COUNCILS have “lost confidence” in a scheme aimed at housing asylum seekers because the UK Government has failed to support them, MPs say.
The Home Affairs Select Committee says some could pull out altogether after being left to carry a “disproportionate share” of costs and pressures.
READ MORE: We must make sure to keep politics away from extradition
And, in a report published today, it slams Sajid Javid’s department for inaction over the quality of accommodation used for vulnerable people, saying it must show “greater urgency” over the “degrading conditions” faced by some.
Committee member Stuart McDonald, the SNP spokesperson on immigration, asylum and border control, said: “Two years on from the last Home Affairs report into asylum accommodation, there has been very little evidence of improvement.
“Local authorities have lost confidence in the system because the Government has failed to listen and respond to their concerns.
“Glasgow, Manchester, Wolverhampton and communities across the UK have done so much to support those seeking asylum in the UK.
READ MORE: Glasgow asks Scottish Government for cash to house destitute asylum seekers
“Yet, the Government has done little to support them.”
Glasgow City Council has repeatedly slammed the UK Government over lack of support in this area.
Last week councillors agreed to ask the Scottish Government to fund emergency housing for destitute asylum seekers and migrants in the city.
However, the MP’s report makes it clear that dissatisfaction there is also felt around other UK councils participating in the asylum seeker dispersal scheme.
The paper says the Tory administration will find itself in “very severe difficulties” if they decide to withdraw from the voluntary programme.
READ MORE: In a city of solidarity, there's more to be done for asylum seekers
The committee stated: “The Government must therefore accept that it is not unreasonable for authorities who have, in many cases, supported dispersal for the best part of two decades and have carried a disproportionate share of the unfunded costs and pressures, to request more equitable treatment.
“It has reached the point where local authorities are contemplating withdrawal.”
Many aspects of the dispersal policy have attracted criticism.
A report from the same committee last year found applicants are concentrated in a small number of areas, placing undue pressure on local schools and healthcare services.
Meanwhile, the latest assessment said the number of asylum seekers accommodated under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 at any one time has increased steadily since 2012 – but the Home Office has not acted to persuade more regional authorities to give them shelter.
It stated: “The number of local authorities which have agreed to participate in dispersal has not, however, increased correspondingly.”
The previous report recorded that, in September 2016, 121 authorities out of 453 (27%) had section 95 asylum accommodation within their boundaries.
READ MORE: Glasgow leads as Scotland meets Syrian refugee target three years ahead of schedule
As of last month, 150 authorities had come forward offering to take part, with 129 participating, according to figures given to the committee.
Meanwhile, successful bidders for asylum accommodation contracts will be revealed in the New Year.
Responding to the report, the Home Office said it is engaging with areas that to date have not participated in asylum dispersal.
A spokesperson added that it monitors accommodation used, fining contractors who fail to address reported issues within relevant timescales.
The department said: “We continue to work closely with local authorities on asylum dispersal and have committed to comprehensive engagement with the Local Government Association and Local Authority Chief Executives to review the process.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here