CLARE SAMBROOK , 16 July 2012: The appalling Rochdale sexual abuse scandal prompted long-overdue scrutiny of our childrenâs homes. Another national disgrace ripe for exposure is the UK Border Agencyâs serial and repugnant oppression and abuse of vulnerable children over more than a decade. Today OurKingdom publishes Clare Sambrookâs exposĂ© of the Border Agencyâs abuse of children and its relentless misrepresentation of evidence of harm. We call upon Parliament to hold ministers, the Home Office and its ugly agency to account. (The material that follows is distressing.)
Lunchtime at Yarlâs Wood
Sunday, 20 September 2009, the UK Border Agencyâs Yarlâs Wood detention centre run by commercial contractors Serco.
A woman enters a room and finds a five-year-old child inserting his finger into another five-year-oldâs anus, moving it backwards and forwards.
The little boy whose anus has been penetrated tells his mother that one of the other boyâs much older brothers has done this to him several times before. He complains of pain in his bottom, has become emotionally distant, will not let his mother touch him.
A GP employed by Serco does not examine the boy internally, concludes that his bottom is sore because he has scratched it, says psychological effects are a matter of âwait and seeâ. Bedfordshire childrenâs services decide not to take the matter further.
There is no investigation of the young people who might have sexually abused the little boys, or of whether they might pose a continuing threat to other children within the detention centre.
The motherâs pleas for a specialistâs opinion, for therapeutic help for her son, for an independent investigation, are all refused.
The Border Agencyâs so-called âChildrenâs Championâ, whose job is to protect and promote childrenâs welfare and safety, fails to intervene. The Childrenâs Society, a Church of England charity that provides welfare services to Yarlâs Wood families, also fails to act. Mother and son are rapidly transferred out of Yarlâs Wood and removed from Britain.
A special culture
Perhaps the most unsettling aspect of this story, which is fully documented as we shall see, is that it holds so few surprises for people familiar with the Border Agencyâs special culture.
Paediatricians, psychiatrists, psychologists and child welfare experts who have exposed inconvenient truths have seen their work and reputation traduced by Border Agency officials. Their advice has been ignored, summarily dismissed, even derided. Viable alternatives to detention offered by reputable experts have been ignored. Parliament has been repeatedly misled.
Doctors, nurses and charities who step inside the culture may forget their critical faculties, their moral compass and professional ethics.
This dossier highlights just some of the Border Agencyâs attempts to misrepresent evidence that children, including the sexually abused little boy, have been harmed in its care. It follows the pattern of misrepresentation and denial all the way to the current âcompassionate approachâ to child detention â a practice that continues despite the Coalition promise to end it.
An exciting growth market
For the Agencyâs commercial partners, security companies G4S, Serco and the rest, immigration detention is one growth market within an âexcitingâ outsourcing boom, grounded in cosy relations with ministers and civil servants.
The Labour governmentâs aggressive acceleration of the detention policy in 2001 gave the security industry new opportunities to extract profit from every step of the process: arrest, transport, detention, removal â even healthcare and social work within the rapidly expanding âdetention estateâ.
From its opening in 2001, Yarlâs Wood detention centre was run for profit, first by GSL, part of what is now the worldâs biggest security company G4S,* later by service company Serco.
The Border Agency and its commercial contractors set about the raiding and detention of families with remarkable enthusiasm and disregard for childrenâs welfare, detaining up to 2000 children a year in prison-like conditions, sometimes for weeks and months on end, against all professional advice.
The Home Office and its Agency brushed aside repeated warnings fromsuccessive European Union Human Rights Commissioners and repeated recommendations from the HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP), urging over years that the detention of children should happen only in exceptional circumstances, and decisions must be based on âindependent and immediate welfare and needs assessments of each child.â
For the border control mind, and commercial contractorsâ culture rooted in the cash transit business (G4S), and transport and maintenance (Serco), âchildrenâs welfareâ has proved an inscrutable concept.
An HMIP team visiting Yarlâs Wood in the Spring of 2005 found three children who had been detained immediately before their GCSE exams and one autistic five year old so distressed she had not eaten for five days.
Englandâs first Childrenâs Commissioner, Sir Al Aynsley-Green, called repeatedly for detention to cease, saying that nothing in his 30-year career as a childrenâs doctor prepared him for his first visit to Yarl’s Wood.
His first report, âAn announced visit to Yarl’s Wood Immigration Removal Centre 31st October 2005â records that none of the children he encountered had any idea why they were locked up. Many had been in Britain for years or were born here. One boy in school uniform had been snatched with his mother as he was about to catch his school bus, with no opportunity to say goodbye to his classmates. The children were subjected to body searches, sometimes several times a day. Three had been locked up for more than 57 days.
Handcuffs in hospital
The security industryâs priorities, culture and clout shine in a chilling âMemorandum of Understandingâ struck in 2005 between Yarlâs Woodâs managers, GSL, and Bedford Hospital which empowered GSL to handcuff children who needed hospital care. The document (in my possession), which defines a child as âa human being up to the age of 18â, permits GSL escorts to overrule medical objections to the handcuffing of child patients. If doctors or nurses persist in objecting, GSL escorts may insist the cuffs stayed on, pending a decision from a higher authority, namely the GSL Duty Shift Manager who would rule on whether the cuffs stayed on or not, or whether to delay medical treatment âuntil alternative security measures can be put in placeâ.
