Latest News from Positive Action in Housing

Land of no return

June 12, 2008 · 25 Comments

All across the country, communities are organising themselves to stop their friends and neighbours from being deported. From lobbying the Home Office to foiling dawn raids, the resistance will stop at nothing to keep failed asylum seekers safe in Britain. By Rachel Stevenson and Harriet Grant

Watch Video online

‘We had our own little code to warn them it was a dawn raid and to get out. There’s more than one way of getting out of the flats - there’s two staircases and two lifts, so you could play games if you knew how. If we were a thorn in their flesh, then good.”

Sixty-seven-year-old Jean Donnachie flashes a mischievous smile as she describes the tactics she and her neighbours used every day to thwart immigration officers trying to arrest asylum seekers on her estate in Glasgow. A grandmother and former cashier who has lived on the Kingsway for 20 years, she makes an unlikely resistance fighter. But when she talks about how the estate took on the Home Office, there is a gleam of defiance in her eyes.

At first sight, the Kingsway seems an unwelcoming place. Wind whips around the 15-storey tower blocks, the windows in the lobby doors are broken, the corridors are gloomy and bare. Remnants of police incident tape flicker from lampposts and prominent surveillance cameras add an air of menace to its pathways. There is little to dispel the sense that this is one of Britain’s forgotten pockets of poverty.

But when hundreds of asylum seekers were placed there to live - often for years - while their cases were processed, they were warmly embraced. “We had been really going downhill - a lot of antisocial families were being put here. But after a year of the asylum seekers coming, the atmosphere became completely different,” Donnachie says. “These people couldn’t do enough for you, and I thought this was wonderful - it was like going back to when I was a child and you could leave the key in the door and if you needed help someone would come round.”

The estate became home for hundreds of families escaping persecution and torture in places such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Algeria, Uganda and Congo. Most had their request for asylum in the UK turned down, and when the Home Office began coming to the estate at 5am to remove them, Donnachie and the rest of the residents looked on in horror. “It was like watching the Gestapo - men with armour, going in to flats with battering rams. I’ve never seen people living in fear like it,” says Donnachie. “I saw a man jump from two storeys up when they came for him and his family. I stood there and I cried, and I said to myself, ‘I am not going to stand by and watch this happen again.’”

She got together with her friend Noreen and organised the residents into daily dawn patrols, looking out for immigration vans. When the vans arrived, a phone system would swing in to action, warning asylum seekers to escape.

The whole estate pitched in, gathering in large crowds in the early-morning dark to jeer at immigration officials as they entered the tower blocks. On more than one occasion, the vans left the estate empty - the people they had come for had got out in time and were hidden by the crowd. The estate kept this up for two years until forced removals stopped.

But what happened on the Kingsway is not unique. Over the past few years there has been a growing resistance to the government’s attempts to deport failed asylum seekers. From Manchester, from Sheffield, from Belfast, from Bristol, the Home Office is being bombarded with requests from British people all over the country asking for asylum seekers to be given another chance.

One reason why deportations are being challenged is that, despite reports to the contrary, many asylum-seeking families have successfully integrated. Inefficiencies in the system have meant cases have taken years to process, giving families, in particular, the chance to put down roots. Many of their children were born in Britain, go to school here and have close friendships with local children. The government does not allow asylum seekers to work, so many put in hours of voluntary work to occupy their time. They have forged strong links with locals, who have helped them fight to stay.

They believe this resistance is now paying off. Under pressure to speed up removals, the government has introduced a new system for processing claims and is clearing a backlog of up to 450,000 cases. It is called the Legacy Case Resolution Programme, and the latest available figures from the Home Office show that at least a third of people going through it are given leave to remain. In Scotland, more than 80% of these “legacy” cases are winning asylum status. In order to get status under the programme, applicants must show they have local support. For many communities, this is a victory.

Donnachie and her neighbours are now celebrating as families on the estate get good news. Safia, a mother of three and a refugee from Pakistan’s tribal region, is sure that without her friends she would have been sent back. “They were not asylum seekers but they want to help us. They used to come out every morning to protect us. If they didn’t raise their voice for us, maybe we wouldn’t have got our status.” After more than five years in the UK, Safia and her children can stay permanently.

