• Deserving and undeserving migrants

      Dhaliwal, Sukhwant; Forkert, Kirsten (Lawrence and Wishart, 2015-11-10)
      This article explores findings of the 'Go Home' - Mapping Immigration Controversy research project that arose in 2013 as a response to the government's anti-immigrant publicity campaigns. It considers a particular theme that emerged from the focus group data: the ways in which respondents, including ethnic minority British citizens and recent immigrants, distinguished between 'deserving' and 'undeserving', or 'good' and 'bad' migrants. The authors draw on Beverly Skeggs's work on values and respectability to provide insights into why those being devalued by dominant anti-immigrant discourses are themselves utilising these classifications as part of their own strategies for recognition. They also note that their respondents are also resisting the material practices of everyday bordering by calling on alternative values such as compassion, empathy, and solidarity.
    • Evaluation of the Alexi Project ‘Hub and Spoke’ programme of CSE service development. Final report.

      Harris, Julie Philippa; Roker, Debi; Shuker, Lucie; Brodie, Isabelle; D'Arcy, Kate; Dhaliwal, Sukhwant; Pearce, Jenny J.; University of Bedfordshire (University of Bedfordshire, 2017-11-01)
      This report details the evaluation of a programme of service development as it was rolled out through 16 new services, which were designed to extend the coverage and reach of child sexual exploitation (CSE) services in England. They were funded by the Child Sexual Exploitation Funders’ Alliance (CSEFA). The 16 services were all established by voluntary sector organisations, and specialised in working with young people affected by CSE. Each service adopted a ‘Hub and Spoke’ model of service development, which involved an established voluntary sector CSE service (known as the ‘hub’), locating experienced project workers (known as ‘spokes’) in new service delivery areas. These spoke workers undertook a range of activities to improve CSE work locally, including individual casework and awareness-raising with children and young people, and consultancy, training and awareness-raising with professionals locally. The evaluation adopted a realist approach. This focusses not just on whether programmes or interventions work, but on how or why they might do so (Pawson and Tilley, 1997 ). It takes a theory-driven approach to evaluation rather than concentrating on particular types of evidence or focussing on ‘before’ and ‘after’ type data. It starts from the principle that interventions in themselves do not either ‘work’ or ‘not work’ – rather it is the people involved in them and the skills, attitudes, knowledge and approach they bring, together with the influence of context and resources, that determine the outcomes generated. The evaluation was undertaken between September 2013 and January 2017, exploring how the 16 services developed during a phased roll out. The evaluation team undertook extensive fieldwork at each site on two occasions (one visit for the final eight sites), including 276 interviews with Hub and Spoke staff, professionals locally from children’s services, police, and health, and with children and young people and parents/carers. In addition, quantitative data were collected (about numbers of young people and professionals reached), and spoke workers produced case studies about their work with young people.
    • Evaluation of the Alexi Project ‘Hub and Spoke’ programme of CSE service development: key messages

      Harris, Julie Philippa; Roker, Debi; Shuker, Lucie; Brodie, Isabelle; D’Arcy, Kate; Dhaliwal, Sukhwant; Pearce, Jenny J.; University of Bedfordshire (University of Bedfordshire, 2017-11-30)
      The Alexi Hub and Spoke programme was an £8m service development programme, funded by the Child Sexual Exploitation Funders’ Alliance (CSEFA). It was designed to rapidly increase the capacity and coverage of specialist, voluntary sector child sexual exploitation (CSE) services within England. Sixteen CSE services were funded for three years each,1 over a five year period,2 with the aims of: 1. Making specialist support available to children and young people in a series of new locations. 2. Improving the co-ordination, delivery and practice of local services responding to CSE – including the police, children’s services and other partner agencies. The model known as ‘Hub and Spoke’ was used to achieve this, whereby a voluntary sector organisation (the ‘hub’) placed experienced CSE workers (‘spokes’) either within its own or into new neighbouring local authority areas, in order to extend its coverage and reach. These spoke workers undertook a variety of activities, including individual casework with children and young people, consultancy, and training and awareness-raising with children and young people and practitioners. In total, 53 spoke workers were placed out in 35 new local authority areas and supported by the 16 hub services.
    • Families and Communities Against Child Sexual Exploitation (FCASE) : final evaluation report