âFor staff in general the centre is like a human clearing house,â Yarlâs Wood chaplain Larry Wright told a team from HM Inspectorate of Prisons who visited the detention centre in February 2006. Their report, âInquiry into the quality of health care at Yarlâs Wood immigration removal centreâ, published in October 2006, found multiple healthcare inadequacies, compounded by the Border Agencyâs âunresponsiveness . . . to clinical concerns about an alleged history of torture or adverse medical consequences of continued detention.â
When clinical concerns were raised, the Inspectors found, âthe information was not systematically addressed or actioned. Nor was independent medical opinion sought or adhered to.â
HM Prisons Inspectorate urged the government quickly to transfer responsibility for detention centre healthcare from the Home Office to the National Health Service. A very important recommendation, since the Home Officeâs behaviour towards people in its care was plainly distorted by its over-riding concern to police national borders.
Serco took over the running of Yarlâs Wood (including healthcare) from GSL in April 2007 with an eight-year contract valued at âaround ÂŁ85 millionâ.
That same year, under pressure, the government instructed the Border Agency to require all staff dealing with children to undergo mandatory training in child safeguarding. Instead of commissioning an independent, accredited provider, the Agencyâs âChildrenâs Championâ turned to unaccredited G4S. Since then, without any independent scrutiny or evaluation, G4S has trained 7,800 UKBA personnel in âkeeping children safeâ.**
âWholly inaccurateâ records of child detainees
Children were anything but safe. In February 2008Â HM Inspectorate of Prisonslearned that some children detained time and again had been locked up for a cumulative 275 days. âWholly inaccurateâ official figures had calculated their cumulative totals at 14 and 17 days.
Visiting Yarlâs Wood again, in May 2008, Childrenâs Commissioner Sir Al Aynsley-Green found that âChildrenâs physical and mental health rarely appears to inform the decision to maintain detention,â and medical assessments were poor.
In his report on the visit, published in April 2009, Aynsley-Green notes that one mother locked up at Yarlâs Wood was a victim of torture with âa severe depressive illnessâ and âauditory hallucinationsâ, yet her two-year-old son was assessed by detention centre medical staff as just a âhappy boyâ. The mother âwas prescribed anti-depressants and put on suicide watch in the light of three suicide attempts. Yet no mental health support was provided, nor was an assessment of her parenting abilities conducted.â Aynsley-Green repeated his call for child detention to end.
Roll calls, body searches, sex games
The first peer-reviewed clinical study of children locked up at Yarlâs Wood, âThe mental and physical health difficulties of children held within a British immigration detention center,â appeared in the medical journal âChild Abuse & Neglectâ in October 2009.
The authors, Lorek et al, a team of NHS paediatricians and a clinical psychologist, recorded childrenâs âincreased fear due to being suddenly placed in a facility resembling a prisonâ, their weight loss, headaches and tummy pains, their clinical depression and anxiety, the trouble they had sleeping, how older children were so stressed they wet their beds and soiled their pants.
The Lorek team described the body searches, the photographing and the fingerprinting of the children, the roll calls, the ID cards they had to carry at all times, the ten locked doors between freedom and the family centre, the steep deterioration in parents’ mental health and parenting abilities, the self-harm and the suicide attempts.
And the sex games. One father, âspontaneously complained that he had found his daughter in the centre without any clothes on. His child explained that she had been encouraged to undress and play âsex gamesâ instigated by another detained child.â
Another mother, âspontaneously commented on the sexualized behavior of children within the centerâ.
The doctors wrote: âThe high levels of mental and physical health difficulties detected support the view that detention, even for short periods of time, is detrimental and not appropriate for children.â
(One of the authors speaks about their findings on the BBCÂ here.)
The study was sent to members of the parliamentary Home Affairs Committee ahead of their visit to Yarlâs Wood on 15 October 2009 in the course of their inquiry into the detention of children in the immigration system. (The committeeâs duties include scrutinising the Border Agencyâs work). Committee chairman Keith Vaz MP later reported to the House: âOur visit was somewhat marred by the Home Office officialsâ terrible anxiety about the Select Committee visit.â
What the Border Agency did next is quite shocking.
An ex-policeman assesses the medical evidence
The Agencyâs director responsible for children and their welfare, the curiously entitled âDirector of Criminality and Detentionâ, Dave Wood, decided to offer his own assessment of the clinical evidence.
Dave Wood is not a paediatrician or a child psychologist. He is a former Metropolitan Police Deputy Assistant Commissioner who led the Metâs Anti-Corruption Squad as Detective Chief Superintendent. (He gave evidence to theIndependent Police Complaints Commissionâs 2006 inquiry allegations of police corruption in the Stephen Lawrence murder investigation.)
In September 2009, in oral evidence to the Home Affairs Committee, Wood had said that although absconding wasnât an issue â âitâs not terribly easy for a family unit to abscondâ â families should be locked up anyway, because the lack of detention, âwould act as a significant magnet and pull to families from abroadâ.
