Refugees refuse to move into free houses

Thousands of asylum seekers who were to be dispersed throughout Britain are opting to sleep rough in London rather than be given free housing elsewhere.

Thousands of asylum seekers who were to be dispersed throughout Britain are opting to sleep rough in London rather than be given free housing elsewhere.

The determination of the asylum seekers to remain in the capital has thrown into disarray government plans to move 65,000 people out of London and the South-east.

Furious local authorities accused the Home Office of costing them hundreds of thousands of pounds after they responded to emergency calls to provide flats and houses for asylum-seekers and their families. The Home Secretary, Jack Straw, will come in for criticism from the councils over the shortfall between the number of asylum-seekers expected and the actual total dispersed. The Government also faces criticism over placing some asylum seekers in poor quality housing with private landlords.

Liverpool City Council pulled out of the dispersal programme yesterday, claiming it was £170,000 out of pocket. The city was one of the first to respond to emergency calls for housing and has taken in 2,000 asylum seekers since December.

But housing officials claim the Government has refused to pay a £96,000 bill to cover the cost of asylum-seekers who arrived in the city between December and March 2000. They also insist they are incurring further costs - already in excess of £78,000 - because dozens of places provided for asylum seekers are empty.

Councillor Richard Kemp, executive member for housing and neighbourhood services, said: "The people of Liverpool have proved their willingness to accept asylum-seekers - often when no-one else would. But we are not a charity. We cannot afford to bear the brunt of unfulfilled obligations from the Home Office.

"To make matters worse, they have ignored our repeated requests to place asylum-seekers through the council. Instead they have put 1,000 directly into private hands - and unsatisfactory conditions - and we have been left to pick up the pieces."

Councils in the South-west of England are also furious after being told their accommodation will no longer be needed.

A Home Office spokeswoman admitted yesterday that the amount of accommodation required for asylum-seekers outside London had been over-estimated. She said instead of 65,000 beds in the first year, the Home Office now anticipated dispersing no more than 44,000.

Refugee support groups predicted last year that asylum-seekers would be unwilling to leave London because of the presence of people from their own communities, specialist immigration lawyers and medical services.

Asylum-seekers were given the choice of being housed outside London or providing their own accommodation and subsisting only on a voucher package of £36 a week for an individual or £57 for a couple.

The Home Office has been surprised by the numbers who have opted to sleep on the floors of friends' homes or elsewhere rather than come forward for housing.

The Government has been placing asylum-seekers with private landlords after a dispute with local authorities over contracts which councils believe exposes them to undue financial risks. As a result the contracts are currently in their sixth draft and have still not been signed. The Home Office has resorted to placing asylum seekers in private sector housing.

Fazil Kawani, communications director at the Refugee Council, said local authorities were "best placed" to house asylum-seekers and facilitate access to local services.