Donnachie is proud of their achievement. “If what we did took early mornings, standing in the cold, standing in the rain, well, it was well worth it. It all came to a fantastic end and I’m a happy woman, and a better woman for it,” she says.

The struggle on the Kingsway has formed part of a Scotland-wide fight against detentions and deportations that is still going on for many under threat of removal.

Just a few miles away, for example, volunteers have taken over an old cornershop and turned it in to a hub of activity helping hundreds of families to stay in the UK. Known as Unity, it keeps a register of asylum seekers coming in and out of the local Home Office building, where they must, by law, report regularly. It is while reporting that many are detained and taken to a detention centre. If they don’t come back to Unity after reporting, staff at Unity raise the alarm and begin a campaign to release them.

“The idea was that there would be local people right outside the Home Office to help asylum seekers if they were detained,” explains Phil Jones, one of Unity’s founders. The strategy seems to work - a whiteboard on the wall lists names of people in detention centres awaiting deportation, but scrawled next to almost all of them are triumphant updates such as “FLIGHT STOPPED!!!” and “BACK IN GLASGOW!!!”. Up to 50 families a week in Glasgow are now getting permanent leave to remain.

But it is not just in Scotland that asylum seekers have found sanctuary in unlikely places. At the back of the Asda car park in Bury, Greater Manchester, is the Mosses community centre. Inside, along with the sewing group and the creche, Sue Arnall is working hard to protect the asylum-seeking families in the area. Born and bred in Bury and proud of it, the retired teacher was horrified to learn that children in her town were living in fear of being sent to countries some of them had never even visited. Like Donnachie, she felt compelled to act.

She and other women at the community centre mobilised local support, organising marches, getting local schools on board, barraging the local MP and helping asylum seekers with their legal cases. “Most of the children are safe now,” she says, “but not all of them. And there are new ones arriving all the time who we need to fight for.”

Families here are also benefiting from the legacy programme, but not until after years at the hands of a system taht Arnall says is cruel. “It is set up to believe that you’re corrupt or that you’re an economic migrant - rather than asking about what made people leave their homes and their families. These people are fleeing for their lives and, as humane people, we should make room for them.”

She is certain their protests played a part in getting the legacy programme started. “I think we’ve made it very hard for the Home Office to remove families that are settled. And every MP up and down the country will know that, because they will have been lobbied in the way we’ve lobbied ours. There must have been pressure to sort this out in a humane way, but to keep it quiet because if the Daily Mail finds out about this, it will be unpopular. I think they are wrong. The government should be promoting the positive aspects of having refugees in your community.”

This belief is echoed in other parts of the country. In the Shetlands, islanders came together to stop a resident Burmese family being deported, spending months demonstrating until the Minn family won the right to stay. “We won’t put up with this sort of injustice here,” Brian Smith, one of the campaigners, says. “The Home Office only seems to care about what the gutter press thinks, and doesn’t want to listen to the rest of us.”

In Belfast, the plight of two Nigerian families facing deportation united both sides of a society scarred by sectarianism. Campaigners mustered support across Northern Ireland, but the families were not allowed to stay, leaving the community furious. They, too, say the government is pandering to one side of the asylum debate.

Encouraging these local groups is the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns (NCADC). Emma Ginn, one of the NCADC volunteers, holds workshops all over the country on how to fight Home Office decisions. “I can’t prove it, I can’t quantify it, but I’ve been doing this for four years and I know campaigns do work,” Ginn says. “There are people in Britain who wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for a campaign. We have to keep fighting decisions.”

But as well as resisting deportations, another aspect of government asylum policy is under attack from British people - that of leaving failed asylum seekers destitute in the UK. Apart from families with children, most people lose their accommodation and benefits once their case is refused, as government rules dictate there must be “no recourse to public funds” for those it believes are “bogus”. Failed asylum seekers are told to leave the country voluntarily or face being forcibly removed. Thousands are too frightened to return, and it can take years for the Home Office to arrange a forced removal, leaving them homeless and destitute in Britain. There is, however, a growing movement of individuals and church groups helping failed asylum seekers eke out an existence here, feeding and housing them after they have been told they have no right to stay.

