Memorandum submitted by Save the Children
1. Save the Children fights for vulnerable
children in the UK and around the world who suffer from poverty,
disease, injustice and violence. We work with them to find lifelong
answers to the problems they face.
2. As a global organisation, we are uniquely
placed to ensure that the rights of all asylum seeker, refugee
and trafficked children in the UK are protected, promoted and
respected in line with the UN Convention on the Rights of the
Child (UNCRC), other international human rights instruments and
relevant domestic legislation.
THE SCALE
OF CHILD
TRAFFICKING IN
THE UK
3. The internationally recognised definition
of trafficking (in the Palermo Protocol) defines child trafficking
as children being transported for purposes of exploitation within
or across national borders. This includes situations where children
have voluntarily consented to travel but are exploited on arrival.
4. Many children who are trafficked are
handled by highly organised criminal networks, but children are
also trafficked through personal and family connections. Perpetrators
are anyone along the trafficking chainrecruiters, middlemen,
document providers, transporters, corrupt officials and employers.
5. Due to the illicit nature of trafficking
there are few reliable estimates of the number of trafficked children
in the UK. There is no single statutory agency within the UK that
has a responsibility for gathering data and reporting annually
on child trafficking, which means it is impossible to get a true
picture of the scale of the problem.
6. Research carried out by ECPAT UK and
Save the Children in 2006[89]
uncovered 80 cases of known or highly suspected child trafficking
across five local authorities in three regions in England. This
is likely to be just the tip of the iceberg.
7. In 2006, the Home Office commissioned
the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) to
undertake an intelligence-gathering project to try and establish
the level of existing information and understand of child trafficking.
The research team gathered data from the police, law enforcement
agencies, 20 Children's Services teams, BIA and eight NGOs. From
these referrals the research team identified 330 cases that fitted
the profile of child trafficking.[90]
Again this is unlikely to be an accurate figure.
8. Children are exploited in a wide variety
of ways and not just through sexual exploitation, which may vary
according to their age and gender and race. The ECPAT UK/ Save
the Children research found examples of:
Restaurant/catering labour.
Underage forced marriages.
Cannabis factory labour.
9. Trafficking can have a devastating impact
upon children. They are separated from families and in danger
of losing all contact with them. They are at risk of losing their
identity as traffickers often destroy their papers and change
their names. During the journey, unsafe transportation places
them at risk of death or injury.
10. On arrival they are likely to experience
violence, abuse and dangerous working conditions that are harmful
to their health and wellbeing. They are at risk of suffering long
term damage, including HIV/AIDS.
11. The trafficking of children is not an
illegal migration issue, driven by people's desire to come to
the UK. It is a global human rights abuse that requires national,
regional and international co-operation to protect children.
12. Children who have been trafficked should
first and foremost be protectedtheir immigration case can
then be considered after their protection needs have been met.
THE RIGHTS
OF TRAFFICKED
CHILDREN
Council of Europe Convention against Trafficking
13. The Government's announcement to ratify
the Council of Europe Convention against trafficking in Human
Beings by the end of 2008 is extremely welcome.
14. Ratifying the Convention would require
the Government to take specific measures which would help to protect
these vulnerable children, for example, reduce children's vulnerability
to trafficking, notably by creating a protective environment for
them (Article 5); ensuring that relevant authorities have trained
and qualified professionals in identifying and helping victims,
including children (article10); and issuing child victims of trafficking
temporary residence permits in order to ensure the child's best
interests are safeguarded (article 14).
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
15. Save the Children very much welcomes
the Government's announcement on 14 January 2008[91]
to review its general reservation on immigration and citizenship
as part of its consultation on a Code of Practice for the Border
and Immigration agency.[92]
16. The UN Committee on the Rights of the
Child has twice called on the Government to remove the reservation,
which they have described as "against the object and purpose"
of the Convention.[93]
The UK Government will be assessed on its implementation of the
UNCRC in this autumn. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human
Rights has also condemned the UK for maintaining this reservation,
most recently in its report on the treatment of asylum seekers.[94]
17. The Government has made assurances that
it honours the spirit of the UNCRC in relation to children subject
to immigration control but in practice the effect of the general
reservation has been to create a lower standard of care for children
from abroad, which undermines efforts to combat child trafficking.
