Minutes:
The Service Manager – Children Looked
After introduced the report and stated that Unaccompanied
Asylum-Seeking Children (UASC) often arrived in the UK after long
and dangerous journeys, and it was the job of the receiving local
authority to assess their needs and provide them with appropriate
care and accommodation. He explained that UASC were received
through various means, such as in the backs of lorries in
Thurrock’s services and in small boats in Kent. He stated
that every local authority in the UK was set a quota for the
numbers of UASC they were required to take and provide care for,
and this quota was set against the child population. He explained
that previously the quota had been 0.07% of the child population,
but this had recently increased to 0.1%. He clarified that for
Thurrock this was an increase from 31 UASC to 45 UASC, which
increased the number of placements required; the caseload for
social workers; and the caseload for the aftercare team, as many
UASC were aged between 16-18 and were approaching adulthood.
The Service Manager – Children Looked After explained that
due to Thurrock’s transport links, the borough often received
more than its UASC quota and was able to move children to other
local authority areas under the National Transfer Scheme. He
explained that this was slowly changing, and Thurrock were becoming
a ‘receiver authority’ due to the number of children
arriving in Kent. He stated that UASC were often at risk of harm
due to trafficking and exploitation as organised immigration gangs
transported UASC to the UK for a fee and could then further exploit
them once they had arrived. The Service Manager – Children
Looked After explained that the team used their initial contact
with UASC to build trust and a relationship with the professionals
who were going to look after them. He stated that all UASC received
a direct visit within 24 hours and were assessed for their levels
of vulnerability. He stated that school-aged UASC were offered
online education as soon as possible to ensure they were learning
before they were enrolled in local schools, as this reduced the
risk of them going missing. He added that the team had been
successful as officers had run a training event for Ofsted, and the
Thurrock model was now being taught as best practice by Ofsted
inspectors.
The Service Manger – Children Looked After added that the
team utilised multi-agency safeguarding practices to share
information regularly with the police, border force, and relevant
social workers, as this could help all agencies understand where
UASC were coming from and how they could be best helped. The
Service Manager – Children Looked After outlined the data
within the report and highlighted that from April to November 2022,
14 new UASC children had arrived in Thurrock, which brought the
total population up to 34 UASC. He explained that under the
previous quota, the limit for UASC in Thurrock had been 31, and
this had already been surpassed with the new quota rules. He stated
that he had checked the figures, and today there were currently 37
UASC in Thurrock. The Service Manager – Children Looked After
clarified that from April to October 2022 there had been 11 missing
UASC episodes, but these had been from 3 UASC who had gone missing
multiple times. He stated that the Council did not currently have
any long-term missing UASC, but strategy meetings were regularly
held to ensure this did not happen, and if it did the likely places
the missing UASC could be found. He mentioned that all local lines
of enquiry were exhausted before a UASC was classed as long-term
missing, but the team met border force officers every six weeks to
discuss these cases, and some success had previously been seen
finding long-term missing UASC. He added that all UASC were offered
return to home interviews after a missing episode, and of the three
UASC who had gone missing from April this year, two had accepted
this offer and one had rejected.
The Service Manager – Children Looked After explained that
the team received a budget to support UASC, as well as a grant from
government of £143 per person, per night to support their
accommodation costs. He added that the average cost of housing a
UASC was approximately £800 to £1000 per week. He added
that in November 2022 the aftercare team looked after 251 people,
of which 95 were former UASC. He summarised and stated that UASC
were often at great risk of harm and exploitation, particularly
those with missing episodes, and the team worked hard to ensure
that all UASC received appropriate support and worked to reduce
missing episodes.
The Chair thanked officers for the report and asked about the
mixture of genders of UASCs, and which UASCs were received from.
The Service Manager – Children Looked After explained that
the overwhelming majority of UASC were male, and they came from
various parts of the world. He added that the Council had recently
received several UASC from Sudan, Eritrea, and Albania. The Chair
asked why these UASC chose to come to the UK, rather than other
European countries. The Service Manager – Children Looked
After explained that the UASC undertook perilous and dangerous
journeys when leaving their countries of origin, and often things
happened to them which were beyond their control. He explained that
organised immigration gangs often promised great things to the
parents of UASC which did not occur, and the UASC did not have a
choice in which country they were taken too. He added that UASC
were received across Europe. The Service Manager – Children
Looked After stated that social workers had a conversation with all
UASC to understand the trauma they had gone through on their
journeys, and help them to understand that they were now safe with
professionals. He summarised and stated that unscrupulous people
trafficked UASC, who often did not know what was happening to them
and were too afraid to ask or speak up for themselves. Councillor
Chukwu asked how the team helped UASC deal with their traumas. The
Service Manager – Looked After Children replied that the team
helped them to settle into safe places, establish routines, build
communities and relationships, and this often helped with the
impact of their trauma. He added that the team also had access to
specialist resources such as counsellors who were trained in UASC,
and would help them to settle in and give them a stable base.