In a memo to the Home Affairs Committee, dated November 2009, Wood set out to be âhelpfulâ and âprovide some further details in response to concern you may have about the contents of the [Lorek] report.â
The study, he claimed, âwas undertaken without any reference to the UK Border Agency or its clinicians. At no point were healthcare or centre staff, who would have known the children, asked for their views or comments. A number of criticisms are therefore made without any corroborated evidence, or with any opportunity for the centre to comment.â
(Here is Wood on local BBC TV again asserting that the doctors failed to discuss their research).
This was demonstrably false. Lorekâs peer-reviewed study clearly demonstrates their contact with Yarlâs Wood clinicians; indeed the Lorek teamâs psychologist had recommended that five parents should be âassessed by a psychiatrist as a matter of urgency due to the severity of their mental health difficulties and the level of riskâ.
Meetings the Agency claimed did not happen
Whatâs more, Home Office documents (in my possession) record that two of the authors presented their research to Border Agency officials in a roundtable discussion held at the office of the Childrenâs Commissioner for England on 19 June 2007, during which Jeremy Oppenheim, the Border Agencyâs then âChildrenâs Championâ invited the doctors to make a further presentation inside Yarlâs Wood.
And they did, at a formal meeting on 27 September 2007 entitled âMeeting to Discuss Health Impacts of Detention on Childrenâ.
The 26 invitees listed on another Home Office document (in my possession) include Serco healthcare staff, Bedfordshire County Council Social Workers, a representative of security company G4S, the Border Agencyâs Chief Immigration Officer Fiona Jack, its âChildrenâs Championâ, its Deputy Director of Enforcement Policy Stephanie Hutchinson-Hudson, its Head of Detention Brian Pollett and its Assistant Director, Detention Special Policy Unit, Simon Barrett.
According to the Home Office Agenda, at 10.10 am, after an introduction from the âChildrenâs Championâ, two of the authors, Dr Lorek and Dr Nesbitt, gave a presentation entitled, âPhysical and Mental Health Difficulties of children within a UK Immigration Detention Centreâ.
The Home Affairs Committeeâs report, The Detention of Children in the Immigration System was published on 29 November 2009. It completely ignored the Lorek study.
It is hard to understand this significant omission. Perhaps MPs on the committee simply accepted Woodâs assertion that the study âwas undertaken without any reference to the UK Border Agency or its clinicians.â It seems that they did not challenge him. But even if what he alleged were true, the weight ofLorek et alâs professional assessment surely ought to have commanded the respect of the committee and formed part of their report.
Still, the evidence of harm to children did not stay buried long.
Royal Colleges exhume evidence of harm
On 10 December 2009 The Royal College of General Practitioners, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, Royal College of Psychiatrists and the UK Faculty of Public Health issued a joint statement drawing upon Lorek et alâs evidence and urging the government to stop detaining children âwithout delayâ.
Until detention stops, said the Colleges, detained children and young people should be referred immediately to Local Authority childrenâs social care as âchildren at risk of significant harmâ. No child or young person with mental health problems or at risk of developing them should be detained. The Colleges, echoing urgent advice from HM Inspectorate of Prisons a full three years before, urged the government to put detention centre healthcare into the hands of the National Health Service and not the Home Office.
The Collegesâ widely publicised statement was backed by the Royal College of Nursing, the Association of Child Psychotherapists, British Association of Social Workers, the British Psychological Society and the UK Council for Psychotherapy.
But it cut no ice at the Border Agency, whose Director of Criminality and Detention Dave Wood assured The Guardian: âTreating children with care and compassion is a priority. Families at Yarl’s Wood should get the same level of care available on the NHS, and they do.”
On 14 December 2009, the Liberal Democrat MP Alistair Carmichael asked the Labour government when it would stop detaining children. He said: âThe report published last week by the coalition of the royal medical colleges made it clear that children who are detained in immigration removal centres suffer from mental health problems and consider self-harm and occasionally even suicide.â
Minister Meg Hillier, briefed by officials a few days previously, parrotted the Border Agency’s false claim about Lorek et alâs research:
âLet me point out that the report in question . . . did not take into account the views of the clinicians who worked with those children and who know them.â
And so, again, medical evidence of childrenâs suffering was misrepresented and dismissed, and again Parliament was misled.
Security industry nurses see âjolly happy childrenâ
Amid continuing grave concern about medical ethics and competence inside the âdetention estateâ, the Royal Colleges had reminded practitioners working for the Border Agency and its commercial contractors of the basic competencies of their craft â history-taking, examination, investigation, treatment, referral and record-keeping, and of their legal duty to declare children unfit to be detained where detention appears detrimental to their mental health or wellbeing.
Nurses employed by Serco at Yarlâs Wood routinely described child detainees in medical notes as âjollyâ and âhappyâ, according to the third and final report on Yarlâs Wood from Sir Al Aynsley-Green in February 2010 (âThe Children’s Commissioner for England’s follow up report to: the arrest and detention of children subject to immigration controlâ).