18. A key example of this is the omission
of immigration agencies from the duty to "safeguard and promote
the welfare of children" introduced by Section 11 of Children
Act 2004immigration agencies are the only significant statutory
body to be excluded. While Save the Children welcomes the proposed
Code of Practice[95]
through which the Home Office acknowledges the need to offer children
subject to immigration control protection to ensure their safety,
we do not believe that this goes far enough as the proposed Code
will be weaker than a statutory duty.
Departmental responsibility for separated children
19. Save the Children is concerned by the
increasing development of dual systems of care and supportone
for citizen children and one for trafficked children and other
children who are subject to immigration controls (see below).
20. Wider child protection and children's
policy sits within the Department for Children, Schools and Families
(DCSF). With the Ministry of Justice now holding joint responsibility
with the DCSF for juvenile justice issues, it is an anomaly that
the responsibility of separated children remains with the Home
Office. When challenged on whether policy affecting separated
children should be a dual responsibility area between the Home
Office and the DCSF, Ed Balls told the Children Schools and Families
Select Committee, "I should be very happy to listen to the
views of the Committee on that."[96]
21. Save the Children is calling for:
The Government to ensure that the
Convention is ratified by the end of 2008 and that it fully implements
obligations set out in the Convention as soon as possible.
The Government to remove its general
reservation on immigration and citizenship to the UN Convention
on the Rights of the child. The Government must ensure that its
review of the Reservation is comprehensive and fully involves
stakeholders, in order to be credible.
Section 11 of the Children Act 2004
to be amended so that immigration agencies are included in the
duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children.
The Department for Children, Schools
and Families to take the lead in safeguarding these vulnerable
children or at the very least a joint unit must be established
between the Department for Children, Schools and Families and
the Home Office.
TRAFFICKED CHILDREN
GOING MISSING
FROM CARE
22. Of particular concern to Save the Children
is that research has found that a significant number of non-citizen
children are going missing from care. These cases first came to
Government attention over ten years ago when in 1996 West Sussex
police investigations revealed that children from West Africa
were going missing soon after arrival. Similarly, Scotland Yard
investigations found that over just a two month period, between
July and September 2001, 300 black boys between the ages of four
and seven had gone missing from school.[97]
Of these boys, 299 came from Africa and one from the Caribbean.
An international police search was only able to locate two of
the 300 boys who had gone missing.[98]
23. More recently, Save the Children asked
local authorities in England, Scotland and Wales a series of questions
under the Freedom of Information Act about children from abroad
going missing from their care.[99]
24. Of the 109 local authorities who responded
to the request, detailed information was provided in 94 (86%)
of the responses[100]
and of these cases 238 cases of children had gone missing from
care. Of these cases 132 (55%) children remain missing and have
not been located since; 66 (27.7%) have since been found and information
was not provided in the remaining 40 cases.
25. 35 of the children who had gone missing
were suspected cases of child trafficking. However, in many cases
local authorities reported a lack of understanding of what was
meant by the term trafficking, and others reported "no cases
of trafficking to their knowledge" so it is likely that a
higher proportion may well have been were victims of trafficking.
However, even if child trafficking was not evident Save the Children
does not believe that these cases represent any less of a child
protection concern.
26. Of the 238 missing children, information
as to their gender was provided in 150 (63%) of these cases. Of
these, 43 (28.6%) children were female, and 107 (71%) were male.
27. Detail concerning the age at which the
children had gone missing from care was provided in 123 (51.7%)
cases. Of these 123 cases:
12 (9.8%) were under the age of 14.
Two of these cases were 11 year old boys from Afghanistan, and
one was a 12 year old boy from Kenya.
61 (49.6%) were between the ages
of 15 and 16 years old.
49 (39.85) were 17-18 years old.
One was over the age of 18.
28. Information about the country of origin
of the missing children was provided in 149 cases. Of these, 37
(24.8%) came from Afghanistan, 15 (10%) came from Eritrea, 14
(9.4%) came from Vietnam, 13 (8.7%) from Romania and 12 (8%) from
Nigeria. The full list of country of origin information can be
found in annex A.
