Here is the news article, written in the requested style and format.

---

Ban on asylum seekers using taxis for medical appointments comes into force

A sweeping new Home Office policy, prohibiting the use of pre-booked taxis for most routine medical and dental appointments for asylum seekers, has officially taken effect. The move is a direct response to mounting scrutiny over the spiralling costs associated with the UK's asylum system, with officials aiming to curb what has been described as systemic and costly logistical inefficiency.

Why it matters: The policy shift represents a significant attempt by the government to regain control over taxpayer-funded expenditure within the asylum support framework. The system, which currently houses tens of thousands of individuals in hotels, has seen its budget balloon, with transportation emerging as a key area of multi-million-pound spending that ministers now deem unsustainable.

This change directly impacts the large-scale contracts held by private firms responsible for managing asylum seeker accommodation and support, and signals a pivot towards a more austere operational model.

The High Cost of Local Travel

At the heart of the policy change are widespread reports of exorbitant spending on short-distance journeys. The previous system, managed by contractors, frequently defaulted to using private hire vehicles, even for appointments just a short distance from hotel accommodation.

An illustrative case, shared by a taxi driver contracted for the service, has highlighted the scale of the financial drain:

• The Dispatch: A driver was dispatched from a base near Gatwick Airport to Reading to fulfil a transport request.
• The Journey: This initial leg of the trip constituted a round trip of approximately 110 miles (175km) for the driver's vehicle.
• The Task: The actual assignment was to transport an asylum seeker from their hotel in Reading to a local dentist appointment.
• The Discrepancy: The distance between the hotel and the dental clinic was a mere 1.5 miles.
• The Cost: The total cost for the taxi firm to facilitate this 1.5-mile journey exceeded £100, factoring in the driver's travel time and mileage from their distant base.

This single incident is not an isolated one, according to sources within the transport industry, but rather indicative of a systemic procurement failure where logistical efficiency was consistently overlooked.

Background: A System Under Strain

The UK's asylum accommodation system has been operating under immense pressure for several years, a situation exacerbated by a significant backlog in processing claims. This has led to the widespread and prolonged use of hotels as contingency accommodation, a measure that is both expensive and logistically complex.

The Outsourced Model

To manage this complex network, the Home Office has long relied on a series of major outsourcing agreements, known as the Asylum Accommodation and Support Services Contracts (AASC).

• Key Contractors: Private firms such as Serco, Mitie, and Clearsprings Ready Homes hold these multi-year, multi-billion-pound contracts to provide housing and related support services.
• Subcontracting Layers: These primary contractors often subcontract ancillary services, including transport, to smaller, local, or regional firms. This multi-layered approach has been criticised for creating a lack of direct oversight and contributing to inflated costs.
• Previous Mandate: Under the old framework, contractors were responsible for ensuring asylum seekers could attend mandatory appointments, including medical, dental, and reporting obligations. The use of taxis became a default mechanism to guarantee attendance and fulfil contractual duties.

The New Policy in Detail

The Home Office directive fundamentally alters the transport arrangements for a significant portion of asylum seekers. The ban specifically targets pre-booked taxis for routine, local appointments where alternative transport is viable.

• The Directive: Effective immediately, contractors are instructed to cease booking private hire vehicles for non-emergency, local medical appointments.
• Expected Alternatives: Asylum seekers will now be expected to walk or use public transport for these journeys.
• Financial Support: The policy includes provisions for individuals to be provided with information on public transport routes. The cost of bus or train fares for required appointments will be reimbursed.
• Exceptions: The use of taxis will still be permitted in specific, pre-approved circumstances, such as for individuals with significant mobility issues, for appointments in remote locations with no public transport, or in medical emergencies. These cases will likely require more stringent justification and approval than before.

Implications and Next Steps

The implementation of this policy is expected to have wide-ranging consequences for government spending, contractor operations, and the asylum seekers themselves.

The Bottom Line: The primary objective is to generate immediate and substantial savings for the taxpayer. The Home Office has not released a precise figure, but given the scale of the previous spending, the reduction in expenditure is anticipated to be in the tens of millions of pounds annually.

However, the transition is not without potential challenges.

• Operational Hurdles: Advocacy groups have raised concerns about the practicalities of the new system. Navigating unfamiliar public transport systems can be a significant challenge for new arrivals, particularly those with language barriers or health conditions that fall short of the threshold for an exception.
• Health and Welfare: There is a risk that the new logistical hurdles could lead to an increase in missed appointments. This could have negative follow-on effects on the health of individuals and potentially lead to more complex and costly medical interventions later on.
• Contractor Adjustment: The private firms managing the AASC contracts will need to rapidly adjust their operational procedures. This will involve establishing new systems for disseminating travel information and managing the reimbursement of public transport fares, adding a new layer of administrative work.

Moving forward, the Home Office will be under pressure to demonstrate that this policy delivers the projected fiscal benefits without compromising essential health outcomes. The performance of the new system, measured in both cost savings and attendance rates at medical appointments, will be closely monitored by parliamentary oversight committees and the National Audit Office.