child's level of integration in the host country,
socio-economic conditions in the country of origin and the views
of the legal guardian. We recommend following the Committee on
the Rights of the Child's guidance on the treatment of unaccompanied
and separated children outside their country of origin, including
their guidance on the factors to consider when deciding whether
to return a child.[46]
F.7 The NSPCC has some experience of working
with agencies in countries of origin in situations where returns
have taken place. However, we are not currently confident that
in the cases we are aware of proper assessments have been carried
out and that these children are being properly safeguarded and
will not be re-trafficked.
G CO-OPERATION
WITHIN THE
EU (INCLUDING EUROPOL)
G.1 The NSPCC considers that because of
the cross border nature of the problem, EU action is essential
in tackling child trafficking, as well as national and international
action. As well as helping to prevent and combat the crime of
child trafficking, the NSPCC emphasises the role the EU can play
in helping to guarantee the protection of child victims of trafficking,
for example by ensuring children's rights are fully taken into
account within EU asylum legislation, or promoting high standards
of protection of trafficked children.
G.2 The NSPCC notes the range of relevant
EU legislation, plans, programmes and recommendations relevant
to combating trafficking in human beings, including child trafficking.[47]
It welcomes the commitments expressed at EU level to combating
child trafficking, and an increasing recognition of the importance
of specific measures relating to children who have been trafficked.
In November 2007, the Justice and Home Affairs Council adopted
conclusions on trafficking in human beings, which recognised "the
need for special attention to be given to the situation of child
victims of trafficking| taking into consideration that child victims
are to be provided with appropriate assistance and protection
and full account has to be taken of their special rights and needs.[48]
However, in practice such commitments do not appear to have resulted
in significant concrete action.
G.3 The NSPCC has for a number of years
highlighted the importance of a child rights-based approach to
trafficking at EU level, which recognises the specific rights
and interests of trafficked children. In this light we welcome
the "Recommendations on standards and best practices on national
mechanisms for identification and assistance of victims of trafficking
in human beings" which were presented by the European Commission
at an Anti-Trafficking Day meeting held on 18 October 2007. This
document recognises many of the specific considerations in relation
to children who have been trafficked, which is welcome, although
we regret that there were no separate guidelines on the identification
and protection of trafficked children.
G.4 These guidelines have the potential
to provide a framework within which Member State governments,
including the UK and other stakeholders, can work to improve the
way victims of trafficking are dealt with in their countries and
to provide adequate protection. However, the low visibility of
this document is of some concern and it is currently not clear
how it will be used or publicised.
G.5 A specific concern in relation to the
impact of EU policies on trafficked children is the failure to
sufficiently integrate a children's rights-based approach in asylum
and immigration legislation. Trafficked children often enter EU
countries without proper documentation and are therefore seen
as "illegal immigrants". They frequently seek asylum
in destination countries. In order to provide adequate protection
to child victims of trafficking it is essential that EU institutions
ensure that the rights and needs of children are integrated within
all EU activities relating to asylum and immigration. This includes
for example the specific situation of trafficked children and
the need to ensure children's rights to protection are reflected
in the proposed "Directive of the European Parliament and
of the Council on common standards and procedures in Member States
for returning illegally staying third-country nationals"
(COM/2005/0391 final). This is currently being debated in the
Council.
G.6 Another role for the EU is in supporting
the development of much-needed data on trafficking in children,
including through the DAPHNE programme which aims to combat violence
against women, young people and children.
G.7 The NSPCC recommends that the UK Government
consistently advocate the integration of children's rights within
EU legislation which impacts on trafficked children; that it participate
actively in exchanging best practice between EU Member States
on protecting and identifying trafficked children; and that it
help ensure the Recommendations referred to above are made visible
and actively implement them in the UK.
H EFFECTIVENESS
OF THE
CO-ORDINATION
BETWEEN PUBLIC
AUTHORITIES IN
THE UK (HOME
OFFICE, FCO, POLICE
FORCES, SERIOUS
ORGANISED CRIME
AGENCY, BORDER
AND IMMIGRATION
AGENCY, SOCIAL
SERVICES).