29. Research carried out by the Child Exploitation
and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) and ECPAT UK and Save the
Children research have also revealed that significant numbers
of children are going missing from local authority care.
30. The CEOP research identified 330 cases
that fitted the profile of child trafficking and of this number
183or 55% were found to have gone missing.[101]
Similarly, the research carried out by ECPAT UK and Save the Children
in five local authorities in England, found 80 reported cases
of known or suspected child victims of trafficking, 52 (64%) of
which had gone missing. Only four of these children had since
been located.[102]
In September 2005, six Chinese girls aged between
16 and 17 were stopped at Birmingham airport boarding a plane
for Toronto. It is understood they had been in England for up
to two years but they had previously not been detected by any
government agency. Immigration services identified that one of
the adults with whom they were travelling was wanted for human
trafficking in Singapore. The girls were separated and placed
in the care of two different authorities. Three of the girls went
missing within 72 hours. Of the remaining three, one was suffering
mental health problems and appropriate foster care could not be
located. Shortly after being placed in residential housing, she
went missing.
The other two girls remained in foster care for
a further nine months until the younger one went missing. She
has subsequently returned to foster care although has not disclosed
where she has been in the interim. No information about the missing
four girls has come forward.
From Missing Out: A study of Child Trafficking
in the North-West, North East and West Midland.
31. As the majority of children who have
gone missing have never been traced, there is little information
available to explain why they went missing. However, information
from the small numbers of missing children who have later been
found in the ECPA UK/Save the Children research indicates that
in some cases, while children are registered with social services,
the trafficker maintains control over the child and seeks to remove
the child as soon as possible or that children run away from care
in attempt to escape the trafficker.[103]
In addition to actions taken by the traffickers and the child
themselves, gaps within care planning and service provisions also
contributed to children being at risk of going missing.
32. It is clear from the limited research
that is available that significant numbers of children from abroad
are going missing from care. While we welcome the recent Government
proposals to establish arrangements to monitor and take appropriate
action when children go missing from care,[104]
we also see an urgent need for an independent inquiry to be held
into cases of children from abroad going missing. Such an inquiry
would further evidence why this is happening and help to build
up a picture of emerging trends across the UK so this highly concerning
issue can be fully.
Lack of practical guidance
33. Extremely concerning is the fact that
children who have been identified as victims of trafficking are
still going missing from care. Many of the suspected cases of
child trafficking from the ECPAT and Save the Children study had
not been investigated or recorded as such by social services at
the time that the children went missing.[105]
Concerns have been raised that this is due to a lack of awareness
among professionals of child traffickingsomething that
the Government has pledged to tackle.[106]
34. While Save the Children welcomes and
acknowledge the Home Office and DCSF guidance "Safeguarding
Children" who may have been trafficked[107]
we see it only as a much needed first step in addressing some
of the failures in the care and protection of trafficked children.
We are concerned by the lack of practical guidance to support
local authorities and social services to plan, protect and care
for trafficked children in their care on a day to day basis.
35. We hope that the proposed staff training
in the Code of Practice consultation[108]
and the proposals to develop identification and referral mechanisms
for child victims of trafficking in Better Outcomes: The Way Forward
will help address this deficit.[109]
36. As noted by CEOP, children who have
been trafficked and exploited need specialise aftercare and supporttrafficked
children have experienced abuse and exploitation and might also
have suffered sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancies and miscarriages,
trauma, depression, drug addiction and psychological instability.[110]
Any guidance on safeguarding trafficked children must include
protocols on victim care that can be incorporated into existing
local authority pathway planning procedures.
37. The lack of safe and appropriate accommodation
provision is particularly concerning, especially given the evidence
that some children in care who had already been found to have
been trafficked and exploited, subsequently went missing again.[111]
Following the identification of girls being trafficked in West
Sussex, West Sussex Social Services established a safe house for
child victims of trafficking. This safe house was subsequently
closed after a lack of government funding.
38. The ECPAT UK/Save the Children research
found that children went missing from a range of support arrangementsthe
majority from emergency accommodation, but also from foster care
and from a housing provider who was supposed to be providing 24-hour
surveillance.[112]
39. Save the Children therefore welcomes
the recent proposal to provide "safe accommodation arrangements
for foster placements in order to protect them from the people
who bought them into the United Kingdom."[113]
The Government must take forward this proposal as soon as possible
in consultation with stakeholders, including trafficked children
and young people.
40. Save the children is calling for:
An independent inquiry to be held
into the cases of children from abroad going missing from care.
More practical guidance and resources
for the development of a multi-tiered response child trafficking
including 24 hour supervised and safe accommodation and carefully
selected and trained foster placements with the accommodation
provided based on the level of support and protected needed by
the individual child.
Detailed guidance and training for
professionals on the identification and management of cases of
child trafficking.
GAPS IN
SERVICES FOR
ALL SEPARATED
CHILDREN
41. While training and more sophisticated
information about indicators of trafficking should help increase
the number of children who are identified as potential victims
of trafficking, it will still be the case that some children will
not initially display any signs of having been trafficked.
42. Trafficked children arrive and are looked
after as separated children, and research and evidence[114]
shows that in many cases there is a dearth of resources and a
lack of adherence to legislation, regulation and statutory guidance
which has led to the failures of services to meet the specific
care and protection needs of separated children in the UK. A Save
the Children study found that some local authorities were not
able to allocate a social worker to all children and young people
from abroad and that the quality of accommodation and support,
provided by some private semi-independent accommodation service
deliverers, was not always adequate.[115]
43. Save the Children does not believe that
the care and protection of potentially trafficked children can
be separated from the care and protection of the broader population
of separated children. Both are vulnerable groups and as has already
been suggested, it can take time for a separated child to display
an indication that he or she might have been, or is vulnerable
to being trafficked.
44. We welcome the positive statements about
trafficked children in Better Outcomes: The Way Forward. However,
we remain concerned that some of the proposals will have a significantly
negative impact on child victims of trafficking as well as separated
children generally:
A key concern is the proposals to
enforce the removal of under-18s whose asylum claim have failed
back to their country of origin. We are not against the return
of separated children in all circumstances but the return of a
separated child must only take place if it is in the child's best
interests and if appropriate reception arrangements and safeguards
are in place. We are particularly concerned about the significant
risks of return in relation to trafficked children, where without
adequate safeguards in place the child is very likely to be at
risk of further exploitation.
Despite opposition from children's
organisations, the Refugee Children's Consortium (RCC), the Children's
Commissioner for England and the Royal College of Paediatrics
and Child Health,[116]
the proposal to introduce x-rays to determine age has not been
ruled out. Save the Children have serious concerns over the use
of x-rays in age assessment procedures: They are unethical as
it is an invasive practice which will expose children to unnecessary
radiation and inaccurate due to the two-year margin of error for
this procedure. If this proposal is implemented there is a real
risk that vulnerable separated children, including trafficked
children, will be treated as adults. A more accurate and holistic
approach to age assessment is needed.
We do not object in principle to
the establishment of new "specialist authorities" to
address the uneven spread of specialist local authority provision
for separated children and welcome the Government's acknowledgement
that "any move towards pacing children outside London and
the South-East of England clearly requires careful management."
However, we are aware of the risks that improper management and
insufficient funding of dispersal could bring about especially
for trafficked children.
45. Save the Children is calling for:
The proposals in Better Outcomes:
The Way Forward to be assessed against the principles and provisions
of the UNCRC.
Matters regarding all separated children
to be wholly contextualised within a child protection environment.
The return of separated children
to their country or origin to only take place if there are satisfactory
structures and mechanisms to adjudicate on the "best interests"
principle, including a system of guardianship (see below).
The Government to explore the establishment
of independent, multi-agency age assessment panels as recommended
by the Separated Children in Europe Programme.[117]
The development of Specialist Authorities
to incorporate the positive learning from the Safe Case Transfer
project.
A GUARDIAN FOR
ALL SEPARATED
CHILDREN
46. There is no systematic provision of
independent oversight on matters involving separated children
from abroadtrafficked as well as asylum-seeking children.