One such operation can be found in the centre of Sheffield every Wednesday. As shoppers bustle through the busy streets, a band of benign-looking middle-class retirees sit behind desks in the back room of a church handing out envelopes to waiting asylum seekers. They contain £20 in cash, most of it gathered from church collections. For many, it is all they have to live on.

Organising it all is Robert Spooner, a former engineer, who abandoned all plans for a restful retirement when he heard about the destitute asylum seekers in his city. His life is now devoted to raising money for them, believing the government is wrongly denying people fleeing persecution the right to sanctuary in Britain. “Some of the people living on the streets here can’t go back,” he says. “You can imagine what would happen to people going back to Zimbabwe if they were MDC members, or to Iran if they are lesbian or gay, or if they are on the wrong side of a war lord in Afghanistan. These people face real danger.”

Tendero is one of those who would rather be destitute in Britain than face persecution, torture and possibly worse, in his homeland of Zimbabwe. He was a successful businessman until his involvement with the MDC party led to threats on his life. “I thought if I went to England, then I might find a fresh start and come back to Zimbabwe when things are OK to help rebuild my country,” he says as he helps out at Spooner’s drop-in centre. His case has failed and he now lives hand-to-mouth in the UK, sleeping on friends’ floors.

“We look to Britain as the champion of human rights but what I have seen is people being treated as less than human. I tell my friends and family back home this is what my life is like, but they don’t believe the British, with the international image they have, are capable of this.”

Spooner is also staggered such a policy exists. Like many of those involved in helping asylum seekers, the 69-year-old is a committed Christian and believes this choice of “leave or starve” is inhumane. “The government is using destitution as a tool to lower the number of asylum seekers here. It’s totally against any moral stand you have,” he says. “It makes me ashamed, ashamed to be British.”

As well as handing out cash, Spooner’s organisation, Assist, also has a system for finding shelter for failed asylum seekers in the suburbs of Sheffield. A retired couple spent their life savings on two houses for Assist to use rent-free, and Assist also has a list of families and individuals who will let failed asylum seekers sleep in their spare rooms. Rachel and Malcolm Savage are GPs who live in Sheffield with their two young daughters and Margaret, a failed asylum seeker from Uganda. She says she cannot return, and was homeless until Assist asked the Savages to take her in. “We have the space and we think that while Margaret is here, we should help her rather than see her sleep in the street. It’s not that we are against the government having a robust immigration system, but there must be a better, more humane way of doing it than this,” says Malcolm.

Groups such as Positive Action in Housing in Glasgow and the BOAZ trust in Manchester also run lists of families and individuals who will house and feed asylum seekers who have been told to leave the country. Similar groups exist in most cities, giving basic sustenance and shelter to people the government wants removed. These networks are now starting to link up, city to city, coordinating their efforts to fight destitution.

The Home Office stands by its system. Those it turns down, it says, have had a fair hearing and have failed to prove they are at risk. It says it must operate a tough removal policy, and that Britain must not support fraudulent claimants.

But Donnachie, Spooner, Jones and Arnall, and many more like them, believe the asylum system is fundamentally unjust. They say Britain is denying asylum to people genuinely in danger. Senior bishops are similarly critical of the system, as is the Independent Asylum Commission, headed by a former appeal court judge, and the Joint Committee on Human Rights, which have both described Britain’s asylum system as shameful. Outrage at the government’s asylum policy spans Britain’s social and political spectrum.

For many communities, asylum seekers are, simply, highly valued citizens they want to hang on to. Arnall looks around the busy, thriving Mosses centre with pride. “This just used to be an old community centre in a poor area. Now it is so rich,” she says, delighted to have families from all over the world leading safe, happy lives in Bury.

And as Donnachie sets up for the weekly women’s group she runs on the Kingsway, she, too, says the benefits are all hers. “We’ve so many people from so many different cultures and places here now,” she says. “We’re the ones who are gaining - wonderful people, wonderful families with children who want to do things for this country. Britain’s going to be a better place for them, not a worse place, so I just don’t know what the problem is.”

Claiming asylum: How the figures add up

There are between 283,500 and 450,000 failed asylum seekers in the UK.

