The home secretary is acting unlawfully in failing to ensure the rate of support for more than 50,000 asylum seekers is adequate by not implementing an increase of almost £5 a week recommended by officials, the high court has found.
In a case brought in the high court in Manchester by an asylum seeker known only as CB, the amount of financial support given to asylum seekers during the cost of living crisis was challenged. Internal Home Office advice to ministers was disclosed, which revealed that officials told ministers the current rate of £40.85 a week was no longer sufficient to meet basic needs because of the cost of living crisis.
An estimated 58,148 asylum seekers in self-catering accommodation receive cash support for basic needs such as food and travel. The level of support is calculated to be the minimum required for day-to-day survival. Those accommodated in hotels receive about £8 a week because meals are provided for them.
The home secretary is legally required to review the rate of support for asylum seekers in order to ensure that it meets subsistence needs. Financial support for asylum seekers is calculated at a much lower level than benefits.
Officials recommended that in light of rising inflation, the rate must be increased in order to protect asylum seekers from destitution. On 15 November officials stated categorically that the rate had to be increased immediately to £45 a week – an increase of almost £5 – but this advice was not implemented.
A high court order made on Friday by Mr Justice Fordham states: “The secretary of state for the home department has since at least 14 September acted unlawfully in failing to review the rate of asylum support to ensure it is adequate to meet the essential living needs of asylum seekers. Unless or until the secretary of state for the home department increases the rate of support she will be acing unlawfully.”
CB said she brought the case because she was unable to provide for her own and her children’s basic needs on the level of support of £40.85 a person. “It feels like it’s getting harder and harder to survive day to day,” she said. “I’m going without the clothes, toiletries and food I need to try to give as much as I can to the children.”
Her solicitor, Josie Hicklin, welcomed the court’s findings. “The home secretary was warned that over 50,000 people were receiving less than required to meet their most basic needs. Without the bravery of our client the secretary of state’s failing would have gone unchallenged,” she said.
A Home Office spokesperson said: “The welfare of those in our care is of the utmost importance and we continue to make sure asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute are provided with accommodation and a weekly allowance for food, clothing, transport and sundries.
“We are carefully considering the judge’s comments and it would not be appropriate to comment while legal proceedings continue.”
