Evidence & Impact
The Brook House Inquiry examined events at Brook House Immigration Removal Centre following undercover filming by BBC Panorama in 2017 which revealed mistreatment of detained people. The inquiry made 33 recommendations addressing oversight, conditions, safeguarding, use of force, healthcare, staffing, and complaints processes.
The government accepted 27 recommendations in principle, accepted one fully, placed two under consideration, and rejected three. The rejected recommendations concerned a 28-day detention time limit, NHS England responsibility for healthcare quality assurance, and changing the seniority of the Professional Standards Unit head.
According to a Written Parliamentary Answer in January 2025, the Home Office reported that 17 recommendations had been 'completed and closed as of October 2024', with a further five 'due for closure by end of January 2025', and 11 'on track for closure by summer 2025'. However, the evidence base for these assertions remains limited in the public domain.
Documented changes include new contractual arrangements for immigration removal centres, establishment of compliance and engagement teams, prohibition of specific restraint techniques, and a new staffing model. An interim Detention Services Order on Rule 40/42 has been published, with substantive revisions underway. The government has committed to legislative reform for Independent Monitoring Boards, though this awaits Parliamentary time.
A High Court ruling in December 2025 found the Home Secretary had failed to comply with Article 3 ECHR systems duty in Rule 35 safeguarding at Brook House between July 2023 and March 2024, noting only 20 Rule 35 reports were filed despite 260 ACDT care plans during this period. This suggests ongoing challenges in implementing safeguarding recommendations.
Many recommendations involve ongoing reviews and policy development work, including comprehensive reviews of complaints processes, Adults at Risk policy, and use of force protocols. While the government has indicated progress through ministerial statements, published evidence of completed implementation remains limited for most recommendations.
Reforms Attributed to This Inquiry
- New contracts for immigration removal centres requiring internal audit programmes and self-reporting by service providers
- Introduction of Detention Services Compliance Teams and Detention Engagement Teams in each IRC
- Quarterly Executive Oversight Boards bringing together senior Home Office officials and service provider executives
- Publication of interim Detention Services Order clarifying Rule 40 (removal from association) and Rule 42 (temporary confinement) authorisation protocols
- Prohibition communicated to all IRC staff that handcuffing behind backs whilst seated is not permitted
- Updated Detention Services Order on food and fluid refusal linking to Rule 35 process and Adults at Risk policy
- Implementation of maximum 9-hour overnight lock-in period
- New staffing model delivering nearly double the ratio of custodial staff per detained individual compared to 2017
- Introduction of mandatory code of conduct and staff engagement strategy
- Professional Standards Unit training updated to reflect Brook House Inquiry findings
Unfinished Business
- Legislative reform to provide Independent Monitoring Boards with statