Asylum Seekers (Hansard, 9 December 2002)

§ Mr. Liddell-Grainger
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will make a statement on problems affecting asylum seekers in Clearsprings houses in the UK; [84655]
(2) what contract Clearsprings have with the Home Office; [84649]
(3) who monitors the performance and the running of homes run by Clearsprings [84654]
(4) how much Clearsprings receives for looking after asylum seekers in the UK; [84653]
(5) what guidelines he sets for Clearsprings in receipt of housing for asylum seekers. [84652]

§ Beverley Hughes
Clearsprings Management Ltd has a contract with the National Asylum Support Services (MASS) to provide accommodation for destitute asylum seekers. The contract is due to expire in March 2005. I am unable to give details about payments to Clearsprings under the terms of this contract since this information is commercial in confidence. Clearsprings Management Ltd is required to operate within the conditions of their contract with NASS. All properties supplied under contract must comply with all planning and other regulations set by the relevant local authority. NASS is responsible for monitoring the performance of Clearsprings Management Ltd. In particular all properties supplied by the company under contract to NASS will be inspected to ensure they meet the specification laid down in the contract. The contract also includes performance measures which the company is expected to show that it is meeting. NASS can impose financial penalties if either a property is shown to have defects or the company is not meeting its performance targets. I am not aware of any major problems with accommodation provided by Clearsprings Management Ltd. The company is meeting the terms of its contract with NASS and any problems with their accommodation are rectified within agreed timescales.

§ Mr. Hancock
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers have completed all stages of their application and are awaiting removal from the country; and if he will make a statement. [84880]

§ Beverley Hughes
The requested information is not held centrally and could only be obtained through examination of individual case files thereby incurring a disproportionate cost.
The demarcation between the end of the appeals process and the beginning of the removal process is not clear-cut. When asylum appeals have been dismissed, the scope for further legal challenge undoubtedly acts as an obstacle to removal, although by no means the only one. Other limiting factors in the removals process include difficulties in securing travel documentation and legal issues arising from judicial and human rights reviews.
110W
There are measures in place to counter these barriers and subsequently expedite removal.

§ Mr.Hancock
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average time between completion of all stages of the asylum seeking process and notice of removal being issued was in the last 12 months; and if he will make a statement. [84882]

§ Beverley Hughes
Information on the time between completion of the asylum process and the issue of a removal notice may only be obtained by examination of individual case files at disproportionate costs.
Different timescales apply for issuing a notice of removal following completion of the asylum process, according to the type of case. For example the timescale will differ for detained cases under the expedited appeals process, those on monthly reporting, and others whose determinations are served to the last known address.
The initial programme of work to serve appeals in person has now been expanded nationally. The process allows for a six-week deadline for determinations to be served. Statistics are maintained for this particular workstream.
The number of applications for judicial review that are specifically against removal directions is estimated at 30–35 a month. The opportunity to apply for Judicial Review, is usually sufficient to cause arrangements issued on more than one occasion.

§ Mr. Howard
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his oral answer of 2 December 2002,Official Report, column 616, to the Member for Dover (Mr. Prosser), if he will withdraw his proposal to use the former police station in Shorncliffe road, Folkestone as a 24-hour reporting centre for asylum seekers. [85562]

§ Beverley Hughes
[holding answer 5 December 2002]: I refer the right hon. and learned Member to the reply I gave on 5 December 2002, Official Report, column 972W. There are no plans to withdraw the proposal for use of the former Police Station in Shorncliffe road, Folkestone, as a Home Office reporting centre, which forms part of a wider strategy to bring about improved contact with asylum seekers while their claims are under consideration and to control and counter illegal and clandestine entry into the United Kingdom.