(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Co-writer: Øystein Windstad.
With the enormous growth of asylum seekers in Norway, a number of reception centers are now being set up very quickly. The public sector will spend large sums on reception operations, and the receptions are run by either private companies, municipalities or non-profit organizations. Ny Tid sits on documents that show that Norway's second largest company for reception centers has driven several receipts with profits well above budget. These budgets are, according to the UDI, binding for the recipients (see case file).
In 2014, Link AS raised a moderate NOK 2 million in profits. After reviewing their budgets (see Link AS og Link Holding AS), Link AS transferred group contributions of NOK 12 million as group contributions to the parent company Link Holding AS, which was then taken out as a profit. Together, they took out 2006 million, a pattern that can be seen all the way back from XNUMX.
Link AS operates 14 asylum reception centers, and had a turnover of NOK 112 million in 2014. One example is the operation of Torshov Transittmottak, which they received after a tender competition on a budget they did not keep. The company operated Torshov Transittmottak from 2010 to 2014. In the operating contract Ny Tid has been given access to, Link AS has signed that the budgets are binding. During these years, the company spent significantly less than budgeted on welfare services for residents. Over the four-year period, the profits were to total NOK 1,75 million. This ended up at 6,77 million – that is five million kroner in deviation from the tender budget on this one receipt.
Audit reports at several of Link's other receivers have revealed major discrepancies between what they should use and what they have actually used. The funds Link has not used according to the budgets, end up as profits the company can take out as dividends. An audit has shown that asylum seekers have been paid less money than they were entitled to – and Link AS has been ordered to pay the money.
The example Torshov. As mentioned, Link AS operated Torshov Transittmottak from 2010 to 2014. A review of accounting figures from 2010 to 2013 shows that they have spent less than budgeted on, among other things, salaries, training, competence building, information for residents, settlement, activities for children and young people, homework help , relief, childcare and follow-up of people with health problems or disabilities. In 2013, Link AS had budgeted NOK 315 for welfare and activities for asylum seekers. They spent 000 kroner for these purposes. In 116, the budget was also NOK 000, and then they spent NOK 2012. Also in 315, they had also budgeted 000, but spent 180 kroner. In total, Torshov transit reception was to make a profit of NOK 000 in 2011. The result was a profit of almost NOK 315 million. In 000, it was budgeted at 142 kroner – while the result was 000 million plus. In 210, the reception was to make a profit of NOK 000, while the result in reality was NOK 2010 million. In 1,3, it was budgeted with NOK 2011 plus, while the profit was NOK 335 million.
The Norwegian Organization for Asylum Seekers (NOAS) often travels to Norwegian reception centers and is out among the asylum seekers. They believe, similar to what Norwegian People's Aid has previously stated, that it is important to increase the requirements for standards for asylum reception. Jon Ole Martinsen is a senior adviser at NOAS. Ny Tid asks him what it means that a privately run reception year after year only uses half of the funds earmarked for the residents. "It is sad. It affects those who need it most. I hope this is captured by the UDI. Asylum seekers really need these funds – they need to get out and engage in meaningful activities, "says Martinsen.
Another example from 2011 shows that Link AS did not use the money they had set aside for children and young people. At the same time as they had money left over, they applied for extra support for children at the asylum reception center. Link spent NOK 38 less than budgeted on offers for children, at the same time as they received NOK 000 in support of this purpose from the Lebara fund. Link writes on its website that the Lebara Fund will provide "support for multicultural initiatives and contribute to children and young people being able to fulfill their dreams". At the same time as Link AS spent almost a million kroner less on salaries in 25, they applied for money from the UDI for extra security this year.
Martinsen in NOAS emphasizes that one cannot build a profit at the expense of the residents' rights, health and well-being: "Precisely for this reason, it is important to have clear criteria and minimum standards that can be met," he says.
Requires explanation of deviations. Link AS delivered a profit before tax of NOK 18 million in 2014. This summer, the UDI actually asked Link AS to explain major discrepancies related to what was used compared to the tender contracts. In reports from audits made in June 2015 at some of Link's receptions, large discrepancies in the use of money are pointed out. It emerges after an inspection at Link's reception at Spydeberg, Søre Sunnmøre and Vestnes. The reports state that the discrepancies have not been sufficiently explained, and that Link has been ordered to explain. This concerns budget items of more than NOK 100. At the reception at Vestnes in Romsdal, Link has been criticized for leaving the position of information manager vacant for more than three months. The UDI ordered Link to appoint a new information officer at the reception due to sick leave. The inspection reports also show that residents at the reception centers in Vestnes and in Volda had not been paid the correct amount of money.
To this, Martinsen in NOAS suggests: "If a tender is awarded for a given number of employees and occupant measures, the funds must be used for this – not be taken out as surplus. We are very skeptical of this. We hope the UDI will follow up with more oversight and that it will have consequences, "says the senior adviser, and continue:" Generally, you operate with a framework from the UDI. These are narrow frames in the first place. We are most concerned about reception for single asylum seekers (EMAs) aged 15-18. There can be as many as 32 children per adult. We think this is an unsustainable situation. We fear it will jeopardize the safety of the children, ”says Martinsen.
