Asylum seeker legal bills cost taxpayers £6m
TAXPAYERS are facing a record £6million legal aid bill for asylum seekers and immigrants fighting to remain in Scotland.
The number of legal aid grants has increased nearly 100-fold in the past 12 years, latest figures show.
Nearly 9,000 cases have cost the public purse more than £6million in the past year, up from £5.2million the previous year.
This is up from £855,000 in 2001-02, fuelled by those who repeatedly launch lengthy appeals against deportation.
The figures have renewed concern over the cost of the UK’s asylum and immigration system at a time of economic constraint.
They also strengthen the case for stronger immigration controls post-Brexit to stop those with criminal records settling in the UK, claiming their human rights under European law would be breached if they were sent home.
Legal aid chiefs have warned of some ‘unmeritorious’ cases granted funding ‘only to fall at an early stage’.
Scottish Tory community safety spokesman Oliver Mundell said: ‘There will always be a cost to the taxpayer for helping people who require asylum in Scotland, particularly in times of humanitarian crisis. But people will be concerned about the steep year-onyear increases in this bill, and there will come a point when they expect these costs to start decreasing again.’
According to the Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB), the total number of grants for legal advice and representation in asylum and immigration cases rose from 8,830 to 8,983 between 2014-15 and 2015-16.
The cost of these cases over the same period rose from £5.2million to £6.02million.
This is up from only 95 cases in 2004 – a near 100-fold increase.
Glasgow accommodates all 4,000 asylum seekers north of the Border but Whitehall officials have written to 28 of Scotland’s 32 councils, telling them their areas have been earmarked as being potentially ‘suitable for asylum dispersal’.
The Home Office warned council leaders last year that it has the power to force them to house asylum seekers should they fail to co-operate.
In 2014, the Mail exposed law firms profiting from the shambles of Scotwhere land’s asylum and immigration system.
Figures show the top ten earners pocketed nearly £3million a year in legal aid, with one firm receiving more than £630,000.
It emerged that this firm, Katani & Co in Glasgow, had hired an Eritrean sex offender as an interpreter.
Misrak Eyob was jailed for four years in 2009 after he was caught on CCTV trying to rape a 35-year-old woman – but was still taken on to work with vulnerable young asylum seekers.
In another case, the Scottish Daily Mail revealed a child sex offender who was also a failed asylum seeker was deported from Scotland following an 11-year legal battle.
Andrew Bridgen, pro-Brexit Tory MP for North West Leicestershire, said: ‘We offer justice to all so we can’t stop legal aid. What we can do something about is the number of appeals allowed, especially in cases people have criminal records. When the UK leaves the EU, we can decide that people with criminal records are no longer allowed to come to the UK.’
The legal aid funding is largely driven by a rise in asylum seekers over the last decade, says SLAB.
A review paper it has published said that ‘in the early days of dispersal of asylum seekers to Scotland, there was some concern that too few firms and solicitors were available to represent those making claims for asylum’.
It added: ‘While a small number of firms had for many years been providing an immigration law service, the number of dispersed asylum seekers meant that the level of potential legal need was of an altogether different order.
‘Fortunately, the established immigration firms took on significant amounts of asylum casework, along with a number of law centres and a small number of other firms.’
The same review found analysis of Board data suggests that a ‘very high proportion’ of cases for judicial review on immigration and asylum matters are expedited because of imminent deportation, but ‘relatively few are subsequently granted’.
It added: ‘The number and proportion of cases that are subsequently refused by the Board is perhaps suggestive of some unmeritorious cases being progressed, only to fall at an early stage.’
Eben Wilson of TaxpayerScotland said: ‘Taxpayers are fed up with these huge costs and a complete lack of political will to deal with them.
‘It is possible that post-Brexit, with the European Court no longer telling Scottish courts what to do, we will regain control of this drain on our taxes that can be much better used elsewhere.’
A SLAB spokesman said: ‘We keep the provision of legal aid in this area under review and focus on achieving best value for the public funds available to those eligible for assistance.’
‘Steep year-on-year increases’