Skip to main content

Asylum seeker support move quashed


Asylum seeker support move quashed
Campaigners have won a High Court battle challenging the level of government financial support for "struggling asylum seekers".
A judge quashed the decision by Home Secretary Theresa May not to increase the level at which cash payments are made for essential living needs and ordered her to reconsider.
The ruling was victory for a number of organisations led by Refugee Action, which said there was a striking disparity between subsistence payments for asylum seekers compared with those given to people receiving income support.
Mr Justice Popplewell, sitting in London, said Parliament was told last June that the level of support for adult asylum-seekers and their children would be frozen for the financial year 2013/14.
The judge said it was a decision to set rates at a level which involved "a reduction in real terms from what was regarded in 2007 as the bare minimum level necessary to avoid destitution".
He ruled the decision legally flawed, adding: "In my judgment, the information used by the Secretary of State to set the rate of asylum support was simply insufficient to reach a rational decision to freeze rates."
He ordered the Home Secretary to reach a new decision by August 9 on the amounts to be paid under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.
He said the amounts should be decided in accordance with the guidance given in his judgment.
The ruling was a victory for a number of organisations led by Refugee Action, including the Children's Society, Freedom from Torture, Still Human Still Here, and the Refugee Council.
They took action after research showed that many asylum-seekers are struggling to cope on the current rate of support.
The support is paid to individuals while they await a final decision on their asylum applications. During this period the immigration rules do not normally allow them to take jobs to support themselves.
Evidence of their alleged difficulties was provided for the legal challenge by asylum applicants who were later accepted as refugees or given other forms of permission to remain in the UK.
The Red Cross and Helen Bamber Foundation also provided evidence of the impact poverty was said to be having on them, with statements submitted from torture victims still suffering from trauma, parents with young children, and those living with a health condition.
The campaigners say that when the support system was introduced, the Government stated that the level of support to be provided under section 95 was to be set at 70% of income support levels for adults.
Until 2008, the rates were broadly increased in line with increases made to income support payments. Then the link was broken, and since April 2011 there had been no increase at all.
It was submitted that this had led to a striking disparity between the level of support provided to asylum-seekers compared with those given income support.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

[MigrantCause.com] Fwd: MAURITANIA: UN EXPERT WELCOMES NEW ANTI-SLAVERY LAW, SAYS EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT IS KEY

      Web version    New York  Aug 21 2015 1:00PM    UN News Centre with breaking news from the UN News Service  Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery Urmila Bhoola. UN Photo/Jean-Marc Ferré (file) MAURITANIA: UN EXPERT WELCOMES NEW ANTI-SLAVERY LAW, SAYS EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT IS KEY While applauding the adoption of a new anti-slavery law in Mauritania that doubles, from 10 to 20 years, the maximum prison...

John Major praises 'guts and drive' of immigrants in the UK

John Major praises 'guts and drive' of immigrants in the UK Comments: Mr John Major  is right about migrants in the UK and worldwide. Most of  migrants  leave their countries as asylum seekers fleeing persecution, lack of freedom and human rights abuses. Other leave their countries just to look for new opportunities. Arriving in the new countries such as UK , they work hard to survive. In most cases they have left their families and relatives. They have to share their earnings with the people their left behind and to support the education of their relatives.  They live in disadvantageous situations because they  are not  in the same situation like the British people who  have families that  help them to set up a business for example, pay their education, help them to raise funding or to get a bank loan, to inherit houses and other assets. They face institutional discrimination because most of the...

[New post] Daily News and Updates from ReliefWeb 01/29/2016

Paul V Dudman posted: " OECD and UNHCR back increased refugee integration - World | ReliefWeb via ReliefWeb Headlines http://reliefweb.int/ tags: IFTTT Feedly ReliefWeb " Respond to this post by replying above this line New post on Refugee Archives @ UEL Daily New...