Poor conditions. Ny Tid asks the UDI if it is true that they have not followed up Link AS in accordance with the tender contract's budgets. "In general, we would like to point out that the fact that an audit may not have been carried out does not mean that the contract and the receipt have not been followed up," answers the press adviser at the UDI, Vibeke Schjem. She has no concrete answer to the question of what the UDI has done in this case. We ask her to tell about the UDI's views on the current distribution of reception operations between both municipal, idealistic and private actors. "It is politically decided that the UDI will use both private actors, municipalities and voluntary organizations to run reception centers," says Schjem.
Recently, however, it has been possible to read in Klassekampen and other media about the large dividends private players that Hero AS has taken out in recent years. At the same time, non-profit actors express that the amounts for operations are too low for them to operate properly, and several are considering withdrawing (see case on Norwegian People's Aid). "We do not know that actors are withdrawing now," Schjem replies when we ask her to comment on this. “On the contrary, these days we have a demand from new players who want to enter the market, so we see how many offers this results when we advertise. The UDI has its budgetary framework and announces places based on these. We are now paying more than we would like for temporary housing solutions pending the establishment of more long-term asylum reception sites, which are more affordable in operation. ”
In the report Book quality at Norwegian asylum reception centers, which NTNU, SINTEF Byggforsk and Lillehammer University College launched in May this year, reports of deficiencies are reported: worn and broken furniture, rooms without heating, dirty kitchens and activity rooms that have become staff rooms. The report also reveals that so-called children's bases – shared living spaces, which are a requirement from the UDI – are also not used optimally. These are closed during holidays. Children's bases are important to reduce conflict levels and increase security when the days have little structure. The report also reveals that the municipal-run receipts have higher staffing than private ones: “Private players extract larger operating profits than municipalities and organizations. Municipalities and organizations use a larger proportion of the state's financial guidance for reception operations than the private players, ”the report states.
Lack of supervision. Ny Tid has been in contact with managers of both ordinary asylum reception centers and ordinary reception centers for unaccompanied minor asylum seekers. A head of a reception center for unaccompanied minors, who wishes to remain anonymous in this article, says that it is the UDI's inadequate supervision of the reception centers that makes the situation unsustainable. "Much of the reason why the situation can continue as it does today is the lack of supervision of the UDI at the reception centers," says the reception manager. "Had there been a set of rules that required supervision, the reception centers would have had to be responsible for the way they operate. Today, the UDI controls itself. I have the impression that the UDI largely governs on the basis of its obligations to the Norwegian government, rather than laws and regulations that ensure children are safe. " He is afraid of the consequences of commenting on these matters, and therefore does not want to come forward with his full name.
"It's hard to get people to warn about bad conditions – no one dares to say anything. I also think that this is increasingly seen in the public sector. ”
Vibeke Schjem at the UDI tells Ny Tid that at least one inspection or one follow-up must be carried out over the course of three years, and that thorough risk assessments are carried out annually where all receptions are assessed. "This assessment forms the basis for the decision on which receptions should be prioritized for supervision," she says. She emphasizes that the UDI usually supervises the reception of unaccompanied minor asylum seekers twice a year. We ask her what such control entails. "Audit is a review of the operation of a reception center to check that it is in accordance with the tender that has been awarded a contract, and in accordance with the regulations that apply to the operation of a reception center," she says. «The review ends with an audit report. The objectives of supervision are to check that the residents receive the offer they are to have in accordance with the regulations that apply to the reception operation, that the operating operator satisfies the requirements that apply to administrative and financial matters, and that the operation operator operates the individual receptions according to the offer delivered and the contract signed for the operation of the reception. "
“Why are these children called single underage asylum seekers when in reality they are orphans in Norway? And what is the reason for these children to tender? ”
The anonymous reception manager Ny Tid has spoken to, nevertheless believes that it is difficult to gain insight into inadequate or poor reception, as the employees are afraid to report the conditions at the reception centers. "It is difficult to get people to report bad conditions – no one dares to say anything. I also think that this is increasingly seen in the public sector. Another problem is that it is difficult to know how long you have a job at an asylum reception center since the needs are so varied, so the jobs are not attractive to professionals, "says the reception manager.
In an emergency room for unaccompanied minor asylum seekers, the staff numbers 22–25 employees of up to one hundred young people between the ages of 15 and 18. At an ordinary Norwegian child welfare institution, there are at least 17–20 employees per 6–7 children. The reception manager believes that these figures show discrimination against asylum children. "I simply see this as a form of state racism. There are completely different regulations for child welfare institutions than what the UDI and the county governor administer for asylum reception centers for children. Why are these children called unaccompanied minor asylum seekers, when in reality they are orphaned children in Norway? And what is the reason why these children will be put out to tender? There are also very few of those employed who have pediatric expertise. Where does the pediatric competence these children need go – and why is it so common with a staff that is too low? After all, these are children who have often experienced far more brutal things than is the case for Norwegian children in institutions. I think all this says something about the human view behind a state that bases these things on profit, "he says to Ny Tid.
See also the interview with the chairman of the board in Link AS, Moren Jørgensen who believes that efficient operation and lower sick leave is why they spend less money than budgeted.
Foreign Director Frode Forfang says "Must lower expectations".