At least 26,000 failed asylum seekers are destitute, living on Red Cross food parcels.
23,430 new claims for asylum were lodged in 2007 and 73% were refused.

Last year, 13,595 failed asylum seekers including their dependents were deported.

During 2006, 3,500 adults and 1,300 children were detained in dawn raids.

Around 27,000 people are put in detention centres every year.

There have been at least 12 suicides in detention centres.

The UK takes 3% of the worldwide refugee population and ranks 14th in the EU for the number of asylum applications

No one monitors what happens to people who are returned.

· Sources: The Home Office, Refugee Council, British Red Cross, Amnesty International, National Audit Office, NCADC

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/jun/13/immigration.immigrationpolicy

Categories: Appeal · Deportation · Detention · against dawn raids · asylum decisions · asylum seekers · attacks on asylum seekers · dawn raids · destitution · ethnic minority communities

25 responses so far ↓

  • shuck // June 13, 2008 at 6:59 pm

    Why would anyone want to stop FAILED ASYLUM SEEKERS from being removed?

    I find it extremely disturbing that ill-informed members of the gereral public would attempt to help prevent what is a legal removal of families and individuals from the UK.

    I am of the view that those members of the public who are responsible for this are either lacking in knowledge relating to asylum or are hoodwinked by organisations such as PAIH o believe that these Liars, Cheats and Thieves have been hard done by.

    The sooner the Government allows the BIA to comment on individual cases which would highlight the ridiculous asylum cases considered the sooner the public at large would realise that it is folly to support these people.

  • shuck // June 13, 2008 at 7:20 pm

    I must comment as I have before on this forum that I am of the view that the UK should be a safe haven for those genuine asylum seekers seeking international protection and should be welcome with open arms.

    However it is clear that the asylum system of the UK is being abused by bogus asylum seekers and economic migrants to such an extent that we are now being flooded by many who see the UK as an easy option to housing and benefits.

    If an asylum seeker deserves asylum he/she will be given it. This should be realised.

    We as UK Citizens must realise that organisatons such as PAIH do nothing to ensure that only genuine asylum seekers are supported.

    They blindly support peolple who do not deserve it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Ali // June 14, 2008 at 11:59 am

    Shuck: You ask “Why would anyone want to stop FAILED ASYLUM SEEKERS from being removed”? I suggest you read the above article again, where the reasons why people do so are clearly outlined.

    Your other comment of “If an asylum seeker deserves asylum he/she will be given it” once again shows your ignorance and naivety in Asylum issues. If you really are an ex Asylum and Immigration solicitor you would know how ridiculous that statement is.

    Also, if you really are “of the view that the UK should be a safe haven for those genuine asylum seekers seeking international protection and should be welcome with open arms”, why aren’t you still practicing law to help them? I again await your ‘learned’ reply to my question.

  • Angus McKay // June 15, 2008 at 2:05 pm

    ‘There are between 283,500 and 450,000 failed asylum seekers in the UK.’

    Why are there failed asylum seekers in the UK.

    The asylum seekers have entered the UK illegally after having travelled through how many safe countries to get here. To carry on risking life to get to the UK after having reached a safe country negates any asylum claim. It proves that the over-riding aim is not safety, since that has already been achieved, but to get to the UK.

    Nevertheless, the bogus asylum seekers were taken into the UK, given accommodation, weekly sums of money, access to our NHS, education, legal aid et al. The provision of all free can carry on for 3 - 8 years. The asylum seekers are then asked to attend a hearing to determine if they have the right to stay in the UK. Hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers fail the hearing - they then become illegal immigrants.

    Having lived off the British taxpayer for years, how do the failed asylum seekers repay us. Do they accept the legal decisions of the law courts and leave the UK. Not them, they continue to sit on their backsides in our free-to-them accommodation and take all they can con from the British taxpayer.

    Why are they allowed to stay in the UK instead of being immediately deported. Part failure lies with our government. After the hearing, the failed asylum seekers / illegal immigrants are allowed to return to our accommodation. Recent example of this failing was shown by the UK Border Agency who investigated a business and found six illegal workers in employment and the six are now awaiting deportation. Stupid problem created by the UKBA results from the fact that all were released hours after they were arrested. These illegals should have been kept in custody and they and their families should be deported from the UK as speedily as possible. They should not be afforded the opportunity to abscond.