As noted above, separated children may be placed in inappropriate
accommodation with inadequate support, and can also go unrepresented
in asylum claims. In particular the long term durable solutions
for each child may not be fully explored.[118]
47. Based on this evidence, UNICEF UK has
recommended that a guardian is appointed for trafficked children
as soon as a child victim is identified, or there are reasonable
grounds to believe that the child is a victim.[119]
We agree.
48. Article 10 of the Council of Europe
Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings states
that; "As soon as an unaccompanied child is identified as
a victim [of trafficking] ... each Party shall provide for representation
of the child by a legal guardian, organisation or authority which
shall act in the best interests of that child."
49. In addition, the UN Committee on the
Rights of the Child (CRC) has clearly outlined the responsibility
of States to provide guardians for unaccompanied and separated
children:
"States are required to create the underlying
legal framework and to take necessary measures to secure proper
representation of an unaccompanied or separated child's best interests.
Therefore States should appoint a guardian or adviser as soon
as the unaccompanied or separated child is identified and maintain
such guardianship arrangements until the child has either reached
the age of majority or has permanently left the territory, in
compliance with the Convention and other international instruments."[120]
50. It is crucial that a system of guardianship
set up for separated children in the UK follows international
standards. The functions of the guardian are set out in the UNCRC
General Comment number 6, which sets out that, inter alia:
"The guardian should be consulted and informed
regarding all actions taken in relation to the child. The guardian
should have the authority to be present in all planning and decision-making
processes, including immigration and appeal hearings, care arrangements
and all efforts to search for a durable solution..."[121]
51. The Separated Children in Europe Programme
(SCEP) Statement of Good Practice[122]
also recommends that as soon as a separated child is identified,
a guardian or adviser should be appointedin a long-term
perspectiveto advise and protect the separated child. The
Statement sets out the role and function of a guardian as follows,
based on the experiences of member countries:[123]
To ensure that all decisions taken
are in the child's best interests.
To ensure that the child has suitable
care, accommodation, education, language support and health care
provision.
To ensure that the child has suitable
legal representation to deal with his/her immigration status or
asylum claim.
To consult with and advise the child.
To contribute to a durable solution
in the child's best interests.
To provide a link between the child
and various organisations who may provide services to the child.
To advocate on the child's behalf
where necessary.
To explore the possibility of family
tracing and reunification with the child.
52. The Government has responded to calls
for guardians by stating that:
"We consider that the children already receive
sufficient assistance from the local authority social workers
assigned to their care. The children are also referred to the
Refugee Council Children's Panel, which provides additional advice
and signposts the individuals to appropriate services. Legal assistance
is of course available to assist with asylum applications."[124]
53. The local authority is not adequately
resourced to fulfil the effective functions of a guardian as set
out by UNHCR[125]
and the UNCRC. The UNCRC guidance states that, "agencies
or individuals whose interest could potentially be in conflict
with those of the child's should not be eligible for guardianship."[126]
The RCC believes that local authority children's services are
such an agency. For example, recent research from RCC member ILPA,
highlights the potential conflict of interest for local authorities
in carrying out age determinations of young people, because of
the resource implications of determining that someone is a child.[127]
54. The Refugee Council's Children's Panel
is often quoted as providing a guardianship role for unaccompanied
children in the UK. However, this has been refuted by the Refugee
Council.[128]
The role of the Panel is not a statutory one although it is funded
by the Home Office. There is no obligation on children's services
to work together with the Panel of Advisers or vice versa and
it has no mandate to report, make recommendations or ascertain
the feelings of a child. Valuable NGO agencies such as the Refugee
Council Children's Panel are no substitute for statutory guardianship.
55. Save the Children is calling for:
Every separated child who arrives
in the UK to be appointed a guardian who has powers to represent
the child's best interest.
