Carers or Captors - follow up

Thanks to everyone who attended a successful and important meeting held in Committee Room 12 on Tuesday evening. The meeting started well, Mr Grayling was in the corridor surrounded by a bevy of spads, no doubt avoiding the Save Justice campaign taking place outside the Ministry of Justice by our learned friends and Bianca Jagger.

Geoffrey Robinson gave a brief overview of his involvement as the MP for Coventry North. Jeremy Corbyn explained his interest and said what he had seen pertaining to the way people are being treated under  COMPASS Contract between the home office and G4S was "disgusting and appalling."

Farah explained Kazuri's locus in the issue, as a social enterprise which works with women who have suffered trauma and provides housing and resettlement support to vulnerable women.  She spoke of her fear of the rapid march of the privatisation of public sector services, based on dogma,  not rational evidence and how people, women in particular,  were subject to abuse.

Flo Krause explained briefly that while the contract between  the Home Office, G4S and Serco cannot be challenged as it is a matter between two parties, the fact that public funds are being misused can be reviewed. Flo raised the issue of a public inquiry. She also stated that the Home Office had asked for a list of the women who had complained to Kazuri and their addresses in order to investigate.  The case of Chi Mati, a whistleblower was mentioned.  Chi dared to speak out against G4S and substandard housing conditions. She was threatened not only with eviction by G4S but also with deportation by the Home Office. Not until Guardian journalist Zoe Williams stepped in and intervened with an online petition did the government and G4S back off. Chi was allowed to stay.

Flo explained we would not be revealing the identity of the women who have suffered at the hands of G4S as there are competing interests. Flo explained that frequently in her work as a human rights barrister who takes parole cases for prisoners, they need to be moved through the process to open conditions to progress their sentence plan. This will be blocked by prison security with the reason there is intelligence that someone's life will be in danger if that prisoner is allowed to move and that no further information will be shared.

We find ourselves in the same dilemma. We would like to share the information with G4S, who did not attend the meeting, however there are real and present dangers in the way they treat women and indeed men who dare to complain and we cannot be complicit in any way in the repeated traumatisation of already traumatised people. Flo confirmed we would happily give the information to an independent inquiry but not to G4S or the home office. Anyone who is a taxpayer and effectively funding this waste of  public funds has legal standing to bring a case such as this for review. Her back of an envelope calculation of contracts let to G4S in the financial year to 2012 added to more than £1billion. This is just with the Ministry of Justice.  G4S also have contracts with the Home Office the Foreign Office, the DWP, the MoD, and the Department of Health. You can see the MoJ ones here

Geoffrey Robinson supported the prospect of a public inquiry however he stated we would need to gather evidence and present that to Jeremy and his office,  then they would ask other sympathetic MPs of whom there are many to support a request for a public inquiry into the way public funds are being misspent and services are not being delivered.

The meeting was opened up for questions.  Steven Hirschler whose PhD at York University is on the COMPASS contract said that he could provide many case studies to support the inquiry and would like to help compile the body of evidence.

"Sarah" also shared her story about the horrors of being housed by G4S and Cascade, their local housing contractor. She has been moved 5 times in 6 months and most recently 3 weeks ago she faced eviction because G4S had not paid her landlord rent for four months before she moved into the property. G4S denied this in a statement to Alan White the journalist who wrote about this on Monday for the New Statesman. We also have a letter from the home office confirming that no one has lost their home or been evicted. We now have rent statements which show amassed arrears and that both G4S and the home office is misrepresenting the facts. G4S and the Home Office are lying.

Sarah told Jeremy Corbyn that every time she was moved it caused her and her 11 month old baby huge disruption. She also said G4S staff entered the property at any time without prior notice.  She has been told they are "allowed to do that." Housing law clearly states a landlord has to give 24 hours notice prior to entry except in the case of an emergency. We have since had sight of a letter from Sharon Holmes to John Grayson claiming G4S make the women sign agreements which allow G4S access unannounced at any time for any reason. Essentially this is unlawful and violates a tenant's right to peaceful enjoyment. Sarah also told of the substandard properties she was living in,  and how she found cock roaches in her baby's milk.

