Reform Blackburn accused of breaking Geneva Convention

During a fiery full council meeting at Blackburn town hall, one motion submitted by the borough’s new Reform UK group was accused of violating international law.

The mammoth four-hour Blackburn with Darwen Council Forum kicked off with Mayor Mahfooz Hussain handing out civic awards to a number of councillors who lost their seats in May’s local elections, where Reform swept nine seats from a standing start of zero.

This made them the third largest party in the authority and denied the ruling Labour group a majority. But at Thursday night’s first full meeting of the new-look council, it became apparent that the insurgent right wing party was not done shaking things up.

It’s not Nazi Germany!

Reform’s Cllr Helen Voegt submitted a motion regarding transparency around the Home Office’s accommodation programme for asylum seekers, and asked if the council was keeping tabs on people who have been granted asylum, which led to one representative crying out: ‘It’s not Nazi Germany’.

Cllr Voegt noted that Blackburn with Darwen had received £855,600 as part of an asylum dispersal grant for the last financial year, a scheme which is paid for by the government to cover housing costs and other support needs for people fleeing persecution.

While the Reform representative accepted that this accommodation was found and funded by the Home Office, in conjunction with private firm Serco, Cllr Voegt said:

“Once a claim is resolved individuals exit Serco-managed accommodation and support, at which point the council has no requirement to track their onward outcome.

The cumulative local impact of both the temporary dispersal population and any individuals who go on to settle permanently in the borough following a grant of asylum – school places, primary care capacity, translation services, homelessness duties, and community cohesion – falls to this council and local partners to manage.”

The wording of the motion then demanded that Blackburn with Darwen be notified by the Home Office when any local housing is used accommodate people seeking asylum, but it was a demand to track the ‘cumulative effect’ of residents who have been granted legal refugee status that caused outrage.

The UK itself drafted the relevant law after WWII

Anyone who faces systematic mistreatment or harm based upon their protected characteristics, like their identity or political beliefs, is allowed to apply for asylum in this country under the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention – an international law that was drafted and negotiated by the UK following the horrors of World War Two.

Once a court has ruled on the validity of their claim, people are granted refugee status for a period of five years, in which they are allowed to work and access essential services like the NHS. After this period, they can apply for indefinite leave to remain, unless they have committed a serious offence or the circumstances have changed in their home country.

This illustrates Reform councilors’ lack of operational understanding

Responding to the motion, Cllr Damian Talbot (Lab), the Executive Member for Housing and Public Health, stressed that the council itself does not provide asylum accommodation, adding:

“The very title of this motion in my view appears to illustrate the Reform UK’s group’s lack of understanding of our council services that are operated.

As with the previous motions, it appears to be more of a series of questions that could easily have been put to officers and executive members and then responded to. There is and must be transparency, we are legally required to notify the Home Office of any spending.

The content of the motion appears more concerned with the movements of those granted refugee status, people who have proven their right to live permanently in the UK and reside where they choose.

When a person is granted refugee status, this removes all restrictions on their movements. Both within the country and abroad. They can choose to live wherever they want to, whether that’s in Blackburn with Darwen or somewhere else.”

Similarly, Cllr Brian Taylor (Lab) said the council was ‘proud’ of the borough’s inclusiveness, adding:

“I note that this motion is targeted at the residents who have been awarded asylum, it singles them out from others who have settled in this borough.

Do we track and trace people from Bacup, or Whitworth?”

We don’t put crosses and swastikas on doors

Conservative Cllr Neil Slater claimed that the insurgent party were trying to ‘out Restore, Restore’, in reference to the splinter group to the right of Reform, and said:

“I know what you’re saying and I can see where you’re trying to come with it, but it doesn’t sit well in this borough.

We’re not Nazi Germany, we don’t put crosses on doors and swastikas. But we do welcome people here, we do help them.”

Finishing, Cllr Slater added that he would apologise if he came over ‘too strong’, but received a round of applause from the chamber.

Councillor Matchett responded for Reform

Reform group leader Cllr Daniel Matchett responded by saying the Conservatives ‘are living up to the uniparty expectations’ and pushed back against the claim that his party did not understand how the council works.

Cllr Matchett said that Reform’s own ‘rough calculation’ was that 4000 people had entered the borough under the asylum dispersal scheme over the past 20 years – which would work out as between three and four new residents per week.

He cited concerns that ‘we don’t know’ the identity of people claiming asylum and calling some ‘fighting-age males’ and said: “I’m surprised at the Conservative Party and to be honest the independents need to be taking stock of this too, because this is your community. You don’t want undocumented males…”

Unacceptable and disappointing

At this point, the chamber erupted in outrage. Cllr Mustafa Desai, leader of the independent 4BwD group, which is constituted by British Asians, called the inference ‘unacceptable’ while the mayor banged his gavel in an attempt to bring the meeting back to order.

Mayor Hussain said that members were ‘disappointed’ with the comments and wanted an apology. “I am speaking on behalf of residents of Blackburn with Darwen only,” Cllr Matchett began, causing a pantomime response from the chamber of: “No you’re not.”

The motion was defeated, with nine votes for it, two abstentions, and 32 votes against.

An article by Local Democracy Reporter William Morgan.