The Home Office will pay an additional £2.3million to Croydon this year to cover the rising costs to the borough of being a first stop in this country for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children.
The cash-strapped borough last month threatened to copy Kent County Council by refusing to accept the responsibility for new arrivals, as Dover and Croydon carry extra burden compared to other local authorities because of their status as immigration points.
The Home Office has a migrants’ registration office at Lunar House in Croydon town centre.
In the past decade Croydon has looked after more than 5,000 UASCs, including many vulnerable children. Council estimates put the additional cost to Croydon at £50million over the last 10 years.
The costs of looking after UASC is supposed to be met by central government, with local authorities across the country stepping in to take their share of new arrivals under a national transfer scheme. But the scheme is voluntary, and most councils swerve this obligation.
According to official statistics, in July 2021, Croydon was host to 156 UASCs, as well as 477 older care leavers who arrived unaccompanied. Croydon’s government-agreed quota should see the borough looking after no more than 66 UASCs. The high numbers of UASCs arriving in Croydon caused the council “an unreasonable and unsustainable financial burden”, according to a senior Labour councillor.
At last month’s Town Hall cabinet meeting, Hamida Ali, the Labour-controlled council’s leader, said that “all options are on the table” in order to plug a £2.357million hole in the children’s services budget, including laying off social workers and triggering “unsafe” caseload rises.
Without immediate government funding, Ali said, Croydon would “have no choice… including having to confront stopping to support new unaccompanied asylum-seeking children and young people”.
Ali made her remarks just as the United States-backed government in Afghanistan was collapsing, prompting the emergency evacuation of thousands of civilians, many of them, including UASCs, likely to seek asylum in Britain.
An immediate crisis in Croydon over asylum-seeking children appears to have been averted, though, when a council meeting last night was informed that the Home Office had agreed to provide £2.3million in funding this year.
There has been no formal announcement of the settlement, either from Whitehall or from Fisher’s Folly (where the council is in any case currently constrained over the kind of public statements it is able to make during a month-long purdah period before October’s governance referendum).
However, according to Sean “No Scrutiny” Fitzsimons, the Labour chair of the scrutiny committee, much of the credit for persuading the Home Office to cough up goes to Robert Ward, the Conservative councillor who chairs the children’s services scrutiny sub-committee. Ward and council officials, Fitzsimons tweeted last night, “have done an amazing job in putting a strong case forward to the Home Office”.
The breakthrough in funding is not a permanent solution, with the payment only for the 2021-2022 financial year. But it may create a precedent of the Home Office accepting that it needs to make a larger contribution to the costs it creates by being based in Croydon.
As Fitzsimons said, “Croydon has spent millions supporting what is a national service and a permanent solution is now needed.”
According to a Katharine Street source, Ward’s approach was to avoid “just blaming the government”, a strategy used by Fitzsimons and his bosses – including the discredited ex-leader Tony Newman and finance chief Simon Hall – for nearly eight years without any success.
Ward, a retired former oil company executive, also drilled down into the numbers to reduce or eliminate some of the UASC costs which the council was paying.
According to the source, he discovered that while some former UASCs were eligible for housing benefit or Universal Credit, Croydon Council was picking up the tab rather than getting them on to government benefits. That now seems likely to stop, while the government has agreed to cover some other council costs, such as the age assessment team, and will provide an increase in the allowance for under-18s.
But what the Tory government gives with one hand, they are taking away with the other.
The council’s new finance director, Richard Ennis, told last night’s scrutiny committee meeting that Boris Johnson’s hike of National Insurance by 10 per cent is going to cost the council at least £1.25million per year.
“It’s madness to penalise social care providers like Croydon,” Fitzsimons said.
- Inside Croydon depends on regular subscriptions from our readers to enable us to continue to deliver exclusive, headline-making and independent journalism – the sort of scrutiny that Croydon Council would prefer did not exist. Please sign up today as a subscriber. Click here
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at firstname.lastname@example.org
- Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network
- Inside Croydon works together with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, as well as BBC London News and ITV London
- ROTTEN BOROUGH AWARDS: Croydon was named the country’s rottenest borough in 2020 in the annual round-up of civic cock-ups in Private Eye magazine – the fourth successive year that Inside Croydon has been the source for such award-winning nominations
- Inside Croydon: 3million page views in 2020. Seen by 1.4million unique visitors
Interesting quote – “It’s madness to penalise social care providers like Croydon”, Fitzsimons said.
Croydon. That’s you and me picking up the tab for the government failure to reimburse the council the estimated £50m it has cost for fulfilling their statutory duty towards UASCs as has been discussed previously in these pages. Hats off to Robert Ward for forcing the small concession out of the Homeland Security Office and its stingy purse keeper Ms Patel.
One wonder, what leverage was there from the man who ought to have lent his unwavering support, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Minister for Immigration Compliance and Justice or is it Courts?) Chris Philp, our illustrious MP for Croydon South?
My guess is that now that he’s become an expert in rocking dinghies, Mr P will claim that rocking boats is a stretch too far in case he loses his grip on the greasy pole.
Next time he prattles on about thecouncil’s financial mismanagement and overspend, ask him when the £47.7m shortfall will be repaid.