Two voluntary organisations which work with asylum seekers and refugees confirmed their clients' experiences of bad practice and one raised an important issue.  G4S have a long history of human rights abuses and blood on their hands including the death of Jimmy Mubenga who was killed while being deported by G4S guards on a British Airways flight because they held him in a restricted position which forced him to stop breathing. The G4S term for this is carpet karaoke. It is an illegal restraining position. Women have suffered broken limbs, limbs, a pregnant woman was tipped out of her wheel chair. They have no experience of social housing.

Richard Johnson who is the former director of the Work Programme for Serco and now an eloquent and outspoken critic of his former employer stated the issue was in the terms of the contract and that is the real issue, not the provider.

Heather Petch formally CEO of HACT, a housing charity expressed concerns about the fact that housing associations were proposed as  alternatives for managing these contracts for providing housing rather than care and justice providers. She thought housing providers would not be able to sustain contracts which had cut costs to the bone.

A Scottish MP gave the example of how Glasgow City Council  had brought Serco in line through a local umber body of housing associations and suggested connecting with them to share their experiences.

Representatives from 4 government departments including the Home Office and the Cabinet Office attended and expressed an interest to stay informed with regards to developments. Women in Social Housing, the UNHCR which monitors the way the home office treats migrants and displaced people and journalists from Not Shut Up, the prison magazine, the FT and the New Statesman attended. The meeting was well received by grass roots organisations, policy makers and law shapers.


We are in the process of working out the best and most efficient way to compile the data for a public inquiry with a view to a follow up meeting in October. If you have  any suggestions we'd be delighted to hear them.

All that remains is for Kazuri to thank Nanki Chawla and Flo Krause for their hard work in compiling an important report, the consequences of which could change not just policy but also procurement practice and Geoffrey Robinson, Jeremy Corbyn, Sarah Teather and Julian Huppert for kindly supporting the event. Our thanks also to Elizabeth, Nicolette and Omar from the MPs offices.

The full report is available here


http://kazuri.org.uk/images/PDFs/Carers_or_Captors_and_complaints.pdf

G4S fit for purpose or a public liability?

Press release London  June 2 2014
Embargoed till  00:00 Monday 3 June 2014

Invitation to follow

Carers or captors? Is G4S fit for purpose or a corporate rapist profiteering from pain.

Kazuri Properties is a social enterprise which works with women who have suffered trauma and provides housing and resettlement support including resilience training. Kazuri commissioned a report to the Home Affairs Select Committee inquiry into asylum focusing on housing and pastoral care provided by G4S. The report by leading human rights barrister Flo Krause and others scrutinises the COMPASS Contract between the home office and G4S. 39 women gave evidence to the report and complaints ranged from peeling paint to allegations of rape and sexual violence by G4S staff.

The report will be published at a panel discussion moderated by Imran Khan the human rights solicitor in parliament at an event hosted by Jeremy Corbyn MP and Geoffrey Robinson MP on Tuesday 4 June at 17 30 hrs in committee room 12 in the House of Commons, co authors of  the report are director at Kazuri Properties Farah Damji and LSE master's degree student Nanki Chawla.

Women in particular have been subjected to trauma, harassment and in 3 cases allegations of sexual abuse.  These women who are fleeing trauma have to suffer G4S staff entering their homes unannounced,  however the women's complaints are being ignored.

Extract:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1      This submission examines asylum through a gendered lens, with a focus on housing as a human right. Through our interactions with the women tenants of G4S  we propose policy recommendations with regards to both housing and the contracts and subcontractors in charge of this.

2      We conclude that the current asylum system fails women as a particularly vulnerable group, and must be overhauled in its entirety in order for gender mainstreaming to take place. We assert that housing contracts should only be given to housing associations, rather than for profit corporations, and suggest the Housing First model as an alternative to the current system.

3.    We urge an immediate review of the current contractors, in order to assess their capabilities in fulfilling their current mandate, and to ensure that the vulnerable are not being ignored. We also point out that accountability mechanisms and transparency processes are vital to ensuring a fairer, more inclusive new system. We call for trauma sensitivity training for the officials which interact with this group of vulnerable people.

