Children of refused asylum seekers held at a specialist removal centre are being separated from their parents as a form of immigration control, according to the charity that looks after their welfare.
Barnardo's deputy director of strategy, Alison Worsley, said almost one in six families ended up being separated at some point, often before or after they were held at Cedars. "Some for very legitimate reasons," Worsley said. "For example, if a parent is a danger to their child."
But in its new report, Cedars Two Years On, Barnardo's claims some family splits "are often a plan or contingency in response to actual or potentially" non-compliant behaviour. The report states: "As a child welfare organisation this concerns us, as we do not think a family split should be used for the purposes of effecting immigration enforcement."
Currently most family separations are authorised by an assistant director in the Home Office and are usually overseen by an independent panel. Guidance stipulates that splits should be used for the shortest possible time, and the family informed about the separation and of plans for their reunification.
However, the report quotes examples where one of the parents is separated from their children for several days and often returned on different flights. "Barnardo's believes that, if the government continues to use family splits as a means of immigration enforcement, these should be authorised at a more senior level to ensure compliance with existing guidance."
Cedars was opened in response to concerns about the detention of children of asylum seekers in Yarl's Wood. As a result of changes introduced by the coalition, championed by Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg and which drew support from the actor Colin Firth, the amount of time families now spend in pre-departure accommodation is normally limited to 72 hours. The number of children held prior to removal has reduced significantly – from 1,120 children in Yarl's Wood in 2009 to just 90 in Cedars in 2012.
But Barnardo's says that, despite significant progress, more needs to be done to protect vulnerable children and their families. It is calling for improvements to the arrest and escorting arrangements for families to Cedars and Gatwick. There are examples of large teams of police dressed in protective armour arriving at the door of a refused asylum seeker and their family, a potentially intimidating process.
"Barnardo's recommends that arresting officers should only wear personal protective clothing where risk assessments indicate that this is necessary to protect themselves or others," the report notes. "Where possible, officers should not wear uniform, and should transport families in unmarked vehicles."
The report reveals that in April 2012 Barnardo's highlighted the use of disproportionate force on an adult en route from Cedars that resulted in a Home Office investigation. The report notes that, since then, Barnardo's has expressed concerns about the force used on two other adults and both cases have been the subject of Professional Standards Unit investigations.
A Home Office spokesman said that it had "dramatically reformed the process to ensure that the welfare of the child is at the heart" of the family returns process. "The independent family returns panel are consulted prior to every ensured return, and families are only ever removed separately where it is in the best interests of all involved."theguardian.com