The father of a 12-year-old girl told the Childrenâs Commissionerâs team that she had been arrested, beaten, sexually abused and humiliated by Nigerian soldiers. On admission to Yarlâs Wood she was mute, refusing food for seven days. About one Yarl’s Wood child whose mother had been raped in Africa and was hepatitis B positive, Serco nurses wrote under family history, “nil of note”.
The Childrenâs Commissioner, an eminent paediatrician, reported that the Border Agency continued to send children unvaccinated to areas where TB is prevalent and measles and malaria endemic. More than a year after he had suggested it, the provision of bed nets was “still under consideration”. Aynsley-Green repeated his call for child detention to cease.
A covert attack on the Childrenâs Commissioner
The Border Agency had read the Childrenâs Commissionerâs report in advance of publication. Yet again, its response to expert medical advice was to go on the attack.
The Home Office press office circulated an unattributable and defamatory advance note to journalists, undermining the integrity of Aynsley-Green and his work. That extraordinary note, which invented inaccuracies in the report and then knocked them down, can be found here on page 13 of my own Parliamentary submission on official lying.
The black-ops briefing got results: Aynsley-Greenâs February 2010 report was arguably under-reported in the media. And the Border Agency carried on misleading.
Agency officials and their commercial partners Serco gave a positive, upbeat presentation about childrenâs experience of detention to Bedford Borough Councilâs Childrenâs Services Committee on 23 February 2010, assuring committee members that the Childrenâs Commissionerâs report contained âissuesâ that were âunsupported or factually incorrectâ.
But inconvenient evidence of distress and physical damage kept on piling up. In March 2010 the government published Baroness Nuala OâLoanâs independent inquiry into evidence of widespread abuse of asylum detainees, including children, at the hands of Border Agency escort contractors, including G4S. The abuses had been documented in the 2008 Medical Justice report Outsourcing Abuse. OâLoanâs inquiry found that there was âinadequate management of the use of force by the private sector companiesâ; she made 22 recommendations for change.
Readers might by now be able to guess what the Border Agency did next.
In a foreword to OâLoanâs report, Border Agency chief executive Lin Homer attacked the doctors and lawyers who had brought the abuses to light, accusing them of âseeking to damage the reputation of our contractorsâ.
Leaving aside the defamatory nature of Homerâs allegation against the doctors and lawyers, it is the case that âreputational riskâ is a commercial matter and the proper concern of the companies themselves, their executives, directors and shareholders â not for the Home Office.
Only months after the Border Agency had dismissed the evidence of abuse by escort contractors, a previously healthy man called Jimmy Mubenga died during a form of ârestraintâ by private escorters G4S exposed as dangerous inOutsourcing Abuse.
The sexually abused little boy is not totally forgotten
The little boy sexually assaulted over and over again during his weeks locked up at Yarlâs Wood in the autumn of 2009 might have been forgotten by the Border Agency, its contractors and the resident childrenâs charity. But somebody else had found out about him.
The Childrenâs Commissionerâs team, in their review of the detention centre medical notes, had spotted the little boyâs horrible ordeal, had noted the lack of proper investigation, that safeguarding procedures had not been followed, had noted the motherâs desperate requests for independent investigation and medical examination, and that they had all been refused.
Sir Al Aynsley-Green sent a detailed and confidential report on the case to Bedford Borough Council, the UK Border Agency, Serco and Bedfordshire Local Safeguarding Children Board, whose Serious Case Review Panel commissioned an independent investigation in October 2009. The panel decided that âa legally qualified person, independent of all the participating agenciesâ should conduct the Review, and appointed a barrister and mental health review tribunal judge in December 2009, causing real anxiety to Border Agency executives and their commercial partners, Serco. The profitable business of locking up families at Yarlâs Wood, which served as a useful deterrent in border control, was in jeopardy.
Only weeks ahead of the 2010 General Election, and before the independent investigation had made its findings public, the Home Office handed Serco a ÂŁ32 million contract, without competition, to carry on running Yarlâs Wood for three more years.
The Coalition Agreement of 12 May 2010 promised to end the detention of children, but instead of immediately ending it, immigration minister Damian Green said on 15 May that he was âlaunching a comprehensive review of alternatives to child detention, including opening a dialogue with relevant stakeholders, organisations and experts.â
To lead this Review, a legally qualified person, independent of all the participating agencies was not appointed. Damian Green turned instead to the Border Agencyâs own Director of Criminality and Detention Dave Wood, who would co-chair a âworking groupâ of invited civil society and voluntary sector groups. The other co-chair was the Diana Princess of Wales Memorial Fund to whom besieged Border Agency executives had turned for help in the anxious months ahead of the General Election. The Fundâs representative, Patrick Wintour (founder of the Employability Forum), had engaged in private pre-election talks over months with officials â including chief executive Lin Homer, deputy chief executive Jonathan Sedgwick, the latest âChildrenâs Championâ Kristian Armstrong, and Dave Wood.
The Review started work formally on 1 June 2010. (Its terms of reference arehere.) Immigration minister Damian Green told Parliament on 17 June: âWe are carrying out the review as fast as humanly possible, so that the detention of children for immigration purposes can end and a practical alternative be put in its place.â
That might have been Damian Greenâs intention, but it was no part of the Border Agencyâs plan.
