Home > Current Affairs > Articles >

16 January 2007. Chief Inspector of Prisons publishes reports on immigration short-term holding facilities

Anne Owers, Chief Inspector of Prisons, publishes reports of unannounced inspections on four immigration short-term holding facilities (STHF) at Colnbrook near Heathrow Airport, Reliance House and John Lennon Airport, Liverpool and Sandford House, Solihull.

• Posted on Jan 16, 2007

Below are quotes and extracts NCADC (National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns) has taken from the reports.

Colnbrook Short Term Holding Facility

Operated by : Serco  Inspection : May 2006

Detainees locked up most of the time in rooms "reminiscent of a prison cell"

The design of Colnbrook Short Term Holding Facility (STHF) "Its design resembled a prison or police station".  It consists of 40 single rooms that are "reminiscent of a prison cell".  Male and female detainees remained locked in single rooms for unacceptably long periods and can be held for up to five days, or seven if removal was imminent. 

Only 6% of detainees said they had had a legal visit at Colnbrook

"Staff said that detainees found it difficult to get legal advice. Most did not have a legal adviser and some who did said they had parted with large sums of money to no good effect or that advisers were reluctant to help now that they were detained and unlikely to be able to pay any more. Only 6% of respondents to our survey said they had had a legal visit at Colnbrook."

Aggravated Anxiety

"For detainees, lack of access to legal advice, sometimes through successive places of detention, aggravated anxiety"

Suicide risk

Aggravated anxiety seems to lead to a suicide risk, which is reflected by the fact that "Anyone deemed at risk was checked at varying intervals and at least every 15 minutes" and that "Three officers on each shift were required to carry a ligature knife and a further knife was held in the staff office."

Detainees arrive with only the clothes they were wearing

"People detained unexpectedly often arrived with only the clothes they were wearing and might not have changed for a couple of days if they had previously been held in another STHF or a police station."

Detained in four different places in seven days

"One young man held during the inspection had been in four different places in seven days. He had initially been detained in the police station where he reported regularly. He had then been moved to another police station for two days before being transferred, apparently between 2.45am and 4.30am, to Harmondsworth IRC. He had arrived at Colnbrook STHF the day before the inspection and was due to be removed the following day. Although he appeared an intelligent, English-speaking young man, the number of moves had unsettled him and increased his confusion about his situation and what he could do about it."

Prison-issue plastic bags likely to arouse official curiosity on arrival in home countries

"A number of detainees arrived from prisons and were due to be deported within the next day or two. Some had all their possessions tied up in large clearly marked prison-issue plastic bags that were likely to arouse public and official curiosity on arrival in their home countries. The bags did not appear particularly robust. One detainee arrived still wearing his standard prison issue clothing. ... Staff and detainees expressed their concern that the property of detainees who were initially lodged in police stations often got left behind when they were transferred. Anyone about to be removed had little chance of recovering it in time. Police custody records, including property sheets that would have helped to arrange recovery, were rarely attached to the documentation accompanying detainees."

Immigration in such a mess that staff rely on the detainee to give them details of their case

"They [Immigration staff] often had to rely on the detainee to give them details of their case, and any queries to caseholder offices were answered only during office hours even though removals took place at any time of the day or night. Removal directions were regularly faxed through to the immigration office but often arrived after staff had left."

Reliance House, Liverpool
Sandford House, Solihull, West Midlands

John Lennon Airport, Liverpool

Operated by : Group 4 Securicor (G4S)

Inspections : February - June 2006

All can and did hold children and families for short periods.

Indeed, children were a significant proportion of the population at two of the centres.

No healthcare provider

No fire evacuation information to inform detainees

No independent monitoring body conducted regular visits

No disability policy or designated disabilities officer

Lack of legal advice

There was a general, if unfounded, expectation that detainees in short-term holding facilities could wait until they were transferred to immigration removal centres to seek legal advice. However, many passed successive days in shortterm holding facilities, including police stations, before reaching a removal centre and some had removal directions within a day or two.

Reliance House

During the previous three months, 94 men, 40 women and 21 children had been held. During the inspection, we saw a mother and child detained at home, another mother and child and a single man brought from the reporting centre, and two single women brought from the asylum screening unit.

If no bed could be found within the immigration detention estate or if no transport arrived, people were moved to a police station in the evening.

Escort staff told us that it was sometimes difficult to stop for a comfort break during the long drive from Liverpool to removal centres in the south. If they were not passing another detention centre, escorts normally relied on police stations but police were reluctant to admit children.

The [toilet] doors were a foot clear of the floor allowing custody staff to monitor movement inside. However, their position within the main room, which might be occupied by a mixture of people, and the lack of male/female designation, ventilation and privacy would have made it uncomfortable for many detainees.

Man banging his head on the floor, forcibly restrained, not seen by a medic

A man banging his head on the floor had had to be forcibly restrained. He was transferred to an immigration removal centre but had not been seen first by a qualified medical practitioner.

14 year-old child struggling to get evidence considered

The mother detained with her son that morning relied on her son to speak for her even when the inspection team used an interpreting service. This added to the child's stress and he was struggling to cope. They showed us some apparently official original documents from their home country. The son explained that these had arrived late and that he had sent copies to the Home Office. He did not know whether they had been considered. They had no current solicitor and the onus of pressing for clarification appeared to be on this 14 year-old child. We suggested that caseworkers on site should respond to the query but they were reluctant to intervene, stating that the documents had either probably been considered or no longer mattered since the asylum claim had been rejected. Another said they could only consider material submitted by a solicitor. Apart from being erroneous, this put the onus back on the child.

... some IND staff seemed unaware of any particular duty of care towards detained children beyond not holding too many for too long.

Sandford House

A large IND notice advising immigration advisers of a 'future' requirement to register as legal services providers was several years out of date and served no useful purpose as no legal advisers entered the room

They did not normally use an interpreting service but used sign language.

No rules for the facility were available to detainees in the holding room. Staff explained the basic rules on arrival if the detainee understood English.

No complaints had been made since the facility opened. A notice in the holding room explained how detainees could complain but was in English only and detainees had to ask staff for a complaints form.

Single women and families with children were held in the same room as single male detainees

Staff working in the unit, both of whom had been employed by the contractor for some years, did not think they had yet been vetted to Criminal Records Bureau enhanced level and had not had any childcare training. There was no nominated child protection coordinator for the holding room in the building.

G4S priorities revealed

"Officers were trained in the use of control and restraint and were refreshed annually" yet "Initial training for officers included race relations but there had been no refresher training and one officer had last been trained ten years before"

John Lennon Airport

Families with children were occasionally held in the small holding room with other single adult detainees

Staff had not had any childcare training. Staff were unaware of any nominated child protection coordinator for the holding room.

Detainees with the right change or a telephone card, which arriving passengers would not usually have, could use the payphone to contact a legal adviser.

Further Information

http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmiprisons. For an electronic copy of the report, or to request an interview with Anne Owers, please call 020 7035 3850.

Please note : NCADC does not know why these reports have only just been published even though the inspections took place between February and June 2006. So, please do not ask NCADC - please direct your queries directly to the Chief Inspector of Prisons.

Source for this Message: NCADC