“This requires creative and collaborative models of outreach, hospitality, integration of advice into other services, and community legal education that improves knowledge of when and where to get high-quality advice and how to avoid harmful, exploitative and false immigration advice,” the report says. London has four out of 10 offices with legal aid contracts in England and Wales and more than half of the offices registered with the Office of the Commissioner for Immigration Services (OISC) to provide fee-free services at the highest level of advice and case work. Providing immigration advice is a criminal offence unless a consultant is accredited by the OISC or otherwise legally qualified. Despite the daunting problems that have been identified, the report makes the positive point: “This is an exciting and dynamic area to support. There is an extremely dedicated, creative and collaborative base of organizations and practitioners who are already combining service delivery, campaigning and empowerment in ways that truly change people`s lives. Several of our consultant users interviewed described how an organization or clerk had changed their situation; One of them was suicidal before the intervention of the organizations that supported her and had now been given permission to stay with her young child. Thoughtful and strategic funding for the immigration advisory sector has the potential to build on this committed foundation, change many lives for the better, and change the debates about immigration and counselling. Lack of access to legal advice has serious consequences. In one case, a woman had to return to an abusive husband because she could not find a legal aid lawyer to file the application for her, despite immigration regulations designed to protect women in their situation. Other cases have shown people who have been forced to sleep on the streets or remain in exploitative situations. Others had to pay thousands of pounds for advice because access to legal aid was restricted. A major new report published yesterday by the Justice Together Initiative found that the demand for legal advice on immigration issues in London far exceeds the supply. In addition, there is a recruitment and retention crisis in the area of immigration legislation, and urgent steps need to be taken to repopulate the profession.
Although London has more donor organisations accredited by legal aid and OISC than any other part of the country, the authors note that the provision of legal aid is clearly insufficient and that there is a very significant gap between capacity and need for issues that fall outside its scope. Wilding added: “Several of our interviewees were homeless, sleeping on buses or in exploitative situations, and some had paid thousands of pounds for advice because they did not have access to legal advice. People are forced into irregular status and poverty due to the complexity of the immigration system and the lack of access to counselling and case work. Dr Wilding, an ESRC postdoctoral researcher in the School of Applied Social Sciences, said: “Our research shows the huge gap between the need for immigration advice and people`s access to it. This means that people who are legally resident in the UK or who are entitled to legal immigration status do not know what their rights are and cannot access them. People are forced into irregular status and poverty because of the complexity of the immigration system and the lack of access to counselling and case processing. This includes children born in the UK. The summary of the report states: “This research project was commissioned to provide evidence of the extent and characteristics of the demand for and supply of legal advice on immigration issues in London. We were asked to look at the different types of providers, their capabilities, their distribution within the city, funding models and approaches, as well as entry points and referral routes through advisory networks in London.
We were asked to estimate the magnitude of the different types of needs, whether met or not, and the gaps in care. We were asked to explore the experiences of people who have sought or received immigration advice in London. Finally, we were asked to comment on the impact of Covid on demand and care in the capital. Another important finding of the report is that immigration advocacy is experiencing a staffing crisis that appears to apply nationally and at all levels, from lawyers and supervisory clerks to OISC Level 2 and above. The new report estimates that there are at least 238,000 people in London, including tens of thousands of undocumented children who are eligible to apply for regularisation of their immigration status. However, the city only has a maximum capacity of 4,500 immigration files per year, which is outside the scope of legal aid. Dr. Debbie Weekes-Bernard, Deputy Mayor of London for Communities and Social Justice, said the report`s research had revealed the huge problems with the immigration system and it was crucial that the government reintroduce legal aid for immigration and provide adequate funding for free immigration counselling services in London. Jo Wilding commented: “Our research shows the huge gap between the need for immigration advice and people`s access to it.
This means that people who are legally resident in the UK or who are entitled to legal immigration status do not know what their rights are and do not have access to them. The report is based on research by Dr Jo Wilding that reveals the extent of legal aid “deserts” across the UK, in collaboration with PhD student Maureen Mguni and Dr Travis Van Isacker, who wrote her PhD in Brighton on migrant deportations in Calais and is now an independent consultant. The study reveals a gap between the supply of and demand for immigration advice in London, particularly in areas of advice outside the scope of legal aid, and a bottleneck between advice and the work of complex cases. It also identifies infrastructural challenges for the immigration consulting sector, including the lack of trained consultants and a recruitment crisis. It concludes with a series of recommendations to address the underlying infrastructure issues in London`s immigration advisory services sector for policy makers, funders and advisory service providers. The report states: “The overall impression of all the data is that the right types of advice exist in London, and to a much greater extent than elsewhere in England and Wales, but that there is an `overwhelming gap` between demand and capacity or supply. Some types of cases have a larger capacity gap than others, including new asylum applications, family reunification of refugees, Article 8 cases and removal. Similarly, certain groups of people face greater barriers to accessing available counselling, such as trust, language, literacy, digital literacy, and physical or geographic accessibility of services. It is a recurring theme that accessibility requires strategic attention as well as supply and demand: it is necessary to increase supply, but at the same time to take a proactive approach to expand the accessibility of advice. “Many people join the counselling network as a result of some kind of crisis, often related to health, homelessness, violence or job loss,” they write. When they are unable to access or engage in the advice they need, some return to exploitative or dangerous situations. That is why it is important to increase crisis capacity.
Similarly, they argue that it is important to understand how to resolve the underlying issues before crises occur and to provide early advice. Co-authors Jo Wilding, Maureen Mguni and Travis Van Isacker point out that the nonprofit legal services sector has “been reduced by austerity measures and the resulting cuts to municipal funds” and that immigration law has become “more complex.” The report highlights the “infrastructure challenges” facing the sector, including “a lack of trained consultants and a recruitment crisis.” “These changes have changed the landscape of demanding and providing immigration advice,” they say. The study follows lawyer Jo Wilding`s research into the supply of the legal aid market for immigration and asylum – see here. “This had already been identified in areas of the desert of councils, but it was a surprise to learn the magnitude of it in London,” the authors commented. This study was commissioned by the Justice Together Initiative and the Paul Hamlyn Foundation and funded by the Greater London Authority.