Victory against
YMCA –
But campaign
against immigration slavery continues
John Nicholson
There can be
victories in the struggle against immigration controls! But these can only come
about through solidarity and collective action
The YMCA in
Liverpool recently announced its willingness to participate in the immigration
slavery scheme introduced by section 10 of the Asylum and Immigration Act
2004. Section 10 allows for housing and other support for certain refugees to
be made conditional on undertaking “community services”. These are refugees
whose claim has been rejected by the Home Office but are unable to return home
because of circumstances beyond their control – because they are stateless or
ill or (paradoxically in the case of a rejected asylum application) the country
of return is too dangerous
Section 10
transforms refugees into slaves. It makes their labour compulsory as refusal to
participate will mean deprivation of housing and other support. No One Is
Illegal began a campaign against the YMCA. This was supported and lead by groups
in Liverpool.
And the YMCA
has now backed down. Victories can be won!
The struggle
continues!
However the
struggle against immigration slave labour continues. The YMCA in other cities
may decide to collude in the scheme. When the Act was being debated in the
House of Lords, Lord Rooker encouraged voluntary sector groups to get involved.
He also suggested that this compulsory refugee labour could be used for the
maintenance of the refugee’s own accommodation – which is a way local
authorities and private companies can get otherwise unlettable properties
updated for free.
Why the scheme
should be opposed
* It is in
breach of section 4(2) of the European Convention of Human Rights –
(prohibition of forced labour)
* It is in
breach of the 1930 Forced Labour Convention of the International Labour
organisation to which the UK a signatory
* It offends
all trade union principles – in particular the right to reject employment
without suffering penalties. .
What you can do
* Ask your
trade union branch to pass a resolution against section 10 and to notify the
Home Secretary
* Be alert to
any Home Office attempt to involve your or any other company of agency in the
scheme
* Invite a
speaker from No One Is Illegal to your trade union or any other relevant
meeting.
Come to the No
One is Illegal conference, June 25th, 12.30pm-6pm, Cross St Chapel, Cross St,
Manchester , UK
NO-ONE IS
ILLEGAL
www.noii.org.uk , email info@noii.org.uk 16 Wood St Bolton, BL1 1DY
Copy of above
as a Word document:
https://www.asylumpolicy.info/thestrugglecontinues.doc
Response from
Merseyside:
A scheme which
would have forced failed asylum seekers to work in return for accommodation has
been dropped.
The government
pilot, due to start in Liverpool this summer, would have seen young asylum
seekers doing community service before their deportation.
A YMCA
spokesman said it did not think it was appropriate any more.
But Ed Murphy,
chair of Merseyside Refugee Support Network, said he hoped the decision
reflected national policy.
"We are
opposed to the whole government legislation which allows this slave labour to
take place in the first place" Ed Murphy, Merseyside Refugee Support Network
The YMCA is
expected to run a voluntary version of the scheme.
"There was
concern about the compulsory nature of the project and we now no longer think
that it is appropriate and would prefer it if the scheme was voluntary," said
the YMCA spokesman.
"The project
is only in the early stages of consultation and we will continue to consult
local agencies about the pilot scheme."
Mr Murphy said
he hoped the YMCA would not be running a compulsory scheme anywhere.
'Slave labour'
"We hope this decision has been taken on a national level and not just scrapped
in Liverpool because of the opposition the YMCA has faced here.
"We are
opposed to the whole government legislation which allows this slave labour to
take place in the first place."
Under section
4 of the Immigration and Asylum (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004, failed
asylum seekers are provided with accommodation if they are unable to return to
their home countries for reasons beyond their control.
But the failed
asylum seekers can be made to carry out "community activities" while awaiting
deportation under section 10 of the same Act
BACKGROUND:
LETTER FROM “NASS” (HOME
OFFICE) –
SECTION 10 OF THE ASYLUM AND
IMMIGRATION (TREATMENT OF CLAIMANTS, ETC.) ACT 2004 - COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES
You may be aware that the Home Office is now starting to implement section 10 of
the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, Etc.) Act 2004. Section 10
links section 4 support for failed asylum-seekers to taking part in community
activities
Section 4 support - which consists of full-board accommodation - is available to
failed asylum-seekers who have come to the end of the asylum process (including
any appeals) but who, for reasons beyond their control, are currently unable to
return home. This might be due to delays in arranging travel documentation, or
because there is no viable route of return to their home country.