    Anyone or any group(s) assisting the illegals to abscond and go into hiding should be arrested and taken into custody. Legal decisions have been made and the failed illegals must leave the UK when informed to do so - our laws must be adhered to and carried out without obstruction from deluded and not too well educated supporters of ‘asylum seekers’.

  • Michael Woods // June 15, 2008 at 2:55 pm

    shagnus, both of you, people travel through what you and the government label as “safe countries” to get here precisely because those countries are not really safe for displaced persons with little or no recourse to protection.
    You wrote above -
    “To carry on risking life to get to the UK after having reached a safe country…” -
    thus clearly stating your true belief that the intervening countries are not in fact safe. You have again directly contradicted yourself.
    I can tell you from my own experience that the fear of pain and death will cause one to go to any lengths to avoid them especially, as in the case of many asylum seekers, if one has seen it at close quarters.
    I can only suggest but, I feel that an element of personal risk in your very safe lives shagnus would do you no real harm and might indeed generate the capacity for empathy toward those who are different from you and in need.

  • Michael Woods // June 15, 2008 at 3:08 pm

    Good effort shaggy,
    your post above says -
    “our laws must be adhered to and carried out without obstruction from deluded and not too well educated supporters of ‘asylum seekers’ -
    Does that mean that obstruction by a supporter who is both deluded and well educated is OK ?
    Or one who is not deluded but not too well educated is also OK ?
    Before that you said-
    “Anyone or any group(s) assisting the illegals to abscond and go into hiding should be arrested and taken into custody”-
    So, if we do either but not both its OK too ?
    Your grasp of the finer points never fails to impress me shaggy, keep it up and I’m sure you’ll convert even the fairer-minded folk such as Kenneth Mackay.

  • shuck // June 15, 2008 at 3:49 pm

    What is your point Woodned?

    It is a known fact that many asylum seekers travel through Europe en route to the UK. So can you explain what countries in Europe you are referring to as not safe? France, Spain, Italy which?

    Unless an asylum seeker enters the UK on a direct flight or by sea, they have to enter mainland Europe, so if it is protection they are seeking and not UK benefits why not seek it from the first European country they arrive in?

    Face the facts it is known that the UK is seen as an easy option for those seeking to abuse the asylum system for finncial betterment.

    Ali have you ever been to Coventry?

  • Kenneth Mackay // June 15, 2008 at 8:27 pm

    Behind all the smoke and mirrors Mr Woods there is the valid concern, especially in government, that there are just too many coming in.
    The two posters you mock, however inept they be, do nevertheless represent a point of view held by many.
    Having said that I do wish they would temper their hostility and stick to the issues.

  • Angus McKay // June 15, 2008 at 9:28 pm

    Kenneth Mackay . You are Mr Woods

  • shuck // June 15, 2008 at 9:51 pm

    Kenneth Woodened, enough is enough. Be yourself.

  • Michael Woods // June 17, 2008 at 3:50 pm

    Mr Mackay,
    I’m sure you are sincere, you seem a reasonable man. But you must understand that the people who normally post comments against asylum-seekers are of the ilk of shagnus above, irrational, xenophobic and somewhat rabid.
    Furthermore they never ever say anything different to the above. I understand completely why you would wish to distance yourself from them whilst maintaining a rational stance. The shagnus/sighthill/blockem chimaera will however make that very difficult for you because you will be tarred by the same brush when they inevitably hijack your platform for their own ends.
    They are in fact the best possible argument for immigration in much the same way as the dreadful Margaret Thatcher won the election for the Labour party so long ago.

  • shuck // June 17, 2008 at 5:00 pm

    Woodened,

    Give up the Kenneth Stuff as we all know its you.

    Sad stuff really!!!!!!!

  • Angus McKay // June 19, 2008 at 4:35 pm

    woodened, stupid woodened,

    You appear to have read, but were unable to understand, my comment. You may have read the part which is applicable to you, ‘deluded and not too well educated supporters of ‘asylum seekers’.’ That phrase covers you, stupid woodened, and all the stupid questions you ask.

