How is ‘Ter Apel’ possible and why does the government allow such scenes? Now that the conditions at the Application Center for Asylum Seekers have gotten so completely out of hand, it is appropriate to ask whether this is just negligence and incompetence. Or a political choice – of Verelendung especially not to create the impression of a hospitable or civilized country? Okay, there is a staff shortage and high absenteeism at COA, which is increasing the backlog in screening asylum seekers. The numbers of refugees in front of the gate are higher than expected, but not higher than before. And in other European countries, these numbers are not uncommon. This country will not be overrun.
The government has acknowledged that closing asylum shelters after the peak of 2015 was wrong. Municipal authorities are now being pushed aside to purchase shelter locations. A registration center will be added. On Friday, the cabinet announced that it would build twenty thousand homes for status holders, the already recognized asylum seekers. That could shorten waiting times, in the long run. And there were some adjustments: longer decision periods for the IND, postponement of family reunification, more border control. Rutte thought it was a ‘way out’, but acknowledged that it does not solve the problems of ‘Ter Apel’.
Asylum seekers, young, old, families, have been bivouacking there for weeks, in the open air, with only improvised sanitary facilities. And the Red Cross for medical emergencies.
The advice of the Health Care Inspectorate to intervene immediately is the start of an adequate approach.
This week, the international aid organization Doctors Without Borders decided to come forward. What can be called a historic low for the welfare state of the Netherlands. According to AzG, Ter Apel resembled Lampedusa or Moria, like Lesbos.
Also view the image report: The outdoor sleepers of Ter Apel
State Secretary Eric van der Burg (VVD, Asiel) has changed from a reasonable and sober administrator into the knight of the sad figure in a few months. This became apparent when he admitted that MSF in Ter Apel was ‘very bad’ but apparently also necessary. That is why he was “happy” about it. Pleased? That MSF came to do what the State Secretary did not want, could not or was not allowed to do? After all, during previous asylum crises, the government was able to build pavilions, set up army tents and provide medical care. In Ter Apel, the state showed a completely different face – there the chaos was tolerated, perhaps welcomed. No, no numbers for the order of arrival. So no provisional registration either. Hardly any care. Improvised transport to and from emergency reception locations elsewhere in the country.
This caused additional uncertainty about who would be ‘turned’ when. The shelter tents that an entrepreneur provided to the full-holders had to disappear. This is because tent pegs were used in fights. Oh, safety! No, then letting people get pneumonia or scabies is a lot less bad. The death of a three-month-old baby in an emergency location was more than harrowing. Regardless of the cause, this is a catastrophe that cannot be seen separately from the emergency shelter. This group needs immediate medical care and, above all, safety. Just before the weekend, the Health and Youth Care Inspectorate advised ‘immediate intervention’, in view of the health risks, after which the COA immediately evacuated four hundred asylum seekers. That is the start of an adequate approach. The state must immediately deploy its humanitarian capacity for disasters and conflicts. And thus to dispel the suspicion that looking away is policy here. That would be appalling, cynical and inhumane.