Former Guernsey politician and freedom of information campaigner Tony Webber has finally won his battle for a 58-page document including communications on how to handle resettling refugees to be made available.
The document, which has been heavily redacted, covers exchanges between October 2015 and February 2016.
The request was first refused by the Home Office, before Mr Webber reported the case to the Information Commissioner’s Office, which criticised the Home Office but upheld the decision.
Mr Webber appealed to the First Tier Tribunal, which ruled in favour of disclosing the information.
In September 2018 the Home Office requested permission to appeal and asked for the Crown Dependencies’ involvement, before the permission to appeal was turned down. A month later, an appeal was made to the Upper Tribunal but that was turned down, and in March the Home Office disclosed the FOI information with redactions.
After further requests for redactions to be removed, earlier this month the Home Office partially removed them.
Mr Webber believes questions need to be answered on why it has taken so long to make these communications public, describing it as a ‘scandal’.
He said: ‘From the communications we simply have a flavour of the issue. It is an utter scandal it has taken so long. It has been very frustrating.
‘It has taken three years and has taken an extra year because the Crown Dependencies got involved. Anyone associated with this deserves to have the ultimate scrutiny. There is also the question of how much time and money it has taken to stop these documents being made public.’
Within the released documents, a consultation paper for the Syrian Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Programme sets out requirements and funding for the scheme.
It details how sponsoring organisations would be needed to enter into an agreement with the UK government, and how sponsors would be expected to cover upfront costs normally incurred by the local authority.
A sum of £200 would be required per person and there would be a need to provide accommodation and also to arrange access to a doctor and school registration.
Further in the document, it is shown that in October 2015, a representative for Jersey sent a series of questions to the scheme to obtain further information for ministers.
It was asked what would be needed for Jersey to provide employment, health and housing, the minimum number of refugees that would be required and what services would need to be provided.
Following correspondence with the resettlement team, the government stated it would put together ‘an indicative package of what Jersey could offer’.
In December 2015, then Chief Minister Ian Gorst said Jersey would not be taking any refugees because special provisions for refugees would leave them ‘vulnerable to a legal challenge on the grounds of discrimination’.
He said it would mean any refugee entering Jersey would be entitled to special provisions, and that was a risk Jersey could not take.
Jersey’s government has remained defiant that it will not take in refugees, but the reasons have changed, with Chief Minister John Le Fondré stating earlier this year that the Children’s Services Department was not in the right state to take in child refugees.
The government has been contacted for comment regarding the release of the information.