A shameful account of institutional incompetence
On 14 June 2010 the Bedfordshire Local Safeguarding Children Board released an executive summary of the independent investigative report into the case of child sexual abuse that had been so disgracefully mishandled. The investigators found that the Border Agency, the Agencyâs âChildrenâs Championâ, its independent social workers, Sercoâs medical staff and social workers, Bedford Borough Councilâs childrenâs services and the local police had all failed in their duties to safeguard children in the Border Agencyâs care.
Whatâs more, Border Agency officials had â yet again âmisrepresented evidence that children were being harmed and being put at risk of harm. The Bedfordshire independent inquiry found that executives misled ministers about the safeguarding shambles that failed the little boy, and that ministers, relying on the Agencyâs misinformation, decided to carry on detaining children:
âUKBA provided information, on the basis of which a ministerial decision was made affecting the continued detention of children. Although that factual information included reference to the incident leading to this review, there was no evaluation of the impact that this incident had on the propriety of detention.â
Malcolm Stevens, a former lead Childrenâs Services Inspector with the governmentâs Social Services Inspectorate, described the findings as âa shameful account of institutional incompetenceâ.
Commenting in The Daily Telegraph on 18 June 2010, Stevens urged the government to âreconsider the wisdom of its decision to repeat the error of the previous government in allowing the organisation most culpable â the UK Border Agency â to lead its current review of services for children in detention.â
He went on: âFrom the recommendations of this review, if there is one thing on earth that Border Agency should not do, it is that.â
But the government did not reconsider, and the Border Agency carried on leading the Review, with thoroughly predictable consequences:
âAll summer, theâšUKBA made it plain that they were not willing to give up the power to detain children, as part of the policy of ending the detention of children,â said one participant, Syd Bolton, co-director of the Refugee Children’s Rights Project, Children’s Legal Centre.
âIn the many discussions aboutâšhow to end detention held with the UKBA over that review period, it was clear that the UKBAâšsimply would not entertain the possibility of a major plank of its border controlâšpowers being removed.â (Bolton was speaking on 26 March 2011 at the launch of End Child Detention Nowâs âKeep Your Promiseâ campaign.)
Rebranding child detention
What emerged from the Review was not an alternative to detention, but detention rebranded.
The Yarlâs Wood family unit closed on 16 December 2010, but the Agency has carried on locking up children at G4S Tinsley House, where a 10 year old girl had tried to strangle herself in 2009.
A new detention facility called âCedarsâ opened on 17 August 2011, with a new vocabulary (âfamily friendlyâ âpre-departure accommodationâ), run by a familiar security company, G4S, and with the same fundamental safeguarding flaw highlighted in the Bedfordshire Safeguarding Children Board independent report on Yarlâs Wood, namely, âa gap in regulatory arrangements . . . no single agency has an adequate overarching responsibility for regulation of services to children in immigration detentionâ.
G4S âwonâ the ÂŁ15 million contract to run Cedars against no competition. (The name is a government acronym for Compassion, Empathy, Dignity, Respect and Support).
Contract-hungry childrenâs charity Barnardoâs provides welfare services and delivers, by its presence, a reassuring endorsement. When, last year, an independent doctor asked Barnardoâs to take action about the continuing practice of sending families to danger zones without essential immunisation and malarial protection, Barnardoâs chief executive Anne Marie Carrie replied: âG4S, the UKBA contractor for the site is contracturally responsible for ensuring appropriate health services to residents at Cedars,â and she had raised his concerns with the management team.
The doctor wrote to the G4S site manager and got a reply from the Border Agency in an envelope stamped with the G4S logo; it said malarial protection was a matter for the families and those who âhave not arranged any malaria prevention will be provided with an information leafletâ.
A so-called âIndependent Family Returns Panelâ guards childrenâs welfare. One of its members is Dr John W. Keen, who has advised the Border Agency for years, and whose assessment of a vulnerable patient was deemed âirrationalâ and âtaintedâ by the then Mr Justice Leveson in a 2006 High Court Judgement.
The Border Agencyâs office of âChildrenâs Championâ carries on regardless of its catastrophic failure to intervene on behalf of the sexually abused little boy at Yarlâs Wood, and Border Agency staff continue to be trained in child-safeguarding by G4S.
The Department of Health assumed policy responsibility for detention centre healthcare in April 2012; the transfer of budgetary responsibility is due, âsubject to legislationâ, by April 2014. (Hansard)
In the first quarter of this year 53 children were reported detained, far fewer than under Labourâs 2000-per-year peak, but higher than might have been inferred from Deputy Prime Minister Nick Cleggâs December 2010 forecast of âtiny numbers of casesâ detained as âan absolutely last resortâ.
In March 2012 Dave Wood was promoted to the post of chief operating officer of the UK Border Agency. In April, the Home Office quietly appointed as chairman of the UKBA board a career investment banker, Philip Augar (ex NatWest and Shroeders).
The narrow thread of recent history exposed here resonates beyond the hard lives of asylum-seeker families.
Security companies G4S and Serco have moved far, far beyond their security-industry base, deep into our public sector, securing massive government contracts in policing, health, education, welfare.
Senior civil servant and ministerial loyalty to âour contractorsâ, as revealed in this case, is a recurring phenomenon that merits further inquiry and real vigilance as Britain undergoes what the Financial Times has called âthe biggest wave of outsourcing since the 1980sâ.
The pattern of Border Agency behaviour unfolded here suggests a rogue organisation, shielded by the Home Office, beyond accountability to Parliament and the public. Nobody has been held to account for the misleading of ministers, Parliament and the public over years, as a direct result of which thousands of innocent and vulnerable children have been locked up to the detriment of their health and wellbeing. Relations between the Border Agency and its contractors are intimate, enduring and enmeshed. Children remain at risk of harm.
The Home Affairs Select Committee should wake up to its duties, which include scrutinising the Border Agencyâs work, call its executives to account for their repeated denial of evidence of childrenâs suffering, and urge the government to bring about a real and honourable end to child detention.
This document is also available in PDF format.
With huge thanks to Martin Rowson for his specially designed cartoon.
————————
Notes:
*Â GSL and G4S
GSL was part of Group 4 Falck, the huge Danish security company that merged with Securicor in July 2004 to create Group 4 Securicor, rebranded in 2006 as G4S.
In June 2004, just ahead of the merger, Group 4 Falck sold GSL to its management in a £207 million deal backed by private equity firms. Then, in December 2007, G4S bought it back again (for £355 million).
G4S chief executive Nick Buckles told the Financial Times in December 2007 that GSL had been sold âto ease the progress of the merger as there would otherwise have been competition issues over prisoner transportation.â GSL, he said, would now âslot neatly into the next stage of G4Sâs strategy to focus on long-term government contracts.â
** The UK Border Agency and âKeeping children safeâ
Thanks to pressure from the first Childrenâs Commissioner for England and HM Inspectorate of Prisons, among others repeatedly highlighting multiple deficiencies in the Border Agencyâs treatment of vulnerable children over years, mandatory training in child safeguarding for all Border Agency staff in contact with children has been required since 2007.
That was enshrined in the statutory guidance to section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009, which gave the Border Agency a duty to promote and safeguard the welfare of children.
The equivalent statutory duty on other public bodies to safeguard children was provided by Section 11 of The Children Act 2004 following the inquiry into the death of Victoria Climbié, but the UK Border Agency and its predecessors resisted these duties until they were imposed on them under section 55.
Children subject to immigration control, including those held in immigration detention in the UK, were excluded from the full rights and protections of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child until November 2008 when, under great pressure, the UK withdrew most of its reservations to the Convention.
Bibliography:
Unpublished documents in the authorâs possession:
Carrie, Anne Marie. Chief executive, Barnardoâs. Letter to Dr Frank Arnold (27 September 2011).
Foley, Gillian. Detention Services. UK Border Agency. Letter to Dr Frank Arnold. (8 November 2011).
GSL, Yarlâs Wood, and Bedford Hospital. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR CHILDREN NEEDING SERVICES AT BEDFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST AND YARL’S WOOD REMOVAL CENTRE JANUARY 2005. Review date: JANUARY 2006. Ray Reveley, Centre Manager, Yarl’s Wood Removal Centre; Andrew Reed, Chief Executive, Bedford Hospital NHS Trust
Home Office Border & Immigration Agency. INVITEES: MEETING TO DISCUSS THE HEALTH IMPACTS OF DETENTION ON CHILDREN WILL BE HELD AT YARLSWOOD DETENTION CENTRE ON THURSDAY 27 SEPTEMBER 2007 AT 10.00AM
Home Office Border & Immigration Agency. Letter from Joe Heatley, Professional Adviser to Border & Immigration Agency, Childrenâs Champion, Social Policy Directorate, 17 August 2007 RE: HEALTH IMPACTS ON CHILDREN OF FAMILY DETENTION IN YARLâS WOOD IMMIGRATION REMOVAL CENTRE
Home Office Border & Immigration Agency. AGENDA HEALTH IMPACTS OF DETENTION ON CHILDREN. THURSDAY 27TH SEPTEMBER 2007
Home Office. Press Office. Response to criticism â these are not to be attributed as direct statements. Nick Logan. (February 2010)
Public domain documents:
Aynsley-Green, Al. An announced visit to Yarlâs Wood Immigration Removal Centre 31st October 2005. London: The Office of Childrenâs Commissioner. (December 2005)
http://www.asylumpolicy.info/children.htm
Aynsley-Green, Al. The Arrest And Detention of Children Subject to Immigration Control: A report following the Childrenâs Commissioner for Englandâs visit to Yarlâs Wood Immigration Removal Centre 16 May 2008 (April 2009)
http://mighealth.net/uk/images/c/c9/Aynsley.pdf
Aynsley-Green, Al. The Childrenâs Commissioner for Englandâs follow up report to: The Arrest And Detention of Children Subject to Immigration Control. Visit to Yarlâs Wood October 2009 (February 2010)
http://www.jrseurope.org/publications/di550e08psxhlc9f3mmrlqwd.pdf
Aynsley-Green, Al. Speedy end to child detention is needed. The promised review must not be an excuse for civil service prevarication â the welfare of children has to come first. guardian.co.uk (23 May 2010)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/may/23/child-detention-review
