Local authorities that provide housing and subsistence to asylum seekers applying in-country are able to recover their costs from central government under a specific grant regime that is administered by the Home Office. Grant claims made in 1999/2000 show that the costs to local authorities of providing support varied ten fold, with some authorities, particularly those in central London, spending well above the grant thresholds.
This paper recommends ways in which central government might administer the grant more fairly; and helps local authorities by giving examples of good practice in the management of support to existing asylum seekers, which should also help them to better manage their new role as suppliers of support and accommodation to new asylum seekers.
The key messages of the paper are that:
- Accommodation costs accounted for approximately two-thirds of all asylum related expenditure in 1999/2000, and generated most of the cost variations between authorities.
- Most authorities that participated in the Commission's study used a variety of different types of accommodation, the average cost of each type of accommodation varied, but for nearly all accommodation types, the cost per week for housing a single adult or family tended to be more expensive in the capital.
- Although authorities can take action to reduce costs by improving procurement procedures or dispersing asylum seekers to areas with cheaper housing, some authorities, particularly those in central London, are struggling with high numbers of asylum seekers and a lack of affordable local accommodation.
The Audit Commission suggests a fairer system for reimbursing local authorities with responsibility for asylum seekers. It recommends that the Home Office sets grant thresholds that are based on local market rates, assessed independently by rent officers. This would inevitably mean that the Home Office would need to increase grant rates in central London. However, it could reduce rates elsewhere, thus providing an incentive for authorities in cheaper areas to tighten control of their accommodation costs.
In addition, fixed allowances should be provided to cover subsistence and administration costs, which account for the other one-third of asylum-related expenditure.