Local Authority Support to People with No ... - Islington Council

have overstayed their visas, have submitted an Article 8 ECHR application to the Home Office and
are homeless. Case law has established that in such circumstances there is likely to be a duty on
local authorities to support these families under Section 17 Children Act 1989 1 and this can go on for
years whilst a decision is being made by the UKBA on their immigration claim.
The report makes several recommendations to the UKBA, including: families who have overstayed
their visa with outstanding Article 8 ECHR applications should be eligible for Section 4 Immigration
and Asylum Act support from the UKBA. This would give the UKBA a greater incentive to make
quicker and more timely decisions on these cases. The UKBA should make it official policy to
prioritise local authority-supported cases in the same way as cases who receive asylum support; and
they must ensure an effective start-to-end process by funding voluntary returns and carrying out
enforced removals where appropriate.
Local authorities are advised to record, monitor and review their NRPF cases. Policies and
procedures within local authorities should be developed to ensure statutory duties to people with
NRPF are met. A coordinated approach is needed across local authority departments and locality
teams, and between local authorities and external organisations to facilitate the resolution of NRPF
cases.
The report ‘Social Services Support to People with No Recourse to Public Funds: A National Picture’
can be accessed on the NPRF Network website:
http://www.islington.gov.uk/DownloadableDocuments/CommunityandLiving/Pdf/equalitydocs/NRPF_
national_picture_final.pdf
The slides from this presentation are available on the following webpage:
http://www.islington.gov.uk/community/equalitydiversity/refugees_migrants/nrpf_network/events.asp
Hugo Tristram – Development Officer, Refugee Services, British
Red Cross
Hugo summarised the findings and recommendations from the 2010 British Red Cross Report ‘Not
gone, but forgotten’. The report is based on a survey of 101 destitute refused asylum seekers. The
report argues that there is an urgent need for a more humane asylum system in the UK.
Specific ‘client groups’ identified in the report include: refused asylum seekers, new refugees
(becoming destitute when support is withdrawn after 28 days of a positive decision), those
experiencing bureaucratic delay in accessing asylum support and other vulnerable migrants with
NRPF such as victims of trafficking or domestic violence. Impacts of destitution include poor physical
health and malnutrition, homelessness and ‘sofa surfing’ (69%), vulnerability to abuse and severe
anxiety from living in limbo.
Hugo explained that Section 4 support is not sufficient for families and children (who comprised 24%
of cases in the sample) because of the level of support provided and because it is administered in
vouchers rather than cash.
Hugo discussed the issue of destitution arising as a product of the asylum system and what local
authorities and the voluntary sector can offer to people in this situation, particularly when legal aid is
diminishing. He argued that a start-to-end asylum support process was needed, that asylum seekers
1 Clue v Birmingham City Council [2010]
NRPF Network/British Red Cross Conference Report June 2011 6