A HOUSING firm accused of providing asylum seekers with “horrific” accommodation has raked in nearly £200,000 profits.
Orchard and Shipman, which has a £60million contract from Serco to provide accommodation on behalf of the Home Office, yesterday published accounts that revealed it made £192,911 in the 18 months from April 2014 to the end of September 2015.
The profit was condemned by a Glasgow MP who raised a host of concerns about the quality of asylum seekers’ housing in the city before a Westminster committee earlier this year.
Asylum seekers have complained about substandard conditions including rat and insect-infested homes, mould caused by unfixed leaks and overcrowded flats.
Serco insisted each of their homes meet strict Home Office standards. The firm also said it had made an overall loss of nearly £800,000 during a 30-month period.
Earlier this year Keith Vaz MP, chairman of the Home Affairs Committee, announced an inquiry into asylum seekers’ housing standards after visiting accommodation in Glasgow .
He claimed the “horrific” conditions he witnessed were worse than anywhere else in the UK.
The home affairs committee had already carried out a study of housing provision for asylum seekers in England and Wales which was critical of many private firms.
Following Vaz’s visit to Scotland, he announced a new inquiry would look at accommodation throughout the UK. The inquiry is due to start in September.
Orchard and Shipman’s recent profit follows a loss of £889, 482 in the first year of its contract from April 2013 to the end of March 2014.
The financial report noted that profit was achieved after Serco “provided additional support and agreed changes to some elements of the contract that will result in an improvement to future cash flow and profitability”.
Chris Stephen, SNP MP for Glasgow South West, called for the Home Affairs Select Committee to suspend any contract extensions until after September’s inquiry.
He said: “Orchard Shipman has gone from making a loss to a healthy profit.
“We have continued to see deep concerns about the standard of accommodation expressed by a wide range of agencies.”
When he addressed the Home Affairs Select Committee earlier this year, he told ministers of an Iraqi woman with a young child and health problems who was placed in a dirty second-floor flat for months despite a doctor’s letter not to carry her child up stairs.
Serco said at the time that repairs had taken longer than first thought and that she had been moved.
He also raised concerns about tenants not being moved after suffering racist threats and security fears over broken window locks. Serco said all complaints were taken seriously.
Stephens told ministers: “The asylum process is difficult enough without problems of poor housing and treatment to contend with too.”
Jenni Halliday, Serco’s contract director for COMPASS (Commercial and Operating Managers Procuring Asylum Support), insisted that all of the almost 1,600 properties met required standards.
“Serco is making substantial losses on its contract providing housing for asylum seekers in Scotland,” she said.
“O&S’s audited financial statements show it made a combined loss of £792,000 for the 30 months to September 2015 and its financial position in the 18 months to September 2015 only improved due to additional support provided by Serco.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here