Exract ends

 Report now available here  http://kazuri.org.uk/images/PDFs/Carers_or_Captors_and_complaints.pdf


*        The COMPASS Contract is worth over £620 million however women are being evicted because although G4S was paid over £300million, to provide the service, they do not pay the landlords of the property rent. Repeated  failings to provide decent accommodation and to treat women with respect have been frequently evidenced of G4S yet they continue to win lucrative contracts providing public services. The report asks for transparency in the procurement process in the letting of large contracts to private for profit companies.

*      Lord John Reid the former home secretary and Lord Paul Condon former Metropolitan Police Commissioner are paid advisors to G4S. This abuse of trust and power by senior public servants for their personal gain must be reviewed urgently.

*     The role of successive governments in the corporatisation of state duties has lead to the wholesale betrayal of the most vulnerable people in our society.  Companies such as G4S and Serco who are hoovering up contracts worth hundreds of millions of pounds  to deliver services in a way that denigrate the most basic expectations of human rights should be subject to the same stringent regulations as other players in the same market. There is no regulation imposed by established bodies such as the property ombudsman or the HCA upon global outsourcing companies with little or no experience of social housing and pastoral care. Any similar commercial activity by a registered provider regulated by the HCA would be subject to monitoring and sanctions.These questions are important in light of the Lord Chancellor's plans to privatise over 70% of probation services.  Who will carry the risk and the responsibility?

Kazuri are challenging the recent decision to award the contract for the sexual assault and rape crisis centres in the West Midlands to G4S who have no experience of working with traumatised women. A freedom of information request has been submitted. 30 years of learning and a gendered approach to women who are surviving sexual abuse have been thrown out for profiteering and privatisation. Positions to work at these centres have recently been advertised at £12.50 per hour which precludes any qualified or experienced staff coming forward.

For further information or a full copy of the report, please contact info@kazuri.org.uk or call 020 7377 5791.

notes to editors:

Flo Krause and Imran Khan are available for interview.

letter to the home office regarding COMPASS CONTRACT

http://www.scribd.com/doc/142776876/html5

letter requesting information on G4S SARC contract to provide services to victims of rape and sexual assault

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/g4s_contract_to_run_sarc_centres

Labour's PRS strategy.

Housing problems and statistics

A large part of the document is talking about how awful it all is (with quotes) and how some of the worst standards are to be found in the private rented sector (PRS).  For example:

The PRS represents 16.5% of the total households in England

Nearly 1/3 of all PRS households have children and nearly 15% of all couples with children live in the PRS

The proportion of private rented stock which is ‘non decent’ is 35%, compared to 22% owner occupied homes and 17% of social housing

Safety hazards are in 21% of PRS homes compared to 7% in the social sector

In 2010/11 local authorities received over 86,000 complaints and have said in the past that they are aware of 1,477 serial bad landlords

The report goes on to point out the problems that local authorities have with enforcement issues, and the fact that many PRS landlords are well meaning but lack knowledge of their legal obligations.

The report also refers to the ‘retaliatory eviction’ problem and the general costs to society of poor housing.

To find out what the main suggestions are to resolve these problems you have to read to the end.  They are:

1. A national register of landlords

Which will

Assist local authorities identify landlords

Allow distribution of information to and communication with landlords

Help with deal with the problems of tax evasion (apparently costing the Treasury some half a billion pounds)

Item 4 below also indicates that the right to operate as a landlord will be linked to being on the register.

2. A new national private rented property standard

Which would include current minimum standards on

Tenancy deposits
Energy efficiency
Property conditions
Response times and repairs
The report goes on to say that this will be linked to incentives which will only be available to properly registered landlords (including with HMRC)

3. Improved local enforcement

This will

Remove red tape and make it easier for local authorities to introduce licensing schemes

4. Tougher sanctions on bad landlords

Which will involve

reviewing penalties and sentencing guidelines (presumably by making them less derisory)
assessing how they can stamp out retaliatory eviction
removing bad landlords from the national register so they can no longer operate as landlords
There is also an interesting paragraph which follows this which refers to potential benefits to compliant landlords:

supplying renters from local housing registers (probably not much of an incentive in the current housing shortage)

direct payment of benefit to PRS landlords and
an improved legal process to help landlords evict non paying tenants and tenants who commit anti social behaviour including criminal damage.

Via Tess Shepperson

Violets and violence

Forgiveness is  the essence of the violet that is shed by the heel of the one that crushes it.

