Section one Context also a continued concern across the NPM that there are places of ‘de facto’ detention which are not subject to any inspection or monitoring regime. In all parts of the UK there is a need for the relevant inspectorates to consider how they can help to provide assurance about outcomes for those people living in supported accommodation. While the agencies providing care and support in these settings are subject to regulation and inspection, the settings are not. Immigration detention The number of people held in immigration detention continued to rise. In the year ending March 2016 there were 32,163 people entering immigration detention, which constituted a 16% increase of people in detention centres compared with the previous year.10 In contrast the number of children entering detention has fallen by 90% over the last five years, and in this reporting period was 24% lower than the previous year.11 NPM members reported concerns about the prison-like environment in many adult immigration removal centres (IRCs), dysfunctional and inconsistent use of the Rule 35 process (intended to protect those who have been tortured or trafficked, among others who may be particularly vulnerable) in all IRCs, and inadequate safeguarding processes at Yarl’s Wood IRC, which holds women. During the year ending March 2016 32,610 people left detention, and of these, 63% had been in detention for less than 29 days. However, members remained concerned about the detainees experiencing prolonged and indefinite detention. Longport Freight Shed During an inspection of the short-term immigration detention facilities at Dover Seaport in summer 2015, HMI Prisons inspectors found a freight shed that was being used for the short-term detention of migrants. Migrants arriving clandestinely to the UK through the Channel Tunnel were being detained in Longport Freight Shed in Folkestone before being moved to a holding room in Dover or Frontier House. Home Office staff told inspectors that the freight shed was not a place of detention, but after insisting on seeing the facility, inspectors found that the people held there were not free to leave and had been issued with legal authority to detain documents. Inspectors were concerned by the wholly unacceptable environment in which people were held. Though the majority of detainees spent less than 12 hours there, the longest period was 21 hours and 25 minutes, and this was the detention of an unaccompanied child. Over 500 people were held in the freight shed over a period of one month, including 90 children. Inspectors noted that detainees had insufficient food and that conditions lacked decency and were unhygienic. While it was clear that there was a strain on infrastructure in the area during a period when there had been a significant increase in the numbers of migrants arriving from France, the inspection of this facility took place months after this increase had begun, and showed that contingency planning by those responsible had not gone far enough, quickly enough. The facility has since closed. 10. These are the figures for immigration removal centres but do not include those held under immigration powers in non‑residential short-term holding facilities, police stations, or those held in prisons under immigration act powers. Home Office National Statistics (May 2016) Immigration statistics January to March 2016, Detention, available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-statistics-january-to-march-2016 [accessed 01/11/16]. 11. 110 children were held in immigration detention in the reporting period. Home Office National Statistics (May 2016) ibid. 15