Section 10 will link this support to activities that are of benefit to the
community, or certain sections of the community. We hope that the scheme will
not only contribute to community cohesion, but also benefit the individuals
concerned. As far possible, individuals will be matched with activities that
allow them to build on existing skills or interests. Those who are unable to
participate, for instance because of medical reasons or caring responsibilities,
will not be expected to do so. There will also be a number of mechanisms in
place to safeguard the welfare of the individuals - for example, the scheme will
not apply to those under 18, and there will be a maximum limit on the number of
hours of activities per week.
Our intention is to set up a pilot scheme in one area before rolling it out more
widely, in order to design and test out the relevant processes. We have chosen
YMCA England to deliver the first phase of the scheme. Based on the location of
section 4 accommodation and where YMCA England are best able to deliver it,
Ministers have decided to set up the first phase of the community activities
scheme in Liverpool. Des Browne recently wrote to Sir David Henshaw, Chief
Executive of Liverpool City Council, to inform him of the decision and seek the
local authority's involvement in the scheme. A copy of the text of his letter is
attached. He also wrote in similar terms to the relevant MPs at the time -
Louise Ellman, Joe Benton, Peter Kilfoyle, Robert Wareing, Jane Kennedy and
Maria Eagle.
We are now beginning detailed work with YMCA England to finalise a grant
agreement and start setting up the scheme. However, before we go further, we are
keen to build relationships with as many key agencies and organisations in
Liverpool as possible. We want to ensure that the scheme is built up with the
support of local partners, rather than imposed from the top down, and to that
end we want to ensure that you and your colleagues are as fully involved as
possible.
Gary Steptoe in the NASS North West office, who I understand you are meeting
with on Friday 22 April, has kindly offered to set up a meeting so we can
discuss this further. What I had envisaged was for myself and colleagues from
YMCA England and NASS headquarters to come up to Liverpool, go through the
details of the scheme, and discuss how best to keep you involved. I think that
Gary will be in touch with you to canvass possible dates - I hope that we will
be able to find a mutually convenient time. I understand that Gary will also be
approaching other local partners, such as Merseyside Police and the Government
Office for the North West. If there are other individuals or organisations who
you think would like to be involved in such a meeting, then please let Gary or
myself know.
I look forward to meeting you in due course, but in the meantime please feel
free to get in touch if you have any questions (my contact details are at the
top of the letter). For further information you can also visit the IND website:
https://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/en/home/laws___policy/community_activities.html
Yours sincerely
By e-mail
Nick Poyntz
The YMCA Initial Decision:
That the
Committee has considered the draft Immigration and Asylum (Provision of
Accommodation to Failed Asylum-Seekers) Regulations 2005.
"...I am
pleased to inform the Committee that YMCA England will arrange and co-ordinate
community activities in the first phase. That is the first public announcement
of our partnership with YMCA in England in this regard, and we are in the
process of finalising a grant agreement.
https://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200405/cmstand/deleg6/st050315/50315s01.htm
Prepared 16
March 2005
Some Personal
Views:
1. As a
teenager, I undertook a voluntary YMCA 'Work Experience Programme' (WEP) and
have been a Community Service Volunteer (CSV), both being beneficial to me and I
hope, the people worked with. However, I find it morally abhorrent and deeply
offensive that the YMCA has chosen to engage in voluntary activities in the
community, that are considered to be de-facto forced-labour, read slavery.
Further, it also makes a mockery of the very idea of voluntary work and is, yet
another, sad indicator of the quagmire charities and the ‘voluntary’ sector have
put themselves in. Especially when they seek to collude with and become junior
partners to the state’s enforced, read violent, asylum and immigration policies.
2.I think the
way to tackle the YMCA is not to zap them, but to appeal to them on the basis
of their own mission statement, in which it says it stands for:
A worldwide
fellowship based on the equal value of all persons Respect and freedom for all,
tolerance and understanding between people of different opinions Active concern
for the needs of the community United effort by Christians of different
traditions
It would seem
to me that there is a contradiction in the first two of these and being involved
in the so-called community service, due to the coercive nature of the Home
Office plan.
