HO is (again) challenged by @stephenctimms on lack of data about #NRPF.

https://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/correspondence/response-from-daniel-shaw-to-ed-humpherson-parliamentary-question-response/

Below">https://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/correspon... thread is a short summary of what they say, and why the response is completely inadequate:

1. & #39;I fully acknowledge that the wording used was unclear and did not correctly reference the Code of Practice for stats, nor was it sufficiently transparent with regards to the data held by the dept& #39;

Why did the HO not give a clear, transparent response?

Is this an apology?

2. & #39;no complete figures of visas subject to #NRPF conditions can be produced& #39;

We have been asking for years; the HO has had plenty of time to improve its data collection.

How does the HO evaluate the policy?

Is it saving them any money at all?

3. & #39;individuals can apply to have the #NRPF condition lifted& #39;

This is not the case for hundreds of families.

What’s more, the High Court ruling in May highlighted that people are destitute before they apply, which is unlawful and breaches human rights: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/homeless-boy-home-office-high-court-unlawful-recourse-public-funds-a9503436.html">https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h...

4. & #39;Some benefits may still be accessed where they are based upon NI contributions such as contributory based ESA and statutory sick pay& #39;

Keywords are ‘some’ and ‘may’.
In most cases, they are not available.
In all cases, they are not enough.
@childrensociety.

5. & #39;[HO is] committed to further investigate the administrative data we hold to assess whether it can provide any meaningful information on the issue of hardship specifically and will update your team as soon as practically possible.& #39;

Hmm.