The ministers have been accused of paying more than مل 3 million in taxpayers’ money to install a portacabin at the site of the Earlwood removal center in North Bedfordshire late last year. 187 with intent to reside. Asylum seekers there.
Home Secretary Priti Patel Initially, the plan went ahead despite strong criticism from MPs and campaigners, who warned that such housing would be “completely unsuitable” and that residents would struggle to access legal and health services in remote areas. Can
Two months after site construction began, Plans droppedThe Home Office said it no longer needed additional capacity.
The decision came a day before the department. Due to being taken to court On behalf of lawyers who argued that he had failed to obtain planning permission or assess the necessary implications prior to the construction of the refugee camp.
Freedom of Information (FOI) Response to Liberty Investigates Paid 3.175 million for making and renting. The department hired the structure for 13 weeks, during which time it remained vacant.
The basic details of the contract – provided through a government framework for the purchase and lease of prefabricated buildings – have not been published after 10 months, according to Cabinet Office guidelines. A Home Office spokesman said they would be published “on time”.
Shadow Immigration Minister Bambos Chirambos said: “This is a shocking example of the incompetence and wasteful spending of the Home Office. Is lost
Tawfiq Hussain, director of the law firm Duncan Lewis, who was preparing to challenge the use of the camp, said: There was a loss and help was needed. Explain. ”
Previously unknown projects, obtained by Liberty Investigators through information laws, suggest that the site, made up of cramped huts, would have a shower for every eight inhabitants. In the UK, shared homes require guidance for every five occupants.
Tim Noor Hilton, chief executive of Refugee Action, said: “Taking traumatized people into de facto prison camps in the shadow of the infamous Earlwood should never have been considered.
“The government needs to stop wasting taxpayers’ money on malicious and often illegal schemes that try to intimidate and keep people out of sight instead of being safe and integrated in our communities,” he said.
The Home Office is currently moving forward with its new immigration plan, which includes proposals for “reception centers” to provide “basic accommodation” to asylum seekers while their claims are being processed. It also intends to amend the law to allow asylum seekers to be kept at sea while their claims are being processed.
Campaigners are worried about plans to seek large-scale asylum seekers, especially in light of the situation at Napier Barracks, a military site in Folkestone that was rebuilt as a shelter last September. Was, and faced. Strict criticism Failure to meet the basic needs of its residents.
Bella Sanki, director of detention action, said the “reckless spending” on the Earlwood camp was “the result of the government’s addictive response to the protection of refugees, driven by ideology rather than humanity.”
“Their plans to increase the detention and punishment of those seeking protection will put billions of pounds of our money into fraudulent schemes such as the foreign detention of men, women and children,” he added.
“Money will be saved and life will change for the better if the Home Office allows humanitarian treatment and timely resolution of people’s claims.”
It follows a series of revelations about Home Office spending that have raised concerns over the past year. Figures released in July show that the department has paid. compensation 9.3 million in compensation expenses For illegal detention in removal centers in 2020-21 and December. It emerged That it spent 2. 2.3 million on deporting 225 people – ہر 10,000 each.
Rosie Newbugg, a former Labor parliamentary candidate in Velvet Hatfield who campaigned against the Earlwood Plan, said the government had shown “complete moral and political bankruptcy” by wasting millions of pounds in the camp.
A Home Office spokesman said: “There has been an unacceptable increase in the number of migrants crossing the Channel dangerously on planes backed by hateful criminal gangs, which has put pressure on our broken asylum system. Is.
“The government has a legal duty to accommodate asylum seekers who would otherwise be helpless, and we do not apologize for finding every option to do so.”