H.1 There have been longstanding concerns
expressed by NGOs and others about the co-ordination between public
authorities in the UK. One reason for setting up the NSPCC's Child
Trafficking Advice and Information Line was our awareness that
various public authorities (as well as a wider constituency of
voluntary organisations) did not know who to contact and which
other agencies to work with when they became aware that a child
may have been trafficked. One of the aims of the advice line is
to help to ensure a common child protection response from different
agencies. We are currently looking at ways in which the NSPCC
can work more closely with Operation Paladin in relation to police
and immigration services at borders.
H.2 We understand that it will take time
both for new and existing agencies to become more aware of child
trafficking and develop the right response and we are optimistic
that the Working Together Guidance on Safeguarding Children
who may have been Trafficked as well as our own advice line
will help to develop improvements. We have also been encouraged
by some extremely concerned and committed individuals who have
contacted our service from agencies such as Borders and Immigration
and Social Services in order to clarify the steps they should
go through in order to adequately protect and safeguard a child.
H.3 However, we have been concerned that
the respective roles of UK Human Trafficking Centre (UKHTC) and
CEOP are unclear and this has been fed back to both agencies with
the acknowledgement of a need to clarify the relationship between
them. We are concerned that there is confusion on the ground about
the role and remit of both and some continuing overlap in their
areas of responsibility.
H.4 At the same time what is missing is
a police agency equipped to provide operational support to retrieve
individual children who have been trafficked. It seems to us unhelpful
that operational responsibility is left with local police forces,[49]
and Local Children's Safeguarding Boards, when trafficked children
will go missing from an area and be moved by traffickers to other
parts of the UK. We recommend an improved system for referring
information and tracking trafficked children and an improved operational
police response to cases where children may have been trafficked
and are likely to go missing.
H.5 We have also experienced failures by
the police to pass on information to the NSPCC in relation to
the National Advocate role during the Pentameter 2 operation (and
now to the advice line). We have found that this information about
children is not shared with us within the timescales required
by child protection procedures and we remain concerned that unless
children are given the immediate support they need they will continue
to go missing. The lack of effective information referral may
also be a reflection of the failure to properly address the issue
of children at a policy or planning level in either police anti
trafficking operations Pentameter 1 or 2. We are concerned that
this failure to respond appropriately to the needs of children
may be a result of the UKHTC still being an essentially adult-focused
unit. This experience also suggests that a great deal of work
needs to be done to improve the system of referral before the
UK is in a position to ratify the Council of Europe Convention.
APPENDIX 1 CASE
STUDY FROM
THE NSPCC CHILD
TRAFFICKING ADVICE
AND INFORMATION
LINE
This is an ongoing case.
A local authority contacted the CTAIL saying
that the Borders and Immigration Agency had referred a 14 year
old young person to them whose address was in their area. This
young person had gone to their BIA office wanting a passport as
she wanted a cleaning job and had been advised that she needed
a passport. She stated that she had been in the country since
she was 4 months old living in different places and that she had
never attended school. Immigration staff identified that she was
vulnerable and made an appointment for her to return the next
day. They then referred the case to the Local Authority. The young
person did not turn up to her appointment the next day and when
the Police went to check the address, the occupants of the address
had never heard of her.
She is now a missing young person and there
are ongoing multi-agency meetings involving CTAIL to attempt to
locate her.
WHAT SHOULD
BE DONE
DIFFERENTLY IN
THE FUTURE
WITH THE
HELP AND
GUIDANCE OF
THE ADVICE
LINE?
Young people who come forward without official
documents or safe and genuinely protective adult guardians are
highly vulnerable and are at a high risk of going missing. The
latter must be a key factor in decision-making about all children
who have been trafficked or at risk of trafficking.
In the case above there were elements of good
practice, with all of the professionals involved showing care
and concern and working together to try protect the young person.
