“The inspection found that, overall, the Home Office’s service providers were delivering accommodation that was broadly in line with the statement of requirements in their contracts, but that the costs involved were eye-watering, and that consultation with local authorities when opening contingency accommodation hotels had been poor, resulting in damage to a key stakeholder relationship. The inspection also found that Home Office plans to end its reliance on hotels failed to reflect an adequate understanding of the challenge facing the department and were therefore unachievable in their current form. I observed, as well, that quickening the pace of decision making on protection claims would be vital to reducing the pressure on the Home Office to provide asylum accommodation.”

“The inspection found that the Home Office’s performance in delivering an effective and efficient response to the increasing volume of migrant arrivals via small boats was poor, largely because the department remained on an ‘emergency’ footing, having failed to undertake the planning and investment necessary to establish appropriate facilities, and embed routine procedures, to meet the challenge. Inspectors found that the approach to managing the risk around security checks was inconsistent, that biometrics were not always recorded, and that safeguarding was sacrificed at busy times to ensure that migrants were processed quickly. Of particular concern was the very poor quality of the data collected and relied upon in the reception and processing of small boat arrivals.”

“I fear that some officials, left to their own devices, would be content to polish and put a positive gloss on far too much, which results in a failure to deliver real change.”

“Addressing recommendations satisfactorily is a matter for the inspected body”

“It is poor governance and reflects badly on the Home Office being held to account.”

“In a similar vein to a reluctance to engage with recommendations, I have also encountered instances during the drafting of inspection reports where there has been significant pushback from the Home Office… Some of this is perhaps down to a culture of defensiveness, but it is not good.”

“I remain frustrated and disappointed over the delays to the publishing of my reports. Though there is a longstanding ministerial commitment that inspection reports should be published within eight weeks of submission, subject to Parliament being in session, none of the 14 reports published in 2022-23 met the agreed deadline.”

“The division between policy and operational delivery is a stark one in the Home Office. It is something that I am not familiar with from my military service…”

“This is not a skillset that I find in abundance in the Home Office. …Wiring diagrams of organisations (which should expose lines of responsibility, accountability, and authority) are promised and subsequently fail to appear.”

“My assessment is that temporary appointments at the very senior levels of the Home Office undermine the delivery of strategic objectives and create uncertainty for the staff.”

“Nowhere is this more evident than in Border Force.… It is hamstrung by the worst aspects of the Civil Service machine while struggling to assert itself as a Law Enforcement organisation. Other European countries have much stronger models and parliamentarians should reflect on whether our country is being secured as effectively as it could be.

“A perennial theme of my inspections is poor data. I described it last year as “inexcusably awful”. It remains an accurate description in many areas of Home Office business. Without accurate data the Home Office will struggle to prioritise and respond to situations and people will suffer.”