Dr. Liam Thornton:

On why asylum applicants are treated differently, the honest answer is I do not know. I should know, however, because within normal structures of decision-making, if people are to be sent to one centre or another, documents should outline what criteria will be used to make the decision. If such an internal policy exists in the Reception and Integration Agency, I have never seen it and I am inclined to believe that it does not. As Ms Finn and Ms Ward outlined, there are significant pressures on the direct provision system, which might mean the system is in crisis-management mode, where people are moved into direct provision if there is space, or into hotels if not. When there are several applicants, I do not know the rationale for making the decision. I should know, however, as we all should, the basis for making decisions on dispersal.

In the context of standards within institutionalised settings, I would exercise a note of caution. When one begins by stating that there could be standards to watch over settings which, per se, grossly violate human rights, it gives some form of comfort that the system is fine. While they may be appropriate now, when we are not moving away from direct provision, we should proceed with a note of caution about the standardisation of everything. We do not have standardisation in our lives, but due to the USA's failure to realise properly the rights of those in the international protection system, we suddenly need such standards. Where possible and appropriate, human beings need to live free to make decisions such as where and what to cook, and where and with whom to sleep. When we start outlining standards, such as requiring that a room be a certain size, it begins to decide intimate aspects of people's lives, something I find uncomfortable.