89 ECPAT UK and Save the Children (2007) Missing Out
A Study of Child Trafficking in the North-West, North East and
West Midlands Back
90
CEOP, BIA and Home Office, 2007: A Scoping Project on Child Trafficking
in the UK, p8 Back
91
Home Office Press Release 14 January 2008 "Home Secretary
Moves to Ratify the Council of Europe Convention Against Trafficking
in 2008" Back
92
Border and Immigration Agency (2008) Code of Practice for Keeping
Children Safe from Harm pro forma for responses question 16 Back
93
UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (2002) Concluding Observations
on the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Paragraph
6 Back
94
House of Lords House of Commons Joint Committee on Human Rights
(2007) The Treatment of Asylum Seekers: Tenth report of Session
2006-07. Back
95
Border and Immigration Agency (2008) Code of Practice for Keeping
Children Safe from Harm Back
96
Uncorrected transcript of oral evidence to be published as HC213i:
House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee, Wednesday
9 January 2008. Back
97
This investigation was carried out as part of the "Adam"
case in which the torso of an unidentified young African boy was
found in the River Thames. Back
98
BBC News online, Friday 13 May 2005 Hundreds of Children "vanishing"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4541603 Back
99
Please note this submission includes interim findings only. The
full research findings will be available shortly. Back
100
15 (14%) local authorities responded that they were not able or
willing to provide the information. In 5% of these cases the information
was not provided because the local authority did not hold records
with this type of information. Some of the local authorities who
were not able to provide this type of information have high populations
of non-citizen children in their care. Back
101
CEOP, BIA and Home Office (2007) A Scoping Project on Child Trafficking
in the UK Back
102
ECPAT UK and Save the Children (2007) Missing Out: A Study of
Child Trafficking in the North-West, North-East and West Midlands Back
103
ECPAT UK and Save the Children (2007) Missing Out: A Study of
Child Trafficking in the North-West, North-East and West Midlands Back
104
Border and Immigration Agency (2008) Better Outcomes: The Way
Forward Improving the Care of Unaccompanied Children. Section
3 Back
105
ECPAT UK and Save the Children (2007) Missing Out: A Study of
Child Trafficking in the North-West, North-East and West Midlands Back
106
See for example Border and Immigration Agency (2008) Better Outcomes
: The Way Forward, Improving the care of asylum seeking children Back
107
Home Office and Department for Children, Schools and Families
(2008) Working Together to Safeguard Children: Safeguarding Children
who may have been Trafficked Back
108
Border and Immigration Agency (2008) Code of Practice for Keeping
Children Safe from Harm Section 3 Back
109
Border and Immigration Agency (2008) Better Outcomes: The Way
Forward Improving the Care of Unaccompanied Children. Section
3 Back
110
CEOP, (2007) A Scoping Project on Child Trafficking in the UK Back
111
CEOP, (2007) A Scoping Project on Child Trafficking in the UK Back
112
ECPAT UK and Save the Children (2007) Missing Out: A Study of
Child Trafficking in the North-West, North-East and West Midlands Back
113
Border and Immigration Agency (2008) Better Outcomes: The Way
Forward Improving the Care of Unaccompanied Children. Section
3 Back
114
See for example, save the Children (2001) Cold Comfort Back
115
Save the Children UK (2005) Local Authority Support to Unaccompanied
Asylum-Seeking Young People. Changes since the Hillingdon Judgement Back
116
Press statement March 1 2007 Children's Commissioners respond
to Home Office Proposals for unaccompanied asylum seeking children Back
117
Separated Children in Europe Programme. Statement of Good Practice Back
118
See for example Crawley H (2006) Child First Migrant Second, ILPA Back
119
Unicef UK & ECPAT UK, 2007, Rights here, rights now: Recommendations
for protecting trafficked children Back
120
General Comment No.6 (2005) on Treatment of Unaccompanied and
Separated Children outside their Country of Origin; articles
18 (2) and 20 (1) paragraph 33 Back
121
http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/comments.htm
articles 18 (2) and 20 (1) paragraph 33 Back
122
Separated Children in Europe Programme, Statement of Good Practice
2004 see appendix Back
123
Ibid Back
124
House of Lords Hansard, 14 November 2007, Col No. XXX. Our
emphasis in bold. Back
125
UNHCR, Guidelines on Policies and Procedures in dealing with
Unaccompanied Children Seeking Asylum, Geneva, February 1997,
p.7. Back
126
http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/comments.htm
articles 18 (2) and 20 (1) paragraph 33 Back
127
Crawley, H, 2007, When is a Child not a Child? ILPA Back
128
Refugee Council Response to UK Implementation of Council Directive
2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005, laying down minimum standards on
procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee
status Back
|