    Your failure to grasp any points does not surprise me, stupid woodened, keep it up and I’m sure you’ll convert even your other self such as Kenneth Mackay.

    Give us another laugh, tell us about your ‘own experience that the fear of pain and death will cause one to go to any lengths’. Pick a story from one of your war commando picture comics and tell us all about it.

  • Michael Woods // June 19, 2008 at 6:05 pm

    shaggy,
    I refer you to my previous comments.

  • Angus McKay // June 19, 2008 at 6:34 pm

    woodened,

    Whose name would those comments be under, yourself or Kenneth Mackay, or maybe you refer us to the other comments you are posting under other persons’ names on the newspaper forums.

    You never did keep that promise to yourself, did you …….

    Michael Woods // December 28, 2007 at 3:17 pm
    I very, very sorry mr Woods sir and I promise to stop blogging to myself in the New Year.

    You really are mixed up, it’s all turning out very embarrassing for Positive Action In Housing.

  • shuck // June 19, 2008 at 8:10 pm

    Woodened all your comments are NONSENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Kenneth Mackay // June 20, 2008 at 5:01 pm

    Mr Woods I do take your point. Angus McKay and Shuck have had absolutely no good reason to be rude to me, their comments are disgraceful.
    I see a pattern of this throughout their writings and it is obvious they are :
    A) in cahoots.
    B) unreasoning.
    C) not such as one would want to be associated with.
    So, good luck, I will cease to interact with them and I suggest any other, for or against the situation vis-a-vis immigration in the UK, do like wise.
    They are a disgrace.

  • Angus McKay // June 27, 2008 at 9:13 pm

    ok woodened we always knew it was you.

    Pleased to be informed that you will no longer be using your ventriloquist dummy, Kenneth Mackay, to post your stupid comments.

    They are a disgrace.

  • shuck // June 28, 2008 at 12:15 am

    Woodened,

    You are PAIH DUMMY.

  • Kenneth Mackay // June 29, 2008 at 12:46 pm

    Who do you think you are Mr McKay to insult one of whom you know absolutely nothing. Your rantings and insults do in no way enhance or contribute to the real argument. I feel your moderator on PAIH must intervene whenever you overstep the mark and I am truly surprised they have not done so.

  • shuck // June 29, 2008 at 5:55 pm

    Angus is only telling the truth as it is 100% accurate to state that you Kenneth are Old Woodened.

    Because your friend Ali has again abandoned you do you feel that you have to create a fictional charachter to converse with?

    Seek help immediately Woodened!!!!!

  • shuck // June 29, 2008 at 6:00 pm

    Woodened/Kenneth,

    What is your argument on this site?

    It seems to me that you have no argument other than the usual insults directed at those of us who put forward a balanced and reasoned point of view on this site.

  • Kenneth Mackay // July 1, 2008 at 5:40 pm

    Good luck Mr Woods in your endeavour. I disagree with your fundamental position but I see you are a fair and honourable person as I feel am I.
    The sheer rabidity, back-handedness and blind hatred displayed by the Shuck and Angus McKay pair is immensely difficult as they admit of no approach of reasoned debate. I therefore feel that there is no point attempting a dialogue with either of them and I would advise you to waste no further effort but you, of course, will do as you see fit.
    You had said a while ago that Mrs Thatcher the Tory PM had won the election for Labour because she was so widely detested and you compare Shuck and Angus to her. Sorry as I am to say this, I have to agree they do more harm than good and give my side of the argument a very bad name.
    Nevertheless this is still a free country, just, and they, as unhinged as they appear to be, must be given a hearing.

  • shuck // July 3, 2008 at 5:18 pm

    Well said woodened!!!!

    You are a JOKE!!!!!!!!

  • shuck // July 4, 2008 at 5:41 pm

    Woodened, Lets debate the issue here! Where would you like to start? I am really looking forward to having a serious debate with you regarding issues surrounding Asylum and Immigration.

    It will be a welcome change from your usual insults to those of us who offer a fair, reasoned and educated point of view on this site?

    Have you been reading up?

    Bring it on Woodened!!!!

Leave a Comment