- notification of rights and information are often done formally; - the question of language is often inadequately considered (interpreters unavailable, translations over the phone, use of other detained migrants to help translate, printouts in foreign languages unavailable locally, etc.); - associations' freedom of movement within centres and migrants' access to them could be improved in some cases. The General Directorate of the French national police force does not tend to give much consideration to the CGLPL's observations - mainly owing to the same problem as has been observed in local police stations: the gross shortfall in the police's operating budget. This would seem to be the cause for the deterioration in facilities, cramped spaces, lack of upkeep and lack of occupational activities. The conditions in which these centres operate are usually in line with the requirements – which are very minimalist as they are no more than equipment standards - of Art. R 553-3 of the Code for Entry and Residence of Foreigners and Right of Asylum (CESEDA), but it is regrettable that neither are there any more specific instructions on centres' operating procedures nor are the police assigned within such centres given any proper training. Both of these tools would enable an approach to be fostered that takes greater account of prisoners' fundamental rights, at a time when the police - based on their general training - tend to adopt an exclusively security-centred perspective of their role. The number of placements in detention centres for illegal immigrants of families with children is of major concern to the CGLPL. Everything possible must be done to avoid all imprisonment of children in detention centres for illegal immigrants and, especially, administrative detention facilities (possibility again authorised following the Act of 7 March 2016). According to a recent report by La Cimade13 the number of placements of families with children has risen from 41 in 2013 to 182 in 2016, despite a series of convictions against France by the European Court of Human Rights14 and in violation of the Act of 7 March 2016 which underscored that placement in detention must remain exceptional, with precedence being given to house arrest for families with children. This traumatising measure for children above all seems to be used to simplify border police operations - even when there is no risk of the family fleeing. It is paradoxical to observe a similar trend at a time when the Council of Europe is launching a campaign in a bid to end immigration detention of children. 3.1.2 Waiting areas The situation in waiting areas is primarily characterised by unacceptable accommodation conditions: in the three airports visited15, the rooms in the waiting areas - even those recently designed - do not have any windows and one has a glazed façade overlooking a corridor as if it were a custody cell. Nothing (TV, radio, magazines, various games, etc.) is provided to help pass the time or keep boredom at bay. With nowhere to get some fresh air, the people depend on the availability of the police officers and their willingness to be able to go out. Such facilities are therefore unfit for any extended stays, especially where children are concerned. 13 entitled Detention centres and facilities for illegal immigrants, 2016 report. Decision of 12 July 2016 in five cases concerning France. 15 The waiting area in Dunkirk is, in reality, in a state of limbo. 14 26