It is also an
opportune time to write to the president, as he has only just taken up his post
as of April 1st. I e-mailed him last week, so he will have had at least one
request for reconsideration to greet him on his first day at the new job. If
you want to send others, his contact details are:
Dr. John Tucker
Mugabi_Sentamu_bishop@birmingham.anglican.org
(mailto:bishop@birmingham.anglican.org)
Dave Smith
The Boaz Trust
Contact details
for UK, World & European YCMA's
World Alliance
of YMCAs
https://www.ymca.int/
European
Alliance of YMCAs
https://www.eay.org/
YMCA Scotland
https://www.ymcascotland.org/
National
Council of YMCAs of Wales
https://ymca-wales.org/
YMCA Wales
Community College
https://www.ymca-wales.ac.uk/
YMCA Canada
Website
https://www.ymca.ca/
YMCA for the
United States
https://www.ymca.net/
Y Care
International are the international development agency of the YMCA movement in
the UK and Ireland. We work in thirty countries in Africa, the Middle East,
Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe. We work with local YMCAs and use their
expertise to develop programmes that local people need.
contact
3-9 Southampton
Row, London, WC1B 5HY, UK Map Tel:020 7421 3022 Fax:020 7421 3024 Web:https://www.ycare.org.uk
https://www.ymca.org.uk/pooled/profiles/BF_COMP/view.asp?Q=BF_COMP_21138
ACTIONS AND LEAFLETS:
Say no to
Asylum Slavery
Demonstrate
Tuesday 24th May 2005
12.15pm
to 2.00pm
Called by Merseyside Asylum Rights Campaign
Liverpool
Council Building
Millenium
House
60 Victoria
Street
Liverpool
L1.
6JQ
There
will be a demonstration outside Millenium House against the Home Office
consultation on Section 10 of the Asylum and Immigration Act 2004 (minimum
support for compulsory 'community service'). The consultation is taking place
regarding the YMCA agreement to participate in this dreadful 'practice' and
sadly Liverpool YMCA has agreed to run a pilot scheme. We must all let the YMCA
know that they should now say NO.
Campaign to
Stop the YMCA turning Asylum-Seekers into Slave Labour
Background Legislation
Section 4 of the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act allows for minimum ("hard
case") housing and other support for certain failed asylum seekers. This bare
minimum is available where a failed asylum seeker is unable to return home
because of circumstances beyond his or her control - for instance because they
are stateless or ill or (paradoxically in the case of a rejected asylum
application) the country of return is too dangerous. However section 10 of the
Asylum and Immigration Act 2004 says that even this minimum will only be
available on condition that the refugee undertakes compulsory "community
service".
Slave Labour
This is a punishment hitherto reserved for convicted criminals. It is also a
modern form of slavery. It is in breach of the 1930 Forced Labour Convention of
the International Labour Organisation to which the UK is a signatory. The
Convention defines forced labour as meaning "all work or service which is
exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said
person has not offered himself voluntarily". Asylum-seekers selected for the
scheme will become homeless and destitute unless they perform the required
community services/ labour. This cannot be classified as a "voluntary" agreement
to work. Trade unions in particular should be alert to the use of such wageless
labour. The present scheme is based on the compulsory giving of labour (just
like the national dispersal of refugees is based on the compulsory movement of
human beings, which is itself a form of servitude.)
Breach of Human Rights
Section 10 has been condemned by the Joint Committee on Human Rights of the
House of Lords/House of Commons in its Fourteenth Report of Session 2003-04.
In essence the
criticism is one of slave labour. In particular the report attacks the section
as being in breach of Article 4(2) of the European Convention of Human Rights
(prohibition of forced labour), of Article 3 (prohibition on inhuman or
degrading treatment) and of Article 14 (no discrimination on grounds of
nationality).
The YMCA's collusion in the scheme Lord Rooker in the committee stage of the
2004 legislation made it clear that the government wants not only local
authorities and the private sector but also the voluntary sector to participate
in this scheme as slave masters. Hitherto only one voluntary agency has agreed
to participate. This is the YMCA which has agreed to run a pilot scheme in
Liverpool. This was made public by the YMCA in a statement of May 5 which
attempts to justify the proposed slavery.
* The
first sentence of the statement says "YMCA England is the preferred provider" to
deliver such a scheme. What does this mean? It is the language of corporate
bodies tenders rather than an organisation fighting for the rights of asylum
seekers.