Bedford Borough Council: Minutes for Children’s Services Policy Review and Development Committee meeting, Feb 23 2010, 6.30PM. (23 February 2010)
Bedfordshire Local Safeguarding Children Board. Independent Review.Executive Summary. Child A and Child B Placed with Family at Immigration Removal Centre (June 2010)http://www.bedfordshirelscb.org.uk/pro_files/executivesummaryforchildaandchildbindependentreviewfinalversion090610unprotected(2).pdf
Bercow et al. Alternatives to immigration detention of families and children. A discussion paper by John Bercow MP, Lord Dubs and Evan Harris MP for the All Party Parliamentary Groups on Children and Refugees (July 2006)
http://www.medicaljustice.org.uk/images/stories/reports/alternativestodetention.pdf
Bolton, Syd. Co-director of the Refugee Children’s Rights Project, Children’s Legal Centre. Launch of End Child Detention Nowâs âKeep Your Promiseâ campaign. Oxford House, Bethnal Green, London, (26 March 2011)
http://ecdn.org/2011/04/12/where-now-for-the-campaign-to-end-child-detention/
Green, Damian. Immigration minister. Letter to Keith Vaz, MP, chairman, Home Affairs Select Committee, on UK Border Agency and Border Force governance and the appointment of investment banker Philip Augar as chairman of the UKBA board. (6 June 2012)
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/home-affairs/120606-Damian-Green-to-Chair.pdf
Burstow, Paul. Written Answer to Question from Simon Kirby MP on transfer of detention estate healthcare to the NHS. (31 January 2012)
Carmichael, Alistair. Liberal Democrat MP Alistair Carmichael. âThe report published last week by the coalition of the royal medical colleges made it clear that children who are detained in immigration removal centres suffer from mental health problems and consider self-harm and occasionally even suicide.â House of Commons. Oral Answers to Questions. Home Department. (14 December 2009)
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmhansrd/cm091214/debtext/91214-0001.htm
Clegg, Nick. Speech. Nick Clegg confirms end to child detention (16 Dec 2010) Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg this morning announced that child detention for immigration purposes is to end.http://www.libdems.org.uk/speeches_detail.aspx?title=Nick_Clegg_confirms_end_to_child_detention_%28full_speech%29&pPK=d73b587e-f837-4b16-b7d5-a14b1bfa8a9b
Coalition Agreement reached by the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats (12 May 2010)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8677933.stm
Crawley, Heaven. Ending the Detention of Children: Developing an Alternative Approach to Family Returns. Centre for Migration Policy Research (CMPR), Swansea University. (June 2010)
http://www.swansea.ac.uk/media/Alternatives_to_child_detention.pdf
Green, Damian. Immigration minister. Interview. BBC Radio Scotland. 14 June 2012.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10309237
Green, Damian. Immigration minister. âWe are carrying out the review as fast as humanly possible, so that the detention of children for immigration purposes can end and a practical alternative be put in its place.â Westminster Hall. Alternatives to Child Detention (17 June 2010)
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm100617/halltext/100617h0001.htm
Gil-Robles, E. Report by Elvaro Gil-Robles, Commissioner for Human Rights on his visit to the United Kingdom 4thâ12th November 2004, CommDH (2005). Strasbourg: Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights.
https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=865235&Site=COE
Griggs, Tom. G4S recaptures prison operator in £355m deal. Financial Times (19 December 2007)
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/de6ba690-adc0-11dc-9386-0000779fd2ac.html#axzz1ywEfCGL4
Hammarberg, Thomas (2008). Memorandum by Thomas Hammarberg, Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe Following his visits to the United Kingdom on 5-8 February and 31 March-2 April 2008, CommDH. Strasbourg: Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights. (18 September 2008)
HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP). Report on an announced inspection of Yarl’s Wood Immigration Removal Centre 28 February – 4 March 2005 by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons
HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP). Inquiry into the quality of healthcare at Yarl’s Wood Immigration Removal Centre (20-24 February 2006) by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons.
HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP). Report on an announced inspection of Yarl’s Wood Immigration Removal Centre (4-8 February 2008) by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons
More HMIP reports on Yarlâs Wood here.
Hillier, Meg. Labour Home Office minister. The Lorek report âdid not take into account the views of the clinicians who worked with those children and who know them.â House of Commons. Oral Answers to Questions. Home Department. (14 December 2009)
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmhansrd/cm091214/debtext/91214-0001.htm
Home Office UK Border Agency. Review into the Ending of the Detention of Children for Immigration Purposes. Terms of Reference. (1 June 2010)
Homer Lin, UKBA chief executive. Response to Medical Justice. âState Sponsored Crueltyâ. Children in immigration detention. September 2010, said UKBA took the needs of âvulnerable individuals seeking asylum in the UK, and in particular the need to safeguard and protect the wellbeing of childrenâ, very seriously.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/sep/09/detention-children-immigration-centres
Homer Lin, UKBA chief executive. âseeking to damage the reputation of our contractorsâ. Foreword to OâLoan (March 2010) p1.
