Gove's statement light on detail. No timeframe it seems for full implementation. No confirmation of long-term safeguarding. 6 month requirement for sponsors to provide accommodation, leaving open for future disruption, and social media to find matches. Not close to good enough
Any scheme cannot rely on the goodwill of the public. It needs proper frameworks. Use existing local authority frameworks and expand them with genuine investment as an example of how to implement a scheme now.
Currently this scheme still looks likely to minimise the number of people in the immediacy who can reach UK for safety, while putting the responsibility for protection on the public and allowing the government to sidestep criticism,
What happens in six months? Inevitably some sponsors will say they no longer want to accommodate people. What happens to educational disruption for children for example? Risk of homelessness, which btw the government as already said migrants can be deported for.
Any plan needs to involve genuine safeguarding. It needs to be stable in the long-term. It needs to ensure protection and support needs, often highly complex, will be met. This scheme doesn't appear to do any of that.
We have seen with the use of hotels that current frameworks already put asylum seekers at risk, including of exploitation and trafficking, and this appears to just pose the danger of escalating that.
Invest in the asylum system. Provide accommodation and genuine, necessary specialist support to meet people's needs. Issue asylum and make the right to work a norm of doing so. Utilise Local Authority frameworks and expand them with the resources they need.
Long-term we need to entirely strip down and rebuild the asylum system. in the immediacy measures need to be focused on safeguarding and protection for ALL those who need it, and this scheme doesn't even get close.
Oh, and not requiring a DBS check for sponsors is criminally idiotic and dangerous. Safeguarding has seemingly gone out of the window with this whole plan. I respect the people who will step forward to provide accommodation, but this scheme poses real risks to refugees.
Gove quoting the "experience of sponsorship schemes" in defence of the six month limit, About 600 people in total have been helped over the many years the pre-existing "community sponsorship scheme" has been in place. That's not encouraging.
"Light touch vetting initially", No DBS, but nice little chat. What could possibly go wrong with safeguarding and protection? Yes, may do more thorough checks later, but how long after someone has arrived? What happens in short-term? Will support be provided during accommodation?
National vetting process initially and local authorities will do follow up. We have seen with the hotels scheme that LA's weren't given notice about people being placed in their regions. This is a recipe for people to slip through the cracks, particularly children.
Gove admits the "scheme is not perfect". Well, at least he has one thing right. It doesn't need to be so flawed though. Safeguarding, yes I bang on about it, could be better ensured with investment in existing mechanisms for one thing.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