*
Historically all slave-owners seek to justify their role in showing that
servitude somehow "helps" the slave. This was the position of the cotton growers
of the Southern states of America at the time of the civil war - slavery being
portrayed as a way that black plantation workers could be educated and their
welfare met. The YMCA portrays section 10 as being benevolent and helpful to
asylum-seekers
*
The YMCA says that under the proposed scheme "No individual will be required to
carry out any specific activity against their will." This is somewhat
disingenuous as an asylum seeker within the scheme who refuses to carry out all
proposed activities will automatically lose all support. This is clear from
clause 4 of the Immigration and Asylum (Provision of Accommodation to Failed
Asylum-Seekers) Regulations 2005.
*
The statement says section 4 asylum-seekers should be allowed to enter into paid
employment and that the YMCA will continue to be
"outspoken" on
this and on other matters appertaining to refugees. We agree section 4
asylum-seekers should have the right to paid work and in fact think all asylum
seekers should have this right. However there is an omission from the issues on
which the YMCA is prepared to be "outspoken". At the moment those subject to
immigration control are outside the welfare state. Entitlement to most benefits
and services are dependant upon immigration status. Since 1999 asylum-seekers
have been subject to a new poor law (administered by NASS - the National Asylum
Support Service) based on compulsory dispersal and "maintenance" below income
support level. "Hard case" support for failed asylum seekers is even below
these rates. Why does the YMCA not campaign for the restoration of full benefits
and all other entitlements for asylum seekers and everyone else subject to
immigration controls?
An issue of
principle - No Collusion
The statement presents as positive that "The YMCA is also already working with a
large number of failed asylum seekers through a contract with NASS to provide
accommodation to around 150 section 4 recipients". This provision of (usually
second rate) accommodation is not a benefit to refugees. This is because the
YMCA is a party to evicting such section 4 recipients on withdrawal of support
by NASS.
If the
voluntary sector (along with the private sector and local authorities) had
refused to become involved with the poor law and dispersal scheme then these
could not have been implemented. This leads to the basic issue of principle at
stake here. Our position is that immigration controls cannot be sanitised,
cannot be rendered "just", cannot be made "fair". All involvement on this basis
only results in collusion - and in the present case in immigration slavery. It
is ironic that Liverpool, the great port on which slavery rested historically,
has been chosen for the pilot scheme.
What you can
do?
Write to the following at the YMCA:
Richard Capie,
Public Affairs Manager YMCA,
richard.capie@england.ymca.org.uk
.
John Sentamu,
National President of YMCA
Bishop@birmingham.anglican.org
Jeff Calvert,
Chief Executive, Liverpool YMCA,
Jeff.Calvert@liverpoolymca.org.uk
Send copies of your letters to:
*Your
local YMCA
*Anti--Slavery
International info@antislavery.org
*International
Labour Organisation
Europe@ilo.org *The YMCA is an
international organisation. Circulate this leaflet internationally
Come to the International
No One Is Illegal
conference
Saturday June 25th 1-6pm Cross St Chapel
Manchester city centre
Merseyside Asylum Rights Campaign
Adele
Spiers
Adelespiers@yahoo.com
PO Box
283
Liverpool
L13 4WY
CAMPAIGN AGAINST IMMIGRATION
SLAVERY
APPEAL TO TRADE
UNIONS, LOCAL AUTHORITIES, AND VOLUNTARY SECTOR/ COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS
AGAINST IMMIGRATION SLAVE LABOUR
Section 10 of Asylum and Immigration Act 2004 makes “hard case support”
conditional on performance of community work.
This
leaflet explains why trade unions, voluntary sector groups and local authorities
need to make a statement denouncing this clause and refusing to take advantage
of such forced labour.
A new
section with severe implications was added at the last moment to the Asylum and
Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004. This gives the Home
Secretary power to make regulations providing for the continuation of the
provision of accommodation for a failed asylum seeker to be conditional upon her
or his performance of community services.