House of Commons Home Affairs Committee. The Detention of Children in the Immigration System. First Report of Session 2009â10 House of Commons (24 November 2009)
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmhaff/73/73.pdf
Independent Police Complaints Commission. Independent investigation into complaints following âThe Boys Who Killed Stephen Lawrenceâ BBC Panorama 26 July 2006. (2006)
http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/documents/investigation_commissioner_reports/stephen_lawrence_final_report.pdf
Lorek et al. The mental and physical health difficulties of children held within a British immigration detention centre: A pilot study. Child Abuse and Neglect: 33: 573-585. (2009)
Medical Justice. Outsourcing abuse. The use and misuse of state-sanctioned force during the detention and removal of asylum seekers. A report by Birnberg Peirce & Partners, Medical Justice and the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns (July 2008)
http://www.medicaljustice.org.uk/images/stories/reports/outsourcing%20abuse.pdf
Medical Justice. âState Sponsored Crueltyâ. Children in immigration detention. Jon Burnett, Judith Carter, Jon Evershed, Maya Bell Kohli, Claire Powell, and Gervase de Wilde. 141 cases are featured in this report involving children detained between 2004 and April 2010. These children spent a mean average of 26 days each in immigration detention. One child had spent 166 days in detention, over numerous separate periods, before her third birthday. 48% of the children in this report were born in the UK. 74 children were psychologically harmed. Symptoms included bed-wetting and loss of bowel control, heightened anxiety, and food refusal. 34 children exhibited signs of developmental regression. Six children expressed suicidal ideation either whilst in detention or after release. Three girls attempted to end their own lives. (September 2010)
http://www.medicaljustice.org.uk/content/view/1420/89/
OâLoan, Nuala. REPORT TO THE UNITED KINGDOM BORDER AGENCY ON âOUTSOURCING ABUSEâ by BARONESS NUALA OâLOAN DBE (March 2010)
http://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_147177_en.pdf
Plimmer, Gill. Outsourcing set to boom as contracts surge, Financial Times. (17 June 2012)
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7d8072aa-aa89-11e1-899d-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1yBJYMiOw
The Royal Colleges of Paediatrics and Child Health, General Practitioners and Psychiatrists and the UK Faculty of Public Health.Intercollegiate Briefing Paper: Significant Harm – the effects of immigration detention on the health of children and families in the UK. (10 December 2009)
http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/press/pressreleases2009/immigrationdetention.aspx
http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/Significant%20Harm%20intercollegiate%20statement%20Dec09.pdf
Sambrook, Clare. How Official Lying Threatens Our Democracy and What Should Be Done About It, Submission to the House of Lords Select Committee on Communications The Future of Investigative Journalism, 21 November 2011.
Committeeâs report: The future of investigative journalism (16 February 2012)
Sambrookâs report also published on
OurKingdom@openDemocracy (21 November 2011)
Sambrook, Clare. Controversial doctor and Barnardoâs serve UKâs flawed child detention policy. OurKingdom@openDemocracy (15 June, 2012)
Sambrook, Clare. G4S teaches UK Border Agency how to care for children. OurKingdom@openDemocracy (10 July, 2012)
Serco. Contract News Update. Yarl’s Wood Immigration Removal Centre contract extension (11 May 2010)
http://www.serco.com/media/pressreleases/2010/contractnewsupdate10.asp
Stevens, Malcolm. Former lead Childrenâs Services Inspector with the Governmentâs Social Services Inspectorate. âa shameful account of institutional incompetenceâ. Yarl’s Wood immigration centre treated children in a shameful way. Itâs clearer than ever that this centre must be closed, says Malcolm Stevens. The Daily Telegraph. (18 June 2010)
Vaz, Keith, âOur visit was somewhat marred by the Home Office officialsâ terrible anxiety about the Select Committee visit.â Westminster Hall (17 June 2010)
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm100617/halltext/100617h0001.htm
Wood, Dave, Director of Criminality and Detention. UKBA. âTreating children with care and compassion is a priority. Families at Yarl’s Wood should get the same level of care available on the NHS, and they do.” Move children out of migrant centres say medical experts. Owen Boycott. The Guardian. (10 December 2009)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/10/immigration-detention-children-mental-health
Wood, Dave, Director of Criminality and Detention. UKBA. âitâs not terribly easy for a family unit to abscondâ. Examination of witnesses. Home Affairs Committee, 16 September 2009.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmhaff/uc970-i/uc97002.htm
Wood, Dave, Director of Criminality and Detention. UKBA. âthe study was undertaken without any reference to the UK Border Agency or its cliniciansâ. Supplementary memorandum submitted by UK Border Agency. Home Affairs Committee, November 2009.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmhaff/970/09091611.htm
See also OurKingdomâs collections:
The scandal of child detention in the UK
http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/collections/scandal-of-child-detention-in-uk
G4S: securing whose world?
http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/collections/g4s-securing-whose-world
…