      D'Arcy, Kate; Dhaliwal, Sukhwant; Thomas, Roma; Brodie, Isabelle; Pearce, Jenny J.; University of Bedfordshire (Barnardo’s and University of Bedfordshire, 2015-01-01)
      This is the final evaluation report for the Barnardo’s Families and Communities Against Sexual Exploitation project (FCASE), produced by the International Centre, researching Child Sexual Exploitation, Violence and Trafficking at the University of Bedfordshire. The programme was launched in April 2013, funded by the Department for Education (DfE) and concluded in March 2015. The evaluation was undertaken during the same period. The FCASE model has been piloted in three sites, which for the purposes of this report have been anonymised and will be referred to using pseudonyms. It consists of the following elements: a structured programme of six to eight weeks direct work with young people and families where a risk of child sexual exploitation (CSE) has been identified; delivery of CSE training with professionals; and undertaking community awareness raising. The evaluation has been informed by a range of qualitative data. The report identifies the elements that work well and some of the challenges in its implementation. This had been done in order to determine good practice in supporting families and communities and embed more effective practice on protecting children and young people, including those in foster care, from sexual exploitation, harnessing the protective factors within a child’s family and/or foster home. The learning from the project is intended to help other agencies to implement the FCASE model. An on-line learning resource is to be produced in order to facilitate this process1
    • Go home? the politics of immigration controversies

      Jones, Hannah; Gunaratnam, Yasmin; Bhattacharyya, Gargi; Davies, William; Dhaliwal, Sukhwant; Forkert, Kirsten; Jackson, Emma; Saltus, Roiya (Manchester University Press, 2017-03-01)
      "The 2013 Go Home vans marked a turning point in government-sponsored communication designed to demonstrate control and toughness on immigration. In this study, the authors explore the effects of this toughness: on policy, public debate, pro-migrant and anti-racist activism, and on the everyday lives of people in Britain. Bringing together an authorial team of eight respected social researchers, alongside the voices of community organisations, policy makers, migrants and citizens, and with an afterword by journalist Kiri Kankhwende, this is an important intervention in one of the most heated social issues of our time."
    • Made in Little India

      Dhaliwal, Sukhwant (Lawrence & Wishart, 2014-07-01)
    • ‘We are not objects, we are not things’: ethnic minority women’s views of the UK home office immigration campaigns

      Dhaliwal, Sukhwant (Springer, 2016-05-01)
      The lead-up to the 2015 general election in the United Kingdom included considerable discussion about how to encourage women to vote (Grice, 2015). A poll conducted by TNS BMRB for BBC Radio Four ‘Woman’s Hour’ found that immigration was one of the top five concerns for the women who they polled (What do women think about the general election?, 2015). The same survey drew additional insights from a focus group session with six women from Bexleyheath in Southeast London. It seems that these six women viewed immigration as a problem, but, other than a passing reference to border controls and the impact of global elites on London’s house prices, there is little detail about what their specific concerns centred upon or stemmed from. This can be contrasted with interviewees on the Mapping Immigration Controversy (MIC) project1 who suggested that references to immigration can act as a proxy for other grievances, particularly concerns about the economy, access to housing, health care and education. Furthermore, the MIC surveys found that it is difficult to capture, statistically, the multiple factors that are encompassed when individuals say they are concerned about immigration (Jones et al., 2014; Bhattacharyya, 2013). In this short note, I will reflect on some of the key findings from two focus group sessions with ethnic minority women, and on the possibility that anti-immigration campaigns have the effect of making them think that their vote is far less important than the white majority vote. Renewed debates about intersectionality within the United Kingdom, and beyond, should remind us that women do not speak with one voice; Home Office messages on immigration could be received differently by women depending on the way that they experience multiple axes of power. The women who feel the impact of the Home Office’s immigration campaigns most acutely may be from ethnic minorities and particularly (but not only) those subject to immigration controls. It is not clear how many of the Bexleyheath focus group participants were from minority communities. In contrast, the MIC project held two focus groups to specifically gauge the views of ethnic minority women.
    • Why feminist dissent?

      Varma, Rashmi; Dhaliwal, Sukhwant; Nagarajan, Chitra (University of Warwick, 2016-07-01)
      This essay lays out the historical and intellectual lineage of the idea behind the journal Feminist Dissent. As the “Rushdie Affair” was both the backdrop and the catalyst for a group such as Women Against Fundamentalism, the current conjuncture characterized by an exponential expansion of fundamentalism, neo-liberal austerity, rollback of the rights of women and sexual minorities, and racist control of borders and migration has necessitated a different kind of analysis, one that is absent from academic and popular discourse at the moment. This essay is an attempt to propose a new way of looking at the intersection of gender and fundamentalism, and underscores the importance of highlighting dissent as a crucial feminist strategy.