Such
“hard case support” is presently available under Section 4 of the 1999 Act in
cases where a failed asylum seeker is unable to return home because of
circumstances beyond his or her control – for instance because they are
stateless or ill or (paradoxically in the case of a rejected asylum application)
the country of return is too dangerous. Once regulations come into force this
help will be dependant on what has hitherto been a punishment reserved for
convicted criminals – namely obligatory community service
Already
organisations are being asked to submit “expressions of interest” (ie. tenders)
in order to participate as slave-masters. Details can be found at
https://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/en/home/news/press_releases/asylum_and_immigration.html
+
https://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/en/home/laws___policy/community_activities.html
Full
benefits should be available to all irrespective of immigration status – and
people seeking asylum should have the choice to work (it is ironic that all
other people who are seeking asylum are forbidden to work).
Section
10 has been condemned by the Joint Committee on Human Rights of the House of
Lords/House of Commons in its Fourteenth Report of Session 2003-04. In essence
the criticism is one of slave labour. In particular the report attacks the
section as being in breach of Article 4(2) of the European Convention of Human
Rights (prohibition of forced labour), of Article 3 (prohibition on inhuman or
degrading treatment) and of Article 14 (no discrimination on grounds of
nationality).
Why
trade unions must oppose this scheme
This
legalisation of slave labour – transforming into slaves one of the most
vulnerable and abused sections of our communities – is quite clearly something
the labour movement must oppose. It is simply the logical conclusion of the
super-exploitation of migrants, immigrants and refugees – a super exploitation
that resulted in the deaths at Morecambe of the Chinese cockle-pickers.
Why local authorities
must oppose this scheme
It gets
worse. The new section has an expectation that local authorities will collude in
the implementation of this forced labour scheme. It states that: “A local
authority or other person may undertake to manage or participate in arrangements
for community activities”. This is a reminder of the old Poor Laws where
parishes would contract in forced labour from the work-house.
Lord
Rooker in the in the Committee stage of the 2004 Act said in the House of Lords
that community service might involve refugees “contributing to the upkeep or
maintenance of their own accommodation” This is a formula for the free repair
of otherwise unlettable council (and voluntary sector or private property) to
which asylum seekers are involuntarily “dispersed”– which can then be rented out
at a profit once the slave is deported. In immigration newspeak Rooker called
this “social cohesion”. It is more like social disintegration
Why
the voluntary sector must oppose this scheme
It gets
worse still. Lord Rooker also stated “We would be happy to see the voluntary
and community…sectors involved in this way…consultation should take place
with…the National Council for Voluntary Organisations”.
.
The
Home Office is trying to ensure that voluntary organisations, like other welfare
and social service providers, become agents of internal immigration control –
through the increasing link between immigration status and welfare entitlements.
The new section with its imposition of forced (slave) labour is politically the
logical consequence of this.
What to do!
(1) All
organisations should write to the Home Secretary (Home Office, 50 Queen Anne’s
Gate, London SW1H 9AT), to object to Section 10, to state that you will refuse
to participate in it – and to make this correspondence public.
(2)
Organisations should arrange meetings against the exploitation of undocumented
labour and for the non-implementation of Section 10.
(3)
Let’s develop this into a national campaign!
This
leaflet has been produced by
:
NO-ONE IS ILLEGAL
www.noii.org.uk 16 Wood St Bolton, BL1 1DY
LETTER TO YMCA
No One Is Illegal c/o 16
WOOD ST, BOLTON, LANCS BLI IDU
Email
info@noii.org.uk
To:
YMCA
(1)
Richard
Capie
Public Affairs Manager YMCA
richard.capie@england.ymca.org.uk
(2) The Right Reverend Dr. John Tucker Mugabi Sentamu
National President of YMCA
Bishop@birmingham.anglican.org
(3)Jeff Calvert,
Chief Executive, Liverpool YMCA
Jeff.Calvert@liverpoolymca.org.uk
Dear
YMCA
Section 10 of Asylum and Immigration Act 2004 making “hard case support” under
section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act conditional on performance of
involuntary community work.
We have
written to you previously (without reply) voicing our concern over the YMCA’s
involvement in what can only be called an “immigration slavery” scheme. We are
still appalled by your agreement to allow Liverpool YMCA to “pilot” the scheme.
Your statement of May 5th does nothing to reassure us. We would like
to make the following points and raise the following questions. We await your
response
(1)
Historically all slave-owners and masters ultimately seek to justify their role
in showing that servitude somehow “helps” the slave. This was the position of,
for example, the cotton growers of the Southern states of America at the time of
the civil war – slavery being portrayed as a way that black plantation workers
could be educated and their welfare met. Your statement of May 5th
likewise portrays section 10 as initiating a scheme that can be benevolent and
helpful to asylum-seekers
(2) In
whatever way it is sanitised section 10 does construct a system of slavery for
those asylum seekers subject to it because they will be denied all support
unless they agree to undertake community services.