Just pretty words.  Forgiveness is the calming rage after the storm and betrayal,  It's the same old story isn't it, illusion / delusion. You think you think, therefore you are.  You live with that disappointment like a broken promise, and a shattered mind. 

But the violence  perpetrated on our streets, the anger unfurled against  the innocent and the outpouring of hatred for the perpetrators, the murderous act and the grief are united in their emotional DNA. What makes a man take a machete and lacerate another human life? What has happened to fragment   that man's psyche into such separateness  that he can commit an act such as this in the name of god? This is not my God.

It is around us  more and more everyday. Acts of selling out, encroaching controls that take away our taken for granted freedom, less choice.  Occasionally there are  big grand gestures, a threat, a house of cards of lies come crashing down, a gratuitous physical act such as snatching  the sleeping bags and the food parcels of the homeless in Redbridge that makes one  physically ill and want to hurt the people who cause the pain.  But grief is like fingerprints, that stain your once pure soul.

Seeking that empty, carved out purity.

RIP  Soldier. 

Carers or Captors?

Report to the Home Affairs Select Committee Inquiry on asylum

By Flo Krause, Farah Damji and Nanki Chawla

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1      This submission examines asylum through a gendered lens, with a focus on housing as a human right. Through our interactions with the women tenants of G4S  we propose policy recommendations with regards to both housing and the contracts and subcontractors in charge of this.

2      We conclude that the current asylum system fails women as a particularly vulnerable group, and must be overhauled in its entirety in order for gender mainstreaming to take place. We assert that housing contracts should only be given to housing associations, rather than corporations, and suggest the Housing First model as an alternative to the current system. We urge an immediate review of the current contractors, in order to assess their capabilities in fulfilling their current mandate, and to ensure that the vulnerable are not being ignored. We also point out that accountability mechanisms and transparency processes are vital to ensuring a fairer, more inclusive new system. We call for trauma sensitivity training for the officials which interact with this group of vulnerable people.

 “The ache for home lives in all of us, the safe place where we can go as we are and not be questioned.”

Maya Angelou 

This is an extract from a report to the Home Afairs Select Committee on asylum, that will be published  in parliament on June 4 2013 at an event hosted by Jeremy Corbyn MP. For further information please email info@kazuri.org.uk

Joint Committee on the draft Voting Eligibility (Prisoners) Bill

A new Joint Committee has been appointed by both Houses of Parliament to conduct pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Voting Eligibility (Prisoners)Bill. The Joint Committee comprises 6 MPs and 6 Peers. It will take oral and written evidence and make recommendations in a report to both Houses. The Joint Committee invites interested organisations and individuals to send written submissions by 5 pm on Thursday 13 June 2013as part of the inquiry.

CALL FOR EVIDENCE

The Joint Committee on the draft Voting Eligibility (Prisoners) Bill invites interested organisations and individuals to submit written evidence as part of its inquiry.

The draft Bill

The Joint Committee is particularly interested in receiving evidence on the three options for changes to the law set out in the draft bill. They are:

a.       Disqualifying prisoners sentenced to 4 years or more in prison from voting.

b.      Disqualifying prisoners sentenced more than 6 months in prison from voting.

c.       Disqualifying all prisoners serving custodial sentences from voting – a restatement of the existing ban. 

Please state your opinion on all or any of these options giving clear reasons as to why you, or your organisation, hold that particular view. 

The Joint Committee would also welcome evidence on whether approaches beyond these options should also be considered.

Additional questions

The Joint Committee would also be grateful to receive evidence on the following specific questions. It is not necessary to address every question.

1.      What are the historical and philosophical justifications for denying prisoners the right to vote?

2.      Why is the right to vote considered to be a human right? 

3.      Is disqualifying prisoners from voting a suitable part of their punishment?

4.      What are the financial implications of maintaining the current ban in terms of claims by prisoners for compensation?

5.      Is sentence length a legally robust basis on which to retain an entitlement to vote?

6.      What would be the likely legal consequences, both domestically and internationally of:

a) keeping the law as it is?

b) passing legislation giving some prisoners the right to vote, but in a way that maintains a form of blanket restriction?

c) seeking to comply by enfranchising the minimum number of prisoners possible consistent with our international legal obligations?