However, this was not sufficient to safeguard this child. If immigration
had accessed a social worker immediately the young person could
have received a child in need interview which would have addressed
questions of immediate safety and parental responsibility. Best
practice would have dictated that a social worker would not have
discharged the young person without contacting parents or carers,
preferably by visiting the address. If after an interview the
social worker remained concerned about the vulnerability and lack
of adult care for this young person, the social worker could exercise
his/her options of offering local authority care (eg foster care)
or signposting the young person to direct access accommodation
(there is very little of this) or even working with the police
to remove the child into police protection. Following a social
work interview there would also be more information available
to piece this young person's story together to address her needs.
Borders and Immigration could also have contacted
the CTAIL who would have advised immigration officers what questions
to ask (eg Who is at home? Have you got somewhere safe to stay?).
In this scenario the young person would hopefully have been assisted
on the day. At the very least the NSPCC would have access to more
details about the young person to follow up.
Statutory services should also be aware that
if they have real concerns for a young person's welfare, the police
are available to advise on urgent action. They must also always
have cards for young people detailing services to contact for
support.
6 February 2008
36 Leave to remain in the UK for Children who are the
victims of trafficking should not be conditional on their willingness
to testify against their traffickers. Back
37
The appointment of a National Rapporteur or other comparable mechanism
was a recommendation of the European Commission's Experts Group
on Child Trafficking in Human Being and the Council of Europe
Convention on Action in Human Beings which the UK Government intends
to ratify. It would comprise of an independent institution that
collects data and makes recommendations on the development of
policy. Back
38
3 ECPAT UK stands for End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography
and the Trafficking of Children for Sexual Purposes. It is a coalition
of nine leading charities in the UK. Back
39
The appointment of a National Rapporteur or other comparable mechanism
was a recommendation of the European Commission's Experts Group
on Child Trafficking in Human Being and the Council of Europe
Convention on Action in Human Beings which the UK Government intends
to ratify. It would comprise of an independent institution that
collects data and makes recommendations on the development of
policy Back
40
The recent CEOP report (CEOP (2007) `A Scoping Project on Child
Trafficking in the UK') for example, identifies a need for greater
awareness and an improved response, including for example better
screening of children on entry and a more joined up child protection
response from local authorities and the police. Back
41
CEOP (2007) "A Scoping Project on Child Trafficking in the
UK", June 2007, CEOP: London This report suggests that a
large number of children arrive from African countries and China,
that that their methods of entry to the UK are varied as are purposes
for which they are trafficked (although 57 % reported sexual exploitation).
It also reports variation in terms of the level of organisation
of the traffickers. Back
42
Local Authority Circular (2003) This specifies that a child who
has no parent of guardian must be accorded a full care order under
section 20 of the Children Act. Back
43
ECPAT UK (2007) "Missing Out A study of Child Trafficking
in the North-West, North East and West Midlands", January
2007, ECPAT UK: London. Back
44
Research shows that these are common causes for movement of vulnerable
children, see for example, Save the Children UK (2000) "Separated
Children Coming to Western Europe-why they travel and how they
arrive" Wendy Ayotte, Save the Children UK: London Back
45
See for example, Save the Children UK (2005) Local Authority Support
to Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Young People. Changes since the
Hillingdon Judgement Back
46
UNCRC (2005) Guidance on the treatment of unaccompanied and separated
children outside their country of origin. Back
47
These include, inter alia, Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA
on combating trafficking in human beings; Council Framework Decision
2004/68/JHA on combating the sexual exploitation of children and
child pornography; and Council Directive 2004/81/EC on the residence
permit issued to third country nationals who are victims of trafficking
in human beings or who have been the subject of an action to facilitate
illegal immigration, who cooperate with the competent authorities. Back
48
Council of the European Union, Press Release 14607/07 (Presse
253), 2827th Council meeting, Justice and Home Affairs, Brussels
8-9 November 2007 Back
49
It is also problematic that within the police the responsibility
for child trafficking generally sits with officers who do not
sit with the Child Protection Teams of those forces. The exception
to this is Operation Paladin within the Met police which consists
of child protection police working in a multi agency partnership Back
| 
