The Home Office is shirking its responsibilities, says Bethany Morris.
The Home Office’s process for assessing Visa applicants is inadequate and could be discriminatory.
The Home Office uses a ‘traffic-light’ style system to process Visas, which examines applicants’ country of origin and age to assess their right to stay in the country. It then brands each applicant with a colour of either red, yellow or green to highlight their potential ‘risk’.
Although the Home Office has stressed that the algorithm’s verdict is always corroborated by a human caseworker to ensure it is legal and accurate, immigration professionals have warned that the process risks becoming a ‘de-facto decision making tool’.
Many are concerned that the system – with its emphasis on country of origin – is inherently racist. Similar (human-designed) algorithms used in the US have been found to be discriminatory against ethnic minorities. The digitisation of the application process has also come under fire due to the lack of accountability associated with using artificial intelligence in government operations.
Privatisating responsibility
This lack of accountability exists in other areas of Visa processing too, and the Home Office’s use of private companies to outsource applications makes them, rather worryingly, entirely devoid of responsibility.
In 2018, the Home Office subcontracted Sopra Steria to handle immigration claims from inside the UK, and VFS Global for applications from other countries – with both companies are solely responsible for collecting the ‘biometrics’ of Visa applicants. Their role reduces the applicant’s correspondence with the Home Office to next to nil, with the ‘middle-man’ subcontractors essentially sitting at the heart of the interactions.
Both companies however have a chequered history: Sopra Steria have recently come under fire for charging astronomical fees for appointments; only six of their service points across the country are free to attend, while sixty more are charging an average of £60 per appointment.
The inaccessibility of these service points means many applicants must travel many miles to attend, and often have to pay sky-high prices. The Independent recently reported the case of applicant Abdul Farooq from Manchester, who had to pay £780 for an appointment in London to supply his biometric data, as no appointments were available closer to his home before his Visa deadline.
VFS Global’s reputation has come under fire in recent years too, with ‘technical glitches’ in 2015 compromising the sensitive information – such as passports, addresses and dates of birth – for thousands of applicants.
Change needed
David Bolt, Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, has stated that the Home Office’s outsourcing of operations has been done to “manage its capacity” due to funding cuts – which have meant the process is being done “on the cheap”.
Cross-party politicians have also called for an investigation into the relationship between the Home Office and Sopra Steria after warnings that migrants’ risk being mistreated and launched into ‘the hostile environment’.
An influx in applicants is expected with the EU Settlement Scheme, many of which will go on to apply for British Citizenship, and the number of international students expected in September brings fears that the company will not be able to cope with the demand.
The Immigration Law Practitioner’s Association (ILPA) backs the investigation which is expected to assess the competency of Sopra Steria and examine what they see as an unjust level of profiteering from applicants.
Subcontracting Visa applications to private companies has proved a disastrous manoeuvre for applicants who are now facing exorbitant fees, long journeys and increased risks of rejection.
Ultimately, these failures serve to remind applicants that Theresa May’s ‘Hostile Environment’ policy, despite claims of it being over, is never too far behind those fighting their way through the process. How much longer can this go on?
Bethany Morris is a writer for the Immigration Advice Service, an organisation of leading UK immigration lawyers.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
4 Responses to “Outsourcing blame: Why Britain’s Visa system is broken”
Dave Roberts
Bethany Morris is in the business of getting people into this country. Anything else I can help you with?
Tom Sacold
All immigration processes need to be strengthened and tightened up. We need a strict set of basic rules . With a final qualitative test as to their suitability. All applications should be made from their home countries.
Dave Roberts
I agree Tom. All visas should be applied for in the home country. They should be on a strict points system with no right of appeal. On the economic refugee front remember that when Kenya and Singapore both gained their independence from Britain in 1963/64 they had the same GDP. Look at them now. The former is a third world country mired in corruption and poverty and the latter one of the most advanced in the world.
Outsourcing blame: Why Britain’s Visa system is broken — Left Foot Forward | kickingthecat
[…] via Outsourcing blame: Why Britain’s Visa system is broken — Left Foot Forward […]