7.      Would giving prisoners the right to vote have any significant administrative impact on either the prison system or the Electoral Commission?

8.      Is there any evidence to suggest that allowing prisoners to vote would have a significant impact on particular constituencies?

9.      What lessons can be drawn from the experience of other countries regarding prisoner voting?

Written evidence should be submitted through the submit evidence form on the committee’s webpage:

Committee Webpage: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/draft-voting-eligibility-prisoners-bill/

Submit evidence form: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/draft-voting-eligibility-prisoners-bill/inquiry/submit-evidence-form/

G4S asylum-housing fiasco descends into farce

Things aren't going well in the UK's new asylum housing 'market' that is dominated by the world's biggest security company. Now G4S threatens to evict an asylum-seeker because G4S has failed to pay her rent. Are public services safe in its hands?

On the 4th of May, Angela (not her real name) opened a letter from her landlord which revealed that there were massive rent arrears on her home. Angela is an asylum seeker who lives with her 11 month old son. The letter said that there was £1634 owed in rent. This is true. But it's not her fault. Angela’s rent is, or should be, paid for her by a housing company called Cascade Homes. Cascade is supposed to pay the rent to the landlord’s letting agent, Whitegates. Cascade then should claim the money back from G4S, the world’s biggest security company.

Regular readers may recall that G4S won a government contract last year to house asylum seekers in Yorkshire. I have followed this story closely. I am an activist and researcher and I work alongside asylum seeker tenants in Yorkshire and the North East. Over the months together we have revealed how companies to whom G4S subcontracts the work have repeatedly failed to provide housing fit for human habitation, how their staff have been accused of harassing vulnerable tenants.

With arrears of this scale, not surprisingly the landlord wanted payment or repossession of the property. G4S’s answer was not to pay the debt and continue the tenancy. Instead G4S harassed Angela into moving for the fourth time in a few months, leaving mother and infant son bereft of their medical and support networks.

Angela had been moved to this new Cascade address under the supervision of Leeds City Council in December after experiencing Leeds Cascade Housing properties. She had spent a horrific month in a damp, filthy property infested with cockroaches. Under the asylum rules she had no choice but to stay there, but Angela spoke out and forced G4S and Cascade to move her to a decent property in a neighbourhood where she could keep her links to her church and support networks.

Even in her new property the harassment went on. Male housing workers arrived unannounced demanding to be let in. As recently as 26 April a Cascade worker simply let himself in without any prior arrangement when Angela was out.

Then on Wednesday 1 May Angela got a phone call from a G4S/Cascade male employee who said he was Duncan Wells: he told her that she must move immediately to an address in Pudsey miles away from her present neighbourhood. Wells said he would come to see her on Tuesday 7 May when he would bring ID and take Angela to the new address so that she could see the property.

This was deeply distressing news for Angela. The new address was miles away from her church, support services and a childcare centre she had just arranged for her infant son.

Duncan Wells is the ‘Social cohesion manager’ of G4S for asylum housing in Yorkshire and the North East and should be well aware of grave criticisms in Parliament of the threats to the privacy of asylum seekers in their homes. A Parliamentary inquiry into these matters, led by Sarah Teather MP and supported by the Children's Society, reported in January. During a House of Commons debate on the inquiry, on 27 February, Teather said:

"Almost every family told us that housing contractors routinely enter properties without knocking. We heard not just from one family, but from all of them independently that people just turn up and use keys to let themselves in. . . . It causes terror for children, and is an epithet for the lack of respect with which they are treated. They are treated as luggage rather than people who deserve some dignity and respect. The Government must get to grips with that with housing contractors."

Wells told Angela that she had to move because "the landlord wanted the house back". Angela discovered that this wasn't the whole story when she opened the letter left by her landlord listing the arrears on the house. When, in a meeting with Wells, Cascade housing workers and local campaigners Angela disclosed the letter, Cascade at first tried to deny the arrears. Later, they had to own up to the truth, which was more embarrassing still. There had actually been £1000 arrears on the property and a repossession threat before Cascade moved Angela in.

The worry and distress went on and on. The landlord still wanted the property back. Contractors arrived to start work in preparation for a new tenant. Angela had relentless knocks on the door and calls for her to leave the property, and still not even a written notice to move from Cascade.