Councillor Chukwu asked if UASC were encouraged to share their
stories with social workers to help alleviate their trauma. The
Service Manger – Children Looked After responded that they
were encouraged to share their stories, for example some UASC were
persecuted in their home countries because of their religious
beliefs or sexuality, and others were persecuted by local militia
and had seen family members killed. He added that often UASC
parents sent their children from their home countries, as
travelling to the UK or Europe was safer than them remaining in
their home countries, even though the journey itself was dangerous.
He stated that for a young person to make such a journey, there had
to be a significant motivation in their home countries.
Councillor Abbas congratulated the team on becoming a best practice
model for Ofsted. He asked what happened to a UASC when they
reached 18, or had their asylum refused. The Service Manager
– Children Looked After explained that once a UASC turned 18
they were moved to the aftercare team who ensured they had
appropriate housing, and employment or education. He stated that
the team worked with the Home Office on a UASC asylum claim and
helped advocate for the child. He stated that if their claim was
accepted that the team would help them with long term housing and
other issues, and a personal adviser was allocated. He added that
if their asylum claim was rejected, a human rights assessment would
be carried out, and this would consider the impact of the
withdrawal of support, as the UASC no longer had access to public
funds but the team still had to meet their basic human rights such
as having a place to live. He stated that the team would also work
with the UASC and the Home Office on a voluntary return, but
pathway planning was in place with every UASC to discuss the
eventuality of an accepted asylum claim; a rejected asylum claim;
and what would happen whilst they were waiting. Councillor Abbas
agreed with the Service Manager – Children Looked After that
these were vulnerable children, and asked why the local authorities
had to spend money on their care, rather than the Home Office. The
Service Manager – Children Looked After replied that the
local authority had a duty as Corporate Parents, but the Home
Office did have a role to play. He stated that the distinction of
duties was outlined within the relevant legislation. Councillor
Abbas queried why there was an overspend in the team if a grant was
received for UASC housing from central government. The Strategic
Lead – Children Looked After replied that the grant covered
placement costs, such as foster care or supported accommodation,
but did not cover other costs such as social workers or the
aftercare team. Councillor Ralph questioned if the team had enough
resources and staff to handle the increased UASC quota. He also
asked if UASC were receiving their initial health assessments on
time. The Strategic Lead – Children Looked After replied that
the number of children under the care of the local authority would
have an impact on resources, but the quota had been increased
nationally. He explained that that no new foster placements had
been granted after the quota increase, but the team monitored the
workload of social workers closely. He added that overall the level
of looked after children within Thurrock remained stable, due to a
decrease in the number of local looked after children. He added
that UASC initial health assessments were also affected by the
capacity issues within the system, but this depended on where the
child was placed.
Councillor Chukwu questioned how long it took the Home Office to
determine a UASC asylum case. The Service Manager –Children
Looked After replied that it was dependent on the case, and had
been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. He added that the team had
a specific link person within the Home Office, and they regularly
tracked and worked to ensure cases were progressing. Councillor
Chukwu queried how the team were coping with accommodating UASC
following the increase in the quota level. The Service Manager
– Children Looked After explained that placements of UASC
remained a national issue, but the placement team worked with a
variety of foster care providers and semi-supported accommodation
units to ensure all UASC received appropriate housing. He stated
that there were no issues currently within Thurrock regarding
finding placements, but this could change in future due to the
increased quota levels. Councillor Chukwu asked if the team had
encountered any issues with the community being hostile to UASC
placed in their areas. The Strategic Lead – Children Looked
After replied that this had not been an issue so far as the team
considered an area before offering contracts to placement
providers. He added that the team also worked to match up UASC, so
they were placed together in a safe area. He understood that UASC
may face racism and other issues, but the team remained vigilant
and were careful where children were placed. The Thurrock CSP added
that this issue had been brought to her attention once in five
years, and this had been dealt with swiftly. She explained that the
team had recently asked to place a UASC in this area again, and
detailed discussions had been undertaken with the police and CSP
before a decision was made. She added that the team were trained to
spot the signs of racism and knew how to report it. Councillor
Chukwu asked if the team had had any problems with community
integration for UASC. The Service Manager – Children Looked
After replied that this varied for different communities and
different children. He stated that the team made culturally
appropriate links between the UASC, who were often placed alongside
another UASC with similar backgrounds, or shared a first language.
He stated that some UASC struggled to fit in and settle, and these
children were supported closely by social workers and enrolled in
programmes such as English as Second or Other Language.
Councillor Ralph offered Member support to officers and partners,
and assured officers that Member assistance was available if
required. He thanked officers for their hard work, particularly
regarding the training given to Ofsted.
RESOLVED: That the Committee:
1. Were advised of the potential harms faced in relation to
Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children (UASC) presenting to Thurrock
and the work done to safeguard them.
2. Were aware that Corporate Parenting responsibilities extend to
UASC.
The Service Manager –Children Looked After and
Strategic Lead – Children Looked After left the meeting at
8.07pm.
Supporting documents: