I suppose we knew most of it: that direct provision hostels for asylum seekers – which I see as refugee holding camps – are totally degrading, and that the ‘comfort money’ allowance paid to asylum seekers is insufficient for even the most basic needs. What was less obvious is what the new report by Free Legal Advice Centres (Flac) refers to as “the direct provision industry”.
According to a previous Flac report published in 2003, direct provision “is gravely detrimental to the human rights of a group of people lawfully present in the country, and to whom the Government has moral and legal obligations under national and international law.”
The latest report draws very damning conclusions in relation to the holding camps system, introduced in April 2000 and not revised since.
Importantly, although the number of asylum applications has gone down in recent years, the number of people living in direct provision – 6,640 by the end of October 2009 – has remained high. Importantly, too, 32 per cent of them have been living in direct provision for more than three years.
According to Flac, the system lacks transparency. The number of inspections required by the Reception and Integration Agency (RIA), the body in charge of these camps, has not been carried out, and information collected at information clinics is not recorded. Not keeping a register of complaints seemingly allows the RIA to claim a lack of awareness of the shortfalls of the system, even as anecdotal reports from residents speak of badly serviced premises, lack of cleanliness, tight supervision, prevention of visits and other complaints.
The Flac report further records the reduction in welfare payments to asylum seekers, including child benefit, which was previously available to them. This, in tandem with the paucity of the ‘comfort allowance’ and the prohibition to work or seek third level education, creates huge problems for residents, many of whom are highly qualified.
In addition, asylum seekers are often relocated without consideration to their mental health, religious or ethnic background.
The report makes important recommendations in relation to asylum seekers welfare rights, respect for human rights and proper running of the hostels.
But perhaps most shocking is the revelation that the costly direct provision system enables commercially-run providers to make money on the back of asylum seekers, though details of the contracts between the RIA and private companies are not disclosed.
Three of these commercial companies – Bridgestock Ltd, East Coast Catering Ltd and Millstreet Equestrian Services Ltd – are, according to Flac, responsible for 40 per cent of the accommodation of all asylum seekers.
Yet again, looking after the weakest in our society – children in religious institutions, people with mental illness, the elderly and asylum seekers – becomes a moneymaking instrument, badly inspected and monitored.
The Flac report lists a variety of human rights – the right to housing, to family life, to health, to work, to education, to freedom of movement, to freedom of association and freedom of expression – all of which are infringed in these holding camps.
Yet the problem remains hidden, as most Irish people prefer not to think about these people who – for reasons of persecution, war or torture – find themselves legally seeking asylum here.
Dr Ronit Lentin is head of the MPhil in Ethnic and Racial Studies at the Department of Sociology at Trinity College Dublin. Her column appears fortnightly in Metro Éireann
