Member

I understand from someone who has worked in the field with detainees in immigration detention and in conventional, as it were, prisons, that this automatic recognition really helped to move the process along. I guess this was particularly in the days of detained fast track. This change risks a further deterioration in a detainee’s health. It was not unusual to hear the previous Government suggest that people were trying to game the asylum system, and I dare say some do, but this change to the guidance seems to be giving the Home Office the power to obtain a second opinion in a way which is almost gaming the system on that side of the situation, giving itself the chance to do just that. This is a highly skilled—I might say niche—type of work, and not that many doctors and psychologists have experience of it. The guidance specifies matters to be taken into account, which may sound reassuring, but I think it must give scope for the development of thinking about and understanding mental health and trauma, and there is a danger of the guidance becoming a sort of tick-box exercise.