Why does “The Asylum Industry” fail to stand up for lone refugee children?

December 10th, 2006

The large number of civil service and local government staff dealing with lone refugee children is significant though most of these have broader responsibilities. At the same time various “voluntary” and charitable organisations are offering their services for appropriate fees. These are supplemented by a number of NGOs such as for example the Children’s Society, NSPCC, Refugee Council etc. These latter deal with issues related to all refugee children through the Refugee Children’s Consortium. They declare that making representation collectively in this way increases their influence. Sadly to date, in spite of several requests from CAYR they have refused to either endorse CAYR’s campaign to “Seek alteration to regulation . . .” or to suggest an alternative representation of this goal. This continued effective silence as a response to CAYR’s request needs to be explained.

Some harsher judges may consider that there is significance in some of the contracts and service level agreements assigned to some of these NGO’s. Such critics might suspect that there is fear that the renewal of such arrangements might be jeopardised by a forceful stance on behalf of these children. A more sympathetic interpretation might be to recognise that the Consortium membership is drawn from large organisations with extensive agenda’s. The child welfare groups like the NSPCC, Barnardos and the Children’s Society to name three reach across child welfare issues of every sort which may somehow conflict with the very specific political needs of lone refugee children. The refugee specific organisation such as the Refugee Council may find similar conflict of priority for their more general refugee focused goals. The most generous and in my view most likely explanation for this inaction is that the Refugee Children’s Consortium has simply settled into being a bog standard QUANGO. Conferences, reports, meetings with VIP’s and little else. A group of well intentioned people from well intentioned organisations who ultimately are doing little but talking.

This inaction cannot continue. Member bodies of the RCC (a list is published on this site) must either urge action on the issue of these vulnerable young people through the RCC or they must stand aside from a moribund group and make clear and emphatic decisions as to whether or not to challenge these unfair regulations. This particular abuse of these children must be brought to a stop. A FULL STOP!