Mr. Nick Henderson:

I will speak not from lived experience, obviously, but through our service's work with people. You enter a system where, as I said, you may not get a decision for two years. You will be accommodated in Balseskin, probably, but in recent years, because of capacity issues, people may go into emergency accommodation. After being in that initial form of accommodation, you will be dispersed. You will not necessarily know where you are going and you will not have a choice as to where you go. Previously, up until 2017, you would not have had the right to work, but the Supreme Court case changed that. Now you can work if you have been waiting for six months for an initial decision. The quality of accommodation can vary hugely. There are 80 accommodation locations across the country and they really are the good, the bad and the ugly. There is a huge degree of lottery in that respect.

Doras's report, which Mr. Lannon may speak to, covers mental health issues in a lot of detail. I think we would both agree that there has been a huge deterioration in mental health supports. We are noticing that through our services. That goes as far as suicidal ideation and is something we are really concerned about.

The committee has spoken to the Ombudsman for Children, whose report makes clear that direct provision as an institution is not capable of providing for the best interests of the child. The ombudsman's previous report about racism and direct provision found that almost the fact of living in direct provision exposes children to stigma and racism.