Independent monitors call for the new government to change immigration detention practices

An independent body tasked with monitoring places of immigration detention under the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 says the new government and Home Office ministers should “call time” on a number of concerning practices that have been allowed to continue year-after-year despite repeated calls for change.

In its 2023-24 annual report published today (13 August 2024), the North East Midlands, Yorkshire & Humberside IMB (Independent Monitoring Board) highlights two concerns that should immediately be changed:

• Home Office rules confiscate medicine from people placed in non-residential short-term holding facilities (STHFs), preventing them from taking prescribed medicines until they are either moved to a residential facility, or released. This can be more than 24 hours later and the Board is concerned that this could lead to a medical emergency. The IMB has called repeatedly for changes to this rule but the Home Office is still reviewing the matter. This is an issue of national concern and, in the Board’s region, affects facilities in Leeds, Sheffield, Leeds Bradford Airport, the Humber ports and Teesport.

• At Swinderby residential STHF in Lincolnshire, reception interviews are conducted in a non-confidential open area and can be overheard. The interviews are essential to ascertain whether arrivals might be suffering from PTSD, or have been the victims of sexual abuse, modern slavery or other exploitation. In previous annual reports, the Board suggested that the facility’s private room could be used for such interviews but this has not been acted on by the Home Office or by Mitie Care & Custody, the operator of the STHF.

Dominic Byrne, Chair of North East Midlands, Yorkshire & Humberside IMB, commented:

“In many cases, we find ourselves having to raise the same concerns time and time again. These issues show a lack of concern for people’s health and wellbeing. In the Board’s view, it is inhumane to remove people’s medicine from them, preventing them from taking their prescribed doses. It is also shameful that interviews covering sensitive and personal matters are conducted in a non-confidential setting and can be overheard.

We are concerned that IMB recommendations on matters like these are either ignored or responded to at a glacial pace. All too often it feels like ‘Groundhog Day’. Many of our recommendations, such as the two we are highlighting, do not require any extra money. What is needed is a changed way of working. We hope that a new team of Home Office ministers will take a fresh approach to the issues that the IMB is raising.”