7. Supplementary memorandum from the
Commission for Racial Equality, further to oral evidence on Wednesday
19 January 2005
Question 1: Provide further information on the
CRE's views on the extent to which the Government action has addressed
the UN Committee's concerns about asylum issues in paragraph 14
of its Concluding Observations.
1. The Commission for Racial Equality (CRE)
recognises the significant impact which immigration and asylum
policies have on the quality of race relations in Great Britain.
Despite some useful refugee initiatives such as the National Refugee
Integration Strategy, the CRE believes that the general direction
of asylum policy continues to contribute to a climate of public
hostility towards asylum-seekers and refugees which is damaging
to race relations. Some examples of policy initiatives which we
regret are:
(i) The Government target, announced by the
Prime Minister in September 2004, that by mid-2005 more failed
asylum seekers will be deported each month than accepted (Times,
16 September 2004). The focus on the deportation of "failed
asylum-seekers" feeds the culture of misinformation: it implies
that the unsuccessful applicants were simply abusers of the process
trying to gain entry into the UK for other reasons, yet the reasons
for refusal may be more complex than illegality.
In addition, if the number of successful applicants
rises due to a global humanitarian crisis, the UK would have to
commit to rapidly expanding its deportation programme with potentially
negative consequences if it were to continue to meet this target.
(ii) The clear policy pressure to reduce
applications is not in the interests of an equitable, efficient
and unbiased system since the decision-making process is driven
by targets and a need to reduce applications. For example in the
Home Office Annual Report, under "reducing illegal inflows",
policy is "continuing to secure borders and press down on
monthly asylum intake" (Home Office, Annual Report 2003-04
HMSO CM6208, p 117).
(iii) The public questioning of the Geneva
Convention in policy consultation is unhelpful (Big Conversation,
2004, chapter 10).
(iv) Generally, the focus on illegal entry
and employment overshadow any positive message of the benefits
of migration and the need for protection for asylum seekers.
2. The main causes for concern, however,
have been the policies on dispersal and accommodation centres.
3. Asylum dispersal, introduced in 1999
and overseen by the National Asylum Seekers Service (NASS), has
led—in some places—to problems in community relations.
For example, in the Caia Park area of Wrexham where violence erupted
in June 2003. The community has now recovered from the tensions.
Through its "Safe Communities Initiative" (SCI) (see
below) the CRE has intervened and advised public authorities following
conflict situations in the area. In some cases it has intervened
to prevent conflict and mediated between communities and public
authorities.
4. Following the Caia Park incident, SCI
worked in Wrexham and assisted both local communities and public
authorities in order to establish good race relations within the
area. Following reports of tensions, SCI has been involved in
mediation and conflict prevention work between local authorities
and community groups in Walsall and Southampton. SCI has completed
a mini-study into refugees, asylum seeker and community relations
in the West Midlands. It is monitoring the situation on the Sitehill
estate in Glasgow and certain areas of East London. The decision
to suspend dispersal to some areas in late 2004 (Migration News
Sheet, 2004) shows that the issue is still resonant. Further,
SCI has also been involved in collating examples of good settlement
practice in Leicester (through "The Leicester Mercury Group").
5. In relation to accommodation centres
the Government intends to proceed with its proposals to develop
accommodation centres for asylum-seekers. In its response to the
White Paper "Safe Haven, Secure Borders" the CRE argued
that:
(i) The location of accommodation centres
in rural or remote areas will result in the isolation and stigmatisation
of asylum seekers. It is the Commission's belief that accommodation
centres which are not integrated into the local community may
lead to segregation of particular nationalities which is harmful
to race relations and which impedes integration and resettlement.
The size of centres is also of concern.
(ii) In addition, there is a risk that the
accommodation centres will become targets for racist attacks by
Far Right groups as has happened in Germany. The picture of such
centres facing organised attacks gives rise to great concern and
raises questions as to how individuals within such centres will
be protected.
(iii) In August 2003 the Deputy Prime Minister
gave planning approval for an accommodation centre on Ministry
of Defence land at Bicester in Oxfordshire, and plans to develop
sites at RAF Newtown, Nottinghamshire, and at HMS Daedalus, Gosport,
Hampshire. There have been local concerns which led to a public
inquiry in Bicester and the Home Office overruled the Council
and independent planning inspector who refused planning permission.
