Homelessness, exploitation, failure: The price of May’s anti-migrant project

News

‘Theresa May’s hostile environment has meant a lack of basic rights for human beings in precarious situations.’

We wrote for Politics.co.uk about the government’s “right to rent” policy causing homelessness, discrimination and exploitation.

The standard operating procedure of the May government is to outsource immigration enforcement to the public, embedding borders in all sorts of different aspects of our day-to-day life. One of the chief ways it does this is through the ‘right-to-rent’ scheme, which is a far more dangerous development than it sounds. Now we finally have an independent assessment of the operation, via David Bolt, the independent chief inspector of borders and immigration.

The right-to-rent scheme places a legal requirement on landlords and their agents to carry out immigration checks on all adults who will occupy a property before they enter into a tenancy agreement. The punishment for those who fail to do this are very severe. They face a civil penalty of up to £3,000 and a possible prison sentence of up to five years.

Bolt’s inspection report, carried out throughout 2017, paints a stark picture of a scheme that is causing real harm to migrants – both documented and undocumented – people from ethnic minority backgrounds, and society at large. It appears to be being implemented with no meaningful oversight or monitoring whatsoever and is not even achieving its stated aim of reducing or controlling immigration.

You can read the full article here.



SUPPORT OUR WORK

On reaching the UK, people face a hostile environment. Without help, many will be forcibly sent back to the wars, persecution and misery they have fled.

Your donation will help us to help people in their struggle for the right to remain in the UK, and to campaign for migration justice

DONATE TO RIGHT TO REMAIN

TAGS:

One comment on “Homelessness, exploitation, failure: The price of May’s anti-migrant project

  1. pete keenan on

    My friend and client has just been re detained after living in the UK for 16 years, the last 5 with NRPF. A period of incremental rises in punitive regulation, tightening the noose on refugees whose circumstances prevented their carrying dosiers of supportive evidence with them, as they fled the hostile environments from which they sought sanctuary in the UK.
    If, as is most likely, the H.O. fail once again to establish ETD’s for him, after a lengthy period of costly detention he will be released onto the streets once again without the abillity to put a roof over his head.
    A civilised society?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.