Section one Context Reviews into conditions in immigration detention In March 2019, the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee published the report of an inquiry into immigration detention, which found ‘serious problems with almost every element of the immigration detention system’.91 The Committee called for more transparency in collating information about the number of people who are wrongfully detained, identifying a weak administrative process and a lack of judicial oversight of the decision to detain. It asked that the Home Office do much more to ensure that all reasonable alternatives to detention are considered. It also highlighted a rapidly growing consensus among medical professionals, independent inspectorate bodies and other key stakeholders on the need for a maximum time limit. It called for an end to indefinite immigration detention and implementation of a maximum 28-day time limit with regular checks and safeguards. The government responded to the Home Affairs Committee in September 2019, agreeing with the principle of a fair and humane immigration system but rejecting more than half of the recommendations, including the call for a time limit. The government said it believed that an immigration detention time limit of 28 days would severely constrain the ability to maintain balanced and effective immigration control, potentially incentivise significant abuse of the system and put the public at risk. It did accept the need for more 91 92 93 94 openness and public reporting on data.92 In a letter to the Committee, the Home Office also gave an update on its work reforming immigration detention, detailing a twoyear pilot scheme to provide alternative arrangements for a number of women in detention or at risk of being detained at Yarl’s Wood IRC, and plans for further pilots to test different models of support. The Home Office also said that the recently introduced Detention Gatekeeper function was improving the quality and consistency of initial decisions to detain, with judgements made independently of the referring team or caseworker.93 The Home Office consulted on changes to the Detention Services Order policy on mental incapacity/disability in immigration detention (with an update to the 2019 policy published in July 2020). In our last Annual Report, we noted that the Adults at Risk in Immigration Detention policy had failed on multiple occasions to protect people considered vulnerable from being detained. Since the follow up Shaw Review, which reports on the welfare of vulnerable people in immigration detention (published in 2018), the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration now reports annually on the implementation of this policy.94 The Home Office publishes data annually on deaths in immigration detention, to increase transparency. House of Commons Home Affairs Committee, March 2019, Immigration detention: Fourteenth report of session 2017-18, https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmhaff/913/913.pdf [accessed 31/08/2020] The Government rejected 17 of 33 recommendations, partially accepted four and accepted (including accepting the principles but not the action) of 12 recommendations by the committee. See House of Commons Home Affairs Committee, September 2019, Immigration detention: Government Response to the Committee’s Fourteenth Report of Session 2017-19, https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmhaff/2602/2602.pdf [accessed 31/08/2020] Parliament UK (webpage), Appendix 1: Letter from the Minister of State for Immigration to the Chair of the Committee, 23 July 2019, https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmhaff/2602/260602.htm [accessed 31/08/2020] Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, September 2020, News story Chief Inspector publishes 2019-20 Annual Report, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/chief-inspector-publishes-2019-20-annual-report, [accessed 30/10/2020] 33