The Home Affairs Committee report into asylum applications notes
that there "there will be some local sensitivities about
the siting of both induction centres and accommodation centres"
(Home Affairs Committee Report into Asylum Applications, 2003-04
session, Volume I, p 50).
(iv) The Commission is also concerned by
the lack of access to mainstream services, education and health
in particular. In particular, the Commission does not support
the education of asylum seeker children away from mainstream education.
We remind the Government of the principles behind the findings
of the CRE Formal Investigation into the method of teaching English
as a second language in Calderdale (report published in November
1986). Although the findings were naturally restricted to ESL
teaching, the findings were that children in separate learning
environments suffer detriment.
(v) In relation to healthcare, there are
many asylum seekers who will suffer from a number of physical
and mental illnesses which will need specialist and culturally
sensitive treatment. It will be difficult to meet these special
needs by the provision of general health care unless the Government
proposes to "buy" in specialist services from the local
area health authority or social services department.
RACE EQUALITY
DUTY
6. In relation to immigration and nationality
functions, scheduled public bodies shall have regard to the need
to eliminate unlawful racial discrimination and promote good race
relations. There is no duty to promote equality of opportunity.
7. There are very few acts of discrimination
which will constitute unlawful racial discrimination because of
the limitations of the 1976 Act. It is highly likely therefore
that the emphasis will be on the duty to promote good race relations;
under this limb of the race equality duty, policies on dispersal,
accommodation centres, the education of children in detention
and refugee integration ought to be scrutinised for their impact
on race relations and subject to race impact assessments.
8. The CRE has not seen any evidence that
such steps are being taken. Indeed, in relation to dispersal the
CRE is concerned by the insufficient preparation by NASS and key
agencies such as local authorities, the Police health and education
authorities for the reception of asylum-seekers. In relation to
the proposed accommodation centres we have not yet seen any race
impact assessments.
CRE'S SAFE
COMMUNITIES INITIATIVE
9. The Safe Communities Initiative selected
five areas because of their wide range of challenges in respect
of diversity. They are: Wrexham, Birmingham, Glasgow, Leicester
and Tower Hamlets.
10. In essence the initiative is seeking
to look at good practice regarding good race relations throughout
Great Britain.
11. The remit of the Safe Communities Steering
Group derives from the CRE's duty to promote good race relations
generally and, specifically, from its commitment to work more
closely with all communities across Britain. The Safe Communities
Initiative is developing a strategic approach and new ways of
working to tackle tensions within and between communities which
may arise for a variety of reasons. It also encourages communities
and agencies to come together and to promote cooperation between
them in order to facilitate dialogue, problem solving and conflict
resolution.
12. The project has a thematic approach
and looks at five key issues. They include Religion and Belief,
Immigration and Asylum, Incitement to Racial Hatred, Gypsies and
Travellers, and Youth Cohesion.
13. The SCI has seen mixed levels of practice
and provision on the education and skills development of asylum-seekers.
In one of our local city projects, we have noted an innovative
education project within a mainstream school which is designed
to produce tailor-made schooling for new arrivals. However, we
are concerned that other pupils in the same school were not encouraged
to interact with asylum-seeker pupils. In our experience, there
is potential for conflict and segregation.
14. The long term objective must be the
successful integration of all communities. However, we fear that
NASS and other statutory agencies may be inadvertently promoting
the establishment of parallel communities, as demonstrated in
the above example. Again, in the SCI "5 cities" project
we have noted at least one example where the Police are acting
as the main agent for social integration. Whilst the project is
a very positive one, it remains questionable whether it is appropriate
for the Police to be the lead deliverer of social integration.
15. More encouragingly, we have noticed
in the 5 cities project that there are certain ethnic and religious
communities who have supported new arrivals within their wider
communal structures. It appears that many established minority
communities feel a sense of responsibility towards new arrivals
from similar ethnic or religious backgrounds. The CRE has seen
that this kind of effort from established communities to new arrivals
aids and assists their integration or absorption into British
society. However, the responsibility for integration or absorption
should not rest primarily with communities and voluntary organizations
but with the Government and statutory agencies who should work
in partnership with these communities.
Question 2: Please provide further information
the CRE's views on the effectiveness of the PCC in dealing with
reporting of asylum issues.
