Skip to content or view screen version

News from Close Down Harmondsworth Campaign

NCADC | 27.06.2002 08:58

Full-scale prison regime to be introduced for asylum seekers

In light of the events at Yarl's Wood sprinklers are going to be installed over the summer. There will be substantial building work and Harmondsworth will be emptied by 50% for several months.

Internal security gates are also going to be installed so that detainees won't be free to wander round the centre and engage in free association, one of the few pleasures they have. They will be held on designated wings and will have to be escorted to education, recreation and healthcare. It has been stated that more staff will be employed to cope with this and a tannoy may be installed. However,
considering the current lack of staff, which results in very long waiting times for visitors, one visitor recently waited four hours, it is doubtful if anything will improve.

The regime will change too, for the worse. At the moment there are "standard" and "enhanced" regimes. The difference between these will be broadened with a possible curtailment of visiting hours for those on "standard" regime. A demotion to "standard" regime will be used as a punishment. Of the new wings, one will be for people with removal
directions and one will be for 'long-termers'. So much for the government's assertion that people are only held pending removal.

The Home Office Contract Monitor plans a meeting with the groups which visit Harmondsworth to explain the changes when they are finally decided and to ask for opinions, but wouldn't say whether these changes are because of demands from the centre's insurers, or when the insurance is up for renewal.

He has also stated that, post-Yarl's Wood, there is a policy of separating large groups of people of the same nationality, or groups who are 'disruptive'. He said that centres don't make this decision, this resides with the Home Office, although they can make representations to him about who they would like to be moved and he can pass them on, Immigration outside the centre decide.

The Contract Monitor also commented on the reporting of people whose health would be injuriously affected by continued detention, just about all of them I would have thought. He said healthcare staff were aware of their responsibility in this area, although that is very much open to doubt, but the definition appears ungenerous as this procedure has only been used once to release someone. Also it is still not clear when a resident psychiatrist will be employed, so who is going to make the assessments. He said people are welcome to get their own medicals done, but didn't explain how this could be achieved. There
are constant complaints about a perceived lack of proper medical care.

In addition it was said that women more than 7 months pregnant would not be detained because commercial airlines will not carry them. Presumably if they can persuade the airlines to carry them these women will also be locked up. There has been a report of a pregnant woman with an eleven month old child being held. In cases where aircraft are chartered and there are medical personnel on board (usually in the case of Eastern European countries)women over 7 months pregnant may be detained.

It has also been reported that Immigration Officers in the centre have the responsibility to complete NASS forms for accommodation for people with imminent bail hearings. The Contract Monitor said they are aware of their responsibility and have the forms in the centre, but considering their lack of sympathy with detainees one wonders how diligent they will be.

Work has started on a new centre adjacent to the existing one. The contract has not yet been awarded but it is planned to be based on a prison design with galleried units and will hold about 400. It is intended that the most 'disruptive' people in the detention estate will be held there. It's going to be called IDC Longford.

We must step up the campaign to close these centres and end this abuse of human rights!

Ray Barkley
Close Down Harmondsworth Campaign

NCADC
- e-mail: ncadc@ncadc.org.uk
- Homepage: http://www.ncadc.org.uk/

Comments

Hide the following 7 comments

not before time

27.06.2002 14:26

Don't want them escaping or setting light to place before they're deported, would we?

taxpayer


dear taxpayer

28.06.2002 16:47

Okay pal, explain this to me:

Why should I have to pay extra tax to fund all these detention camps and deportations? Why can't we let folk come and work, so they pay tax rather than costing it?

Face it; not only is the current policy brutal and racist, but it also costs a fortune. Everyone loses!

(unless, I suppose, you find suffering entertaining)

also a taxpayer


Keep Harmondsworth!

30.06.2002 14:05

What you people don't realise, is that a lot of immigration detainees are actually very nasty people.
People with violent tendencies towards women, people with criminal convictions who've left there own country to escape prosecution (not persecution), rapists, sometimes even murderers, drug smugglers etc.
Ok, so many of them may not have imminent removal directions but releasing them would be harmful to society.

And you think Harmondsworth should be closed!?

In the know.....


cage everybody!

30.06.2002 20:00

What you are forgetting, intheknow, is that there are nasty people all over the world, and that includes dear old Blighty, shocking as that may sound.

So, the only logical safety measure, I believe, is to lock everyone up. Starting with the foreigners and the weird ones. Preventative measures. It's so simple. Either that or kill everybody in a nuclear armageddon type scenario.

But what kind of politician is going to consider nuclear war or even locking people up in case they do something bad?

Clampdown Kim


Arms Trade

01.07.2002 14:23

Someone needs to highlight the link between refugees and the inernational arms trade! It is the arms trade which is fuelling wars around the world and adding to the refugee crisis!

steelgate


Good point

02.07.2002 22:41

Steelgate has a point when he/she says that there is a link between the asylum crisis and the arms trade, because it's the arms trade that is causing the very situations that lead to them seeking asylum in the first place. If the people of Britain really want to reduce the number who are seeking asylum here, they should be supporting campagins to stop the wars conflicts, and extreme hardship that causes them to claim asylum in the first place. And before anyone goes on about bogus asylums seekers, I don't deny that there is a minority of people who come here to milk the system, however in my view the overwhelming majority have every reason to be here, but the current system treats them as guilty until proven innocent. Really the reason that Britain tends to get the majority of asylum seekers in the EU is that many other EU countries have tougher asylum laws, so people tend to go for Britain because they can't get asylum in France, Germany etc. It's high time that the EU dropped this "Fortress Europe" nonsense and took resposibity for these asylum seekers, rather than leaving it all to one of the most densely populated countries in the EU. By the way, this doesn't mean that we have to become tougher on asylum seekers, on the contary even Britain's asylum policy is too harsh and unfair on the legitimate refugees.

Thomas J


too right

05.07.2002 15:12

Steelgate, you are spot on with your comment about the arms trade being linked to the asylum crisis, since it's the arms that are going into the poor countries that are causing the very wars and repressive regimes that are forcing these people to claim asylum elsewhere.

Some people wonder why Britain is such a huge target, since we are a densely populated island in comparision to much larger countries in the EU, such as France and Germany. The problem is that many EU countries have even harsher asylum laws than our own (the 'Fortress Europe' mentality), and the UK is seen as a 'soft touch' (I'm not saying that's a bad thing). It's high time that the rest of the EU woke up to the fact that THEY have a responsibilty, as developed countries, to accept their role in helping out these people (Britain should still do it's bit as well), especially since their exploitation of the 'developing' countries for their own capitailist ends is a root cause of the asylum problem in the first place.

Thomas J