Quakers protest government drive to reopen immigration removal centres

Why is the British government returning to locking up asylum seekers when alternatives are more humane and effective?

Quakers are protesting government drive to reopen immigration removal centres, photo credit: Simone J Rudolphi

Under new Home Secretary Suella Braverman, the government appears to have reversed its 2018 policy of closing immigration removal centres (IRCs), a decision which may be linked to detaining people before sending them to Rwanda.

Derwentshire IRC in Country Durham was opened last year, replacing Yarl's Wood as the main detention centre for women, while Campsfield and Haslar centres in Oxfordshire and Gosport are to be reopened next year.

Alternatives to detention have been tried and found to work. And to be much cheaper as well as more humane. So why has the government canned the idea after two pilots?" asked Fred Ashmore of the Quaker Asylum and Refugee Network (QARN).

[QUOTE-START]

Alternatives to detention have been tried and found to work.

- Fred Ashmore

[QUOTE-END]

The new centres will allow for a significant increase in the number of people who can be detained, above the 3,000 currently housed in seven existing centres and some short-term holding centres.

Rooted in the conviction that there is that of God in every person, Quakers across Britain work to protect and welcome people seeking sanctuary.

Quakers took part in a musical protest outside Derwentshire IRC on Saturday, 15 October. With samba, guitars and singing, the crowd offered their support to the women inside the centre.

And Layla Moran, MP for Oxford West and Abingdon, led an adjournment debate on the reopening of Campsfield in parliament in late September, condemning it as cruel, expensive and ineffective. She was supported by campaigners outside.

Bridget Walker of QARN and member of Oxford Against Immigration Detention said: “We are totally opposed to immigration detention and always have been.

We don't think it is a solution to any problem. It is outside judicial oversight and we all know it is not time limited."

Read adjournment debate on Campsfield here