16. The pejorative conceptualisation of
asylum-seekers is reflected in views in the media and in public
attitude surveys (British Attitudes Survey, 21st Edition, 2004-05,
Chapter 7). These pejorative views highlight one of the reasons
for Government policy direction. However, as indicated in the
question, we agree that there has been insufficient public education
and campaigning to counter myths and negative interpretations
of evidence that would counter racial tension.
17. In relation to the PCC, the CRE has
an ongoing dialogue with the Press Complaints Commission (PCC).
18. The CRE's Director of Communications
met with the Director of the PCC on 29 January 2004 and with both
the Chair and Director of the PCC on 7 June 2004. A further meeting,
also attended by the CRE Chair, was held on 11 October 2004.
19. On 3 March 2004 the CRE wrote to the
PCC Code Committee requesting that they consider the following
when carrying out their full-scale review of the Code of Practice:
(i) Broadening the clause on discrimination
to encourage newspapers to consider the effect that language and
tone of their reporting has on inciting racial tensions in communities.
(ii) Broadening the clause on discrimination
to reflect groups, such as asylum seekers, refugees, and Gypsies
and Travellers as well as individuals identified by reference
to their race or colour.
(iii) Broadening the clause on accuracy to
state that reports on asylum seekers, refugees or Gypsies and
Travellers must accurately reflect the status of those concerned.
20. The letter also stated that the CRE
does not think that the guidance notes on asylum seekers and refugees
go far enough in insisting that editors and reporters must be
accurate on this issue.
21. The PCC rejected the requests, but agreed
to include additional guidance on these issues in the advisory
notes that are sent to journalists. We are in the process of setting
up a meeting with the PCC to discuss progress on this matter.
Question 3: Please provide further information
on the lobbying which the CRE has been undertaking for a positive
duty for local authorities to have to provide accommodation for
Gypsies and Travellers.
22. The CRE lobbied for a number of changes
to the Housing Bill (now Act 2004). The clauses put forward by
CRE would have:
(i) obliged local authorities to conduct
an accommodation needs assessment for Gypsies and Travellers;
(ii) given Gypsies and Travellers on local
authority sites protection from eviction and security of tenure;
(iii) obliged local authorities to provide
appropriate accommodation for homeless Gypsies and Travellers;
and
(iv) given local authorities a duty to facilitate
site provision and where necessary to provide suitable and appropriate
accommodation for Gypsies and Travellers.
23. A government amendment with the effect
of (i) was put forward and accepted. Proposed clause (ii) was
partially covered by a government amendment, giving protection
from eviction on all local authority sites, but not security of
tenure. Proposed clause (iii) was not accepted.
THE DUTY
TO PROVIDE
AND FACILITATE
24. This would give local authorities a
legal obligation to provide sites or to facilitate provision of
suitable accommodation (public, private and via registered social
landlords). It moves beyond the 1968 duty by balancing public
and private provision. Sites should be provided in the same way
as other forms of housing—identified in housing needs assessments,
regional housing strategies, regional spatial strategies and local
plans. But this clause would provide a "mainstreaming plus"
element, ensuring that where authorities fail to provide sites
they could be challenged. Both the draft committee on the Housing
Bill and the select committee holding an inquiry into Gypsy and
Traveller sites recommended that the government introduce a statutory
duty. The CRE's clause was supported by ACPO, LGA, GLA the Gypsy
and Traveller law reform coalition, Shelter, the Children's Society
and others.
25. The Government did not accept the CRE
clause, or the select committee's recommendation on a duty. Instead
it has announced that it intends to integrate site provision into
the new planning system, whereby Gypsy and Traveller site needs
are assessed at the local level alongside housing need; these
site needs are reflected in regional spatial and regional housing
strategies; and locations for sites are identified in local plans.
26. CRE supports this mainstreaming approach
as it sends out a clear message about the need to meet the accommodation
needs of all communities. However, it is essential that this is
robustly enforced and that authorities do adequately identify
need and sites at the local level. We feel that the statutory
duty we proposed (which was intended to underpin, and not to replace
this new system) would have provided an important safeguard. It
would also have ensured that, where Gypsies and Travellers were
unable to provide for themselves, local authorities would be obliged
to provide for them. The new system does not contain this public
provision safeguard, and risks leaving the needs of the most vulnerable
members of Gypsy and Traveller communities unmet—particularly
as there remains no obligation to provide appropriate accommodation
for homeless Gypsies and Travellers.
| 