Nine days after the phone call, a Cascade worker arrived with a letter giving Angela and her son seven days notice to move and promising a decent house, close enough to enable her to stay connected to her medical and other support networks. On Monday 13 May, twelve days after the phone call from Duncan Wells, and after twelve days of distress and harassment Angela was offered a property which she has seen and accepted, and she will move in there on Thursday 16 May.

G4S had no experience of housing management when it was given a slice of the national asylum housing £620m contracts in June 2012. The private security company had of course a stake in other parts of the ‘asylum market’ with a rocky human rights record in managing immigration detention centres and deportation escort services. Jimmy Mubenga, an Angolan father of five, died after being "restrained" by G4S escort staff during an attempt to deport him in 2010.

In Yorkshire and the North East, G4S's worrying reputation motivated resistance from asylum tenants and their willingness to speak out about appalling conditions. Chris Bryant MP, shadow Minister for Immigration, speaking in February's debate, referred to "hideous conditions" in asylum housing. Last year a Zimbabwean asylum seeker in Sheffield said —  "I do not want a prison guard as my landlord".

The Home Office, with its 2012 privatized asylum housing contracts, has produced cut price contracts for slum housing based on a "new delivery model" which is hopelessly inefficient. The model is based on three or (as in the Leeds case) four tiers of landlords, each one slicing off a share of the profits. In Leeds and West Yorkshire, G4S is in overall charge, with actual housing provision subcontracted to Cascade Housing.

A few of Cascade's 700 West Yorkshire asylum housing properties are owned directly by the company. Most are subcontracted from very small private landlords. In Angela’s case Cascade used a lettings agency to rent the property from a small landlord. This added yet another layer of complication and cost and stretched even further the distance between Angela and the state which owes her a duty of care.

Within this ‘flexible’ delivery model the real losers are asylum seekers and their families. G4S and its subcontractors like Cascade have simply failed to find decent properties for asylum seekers. G4S’s own figures released in February suggest that in Yorkshire up to 300 asylum seekers have been placed in ‘no choice’ housing which is unfit, and breaches their contract with the Home Office.

After the conditions in Leeds asylum housing were exposed by asylum seekers and campaigners in December 2012 the Home Office suspended Cascade from the contract by refusing to disperse new asylum seekers to their properties. A G4S letter leaked to campaigners in March suggested that Cascade was in real difficulties delivering the contract following the withdrawal of G4S subcontractor Mantel in the West Midlands. Cascade Housing’s credit rating from www.192.com fell from 49 (credit worthy) in September 2012 to 5 (caution – credit at your discretion, one category above liquidation) on 1 May 2013. Cascade is not paying its bills and its asylum seeker tenants are being put at risk of harm.

Angela’s case also raises issues about the costings and payments to G4S. If Cascade had paid off the rent arrears for Angela’s home it would have been a payment of £475 per calendar month around £15.61 per night for mother and small child.

How much income have G4S and Cascade received from public funds for Angela's home whilst refusing to pay the lettings agent and the landlord? Let's make an estimate.

Payment for dispersal asylum housing has for many years been on a ‘nightly’ basis. In 2011 Leeds Council was part of a consortium that bid £12 to £13 per person per night – losing out to a G4S bid that was reported as between £6 and £12. Cascade may have been losing money on Angela’s house – hence their reluctance to pay.

The G4S asylum housing contracts in Yorkshire and the North East have descended into chaos and farce. The real losers are vulnerable asylum seekers like Angela, harrassed and abused by housing companies, and constantly uprooted and moved by the Home Office and G4S.

The other losers are of course taxpayers who provide public funds for G4S to wreck the everyday lives of mothers like Angela. The Parliamentary Home Affairs committee inquiry into asylum support is due to hear evidence on the G4S asylum housing contracts in the near future. Having observed this unfolding disaster, and having worked with others to try to protect vulnerable people from its harmful effects,  I urge the Committee to recommend that the G4S asylum housing contracts (and the Serco and Clearel contracts in other areas) should be cancelled and transferred to not-for-profit providers in the housing association and voluntary housing sectors.

Very few articles I have researched and written over the past year or so have had happy outcomes. As I completed this one, Angela rang to say another letter had arrived. This time a letter to say that she had been granted right to remain – a refugee now, not an asylum seeker.