(3)
Section 10 has been condemned by the Joint Committee on Human Rights of the
House of Lords/House of Commons in its Fourteenth Report of Session 2003-04. In
essence the criticism is one of slave labour. In particular the report attacks
the section as being in breach of Article 4(2) of the European Convention of
Human Rights (prohibition of forced labour), of Article 3 (prohibition on
inhuman or degrading treatment) and of Article 14 (no discrimination on grounds
of nationality).
(4) You
say that under the proposed pilot scheme “No individual will be required to
carry out any specific activity against their will” This is somewhat ingenuous
as an asylum seeker within the scheme who refuses to carry out all proposed
activities will automatically lose all support. This is clear from clause 4 of
the Immigration and Asylum (Provision of Accommodation to Failed Asylum-Seekers)
Regulations 2005
(5)
What trade unions have you consulted as to the employment of wageless labour?
(6) We
note that you say that section 4 asylum-seekers should be allowed to enter into
paid employment and that you will continue to be “outspoken” on this and on
other matters appertaining to refugees. We agree section 4 asylum-seekers
should have the right to paid work and in fact think all asylum seekers should
have this right. However we are concerned that there appears to be a deliberate
omission from the issues on which you are prepared to be “outspoken”. This is
the restoration of the right to all benefits and services for asylum-seekers. In
other words no benefit or service should be linked to immigration status. This
would also ensure the end of the forced dispersal scheme – which itself could
correctly be described as being analogous to servitude.
(7) The
first sentence of your statement of May 5th justifying the pilot
scheme says
“YMCA
England is the preferred provider “ to deliver such a scheme”. What does this
mean? It is the language of corporate bodies seeking tenders rather than an
organisation fighting for the rights of asylum seekers.
(8)
Your entering into this scheme undermines the whole concept of “voluntary” work.
“Voluntary” work by its very name suggests the freely giving of services. The
present scheme is based on the compulsory giving of labour (just like dispersal
is the compulsory movement of human beings).
(9) You
say and present as something positive that “The YMCA is also already working
with a large number of failed asylum seekers through a contract with NASS to
provide accommodation to around 150 section 4 recipients”. We do not necessarily
consider this of benefit to refugees. For instance how many section 4 recipients
have you evicted on withdrawal of section 4 support? It is clear that if the
voluntary sector (along with the private sector and local authorities) had
refused to become involved with the dispersal scheme then the latter could not
have been implemented.
(10)
This leads to the basic issue of principle at stake here. Our position is that
immigration controls cannot be sanitised, cannot be rendered “just”, cannot be
made “fair”. All involvement on this basis only results in collusion – and in
the present case in immigration slavery.
We hope
you will reconsider your position
Yours
No One
Is Illegal
Copy sent to Anti-Slavery
International email:
info@antislavery.org
REFERENCES:
References, from
www.asylumpolicy.info
Lead item: -
'Slave Labour Scheme, update'
Liverpool drops
asylum work pilot
A scheme which
would have forced failed asylum seekers to work in return for accommodation has
been dropped.
31 May 2005
https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/merseyside/4597087.stm
'Slave Labour'
Scheme for Failed Asylum Seekers Scrapped
https://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4628210
YMCA's 'slave
labour' work scheme scrapped The project is only in the early stages of
consultation and we will continue to consult local agencies about the pilot
scheme ?
We hope this
decision has been taken on a national level and not just scrapped in Liverpool
because of the opposition the YMCA has faced here...
https://society.guardian.co.uk/asylumseekers/story/0,7991,1496222,00.html
Come to June
25th NOII Conference and anti-deportation rally to discuss next move on the
forced labour scheme and ideas and practice in fighting immigration controls
Saturday, June 25th, 12.15pm-6pm Cross St Chapel, Cross St, Manchester City
Centre, two minutes walk from Albert Square, 15 minutes from Piccadilly station.
Wheelchair accessible
More: PDF
document
https://noii.trick.ca/internationalconferenceJune25th.pdf
[www.asylumpolicy.info]
- 'The YMCA have dropped section 10'
June 2005
