Global Solutions Ltd (GSL) criticised again for their management of Immigration Removal Centres

Anne Owers HMCIP of prisons published today (14 November 2006)her findings of a follow up inspection of Oakington IRC in June of this year.

• Posted on Nov 14, 2006

Once again several recommendations from a previous inspection had not been implemented and there were ineffective "mechanisms to detect and prevent racial discrimination, in spite of previous recommendations and the report of the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman", "provision of activity and of welfare support remained inadequate". "recommendations on suicide and self-harm had not been implemented, and anti-bullying procedures were weak",

In total 18 recommendations from the last inspection had been ignored and 7 only partly achieved. HMCIP has made 40 new recommendations, including improvements to " basic aspects of safety, decency, activity and resettlement".

Liam Byrne Minister for Immigration responding to the report managed to ignore all the criticisms of HMCIP, concentrating on the very few palatable points.

Introduction from the report:
This follow-up inspection of Oakington IRC was undertaken to check whether conditions and treatment in the centre had deteriorated as it moved towards its anticipated closure.

By the time of the inspection, however, there were proposals to extend the contract for a further three years - though it was unclear what kind of detainees the centre would hold. Oakington had already ceased to hold women and children. It would shortly also cease to deal with 'fast-track' cases, and therefore lose the associated on-site legal advice. Our recommendations therefore include those things that will be needed if the contract is renewed and the population changes.

Oakington remained a reasonably safe environment. It was, however, disappointing that several of our recommendations on suicide and self-harm had not been implemented, and that anti-bullying procedures were weak. This will be of increased importance if the centre remains in operation, and holds men who are detained for longer periods, with no on-site access either to independent legal advice or to the immigration service.

We were also extremely disappointed to find that there continued to be insufficient attention to basic protective race relations structures, such as effective ethnic monitoring procedures. Given our previous recommendations, and the report of the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman, there can be no excuse for failing to put in place effective mechanisms to detect and prevent racial discrimination - even though staff-detainee relationships appeared to be essentially sound.

As in other removal centres, the provision of activity and of welfare support remained inadequate. Again, these inadequacies were likely to become more apparent and important if the centre remained open with a different population. The excellent work of the Refugee Council, in providing welfare advice outside its contractual responsibilities, would cease as the Council's contract ended. Detainees would also be held for longer periods, still without access to work.

At the time of this inspection, Oakington was clearly an establishment in transition. It was not entirely clear whether this was a transition to closure or to a different role within the detention estate. It is clear that if the centre does remain open, increased attention will be needed to basic aspects of safety, decency, activity and resettlement, with the withdrawal of some key services and a potentially more anxious and vulnerable population. Our recommendations indicate the matters that will need to be addressed and indeed which should be incorporated into any new contractual agreement.

Anne Owers
HM Chief Inspector of Prisons
Published October 2006

http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmiprisons/inspect_reports/irc-inspections.html/

Source for this Message:
NCADC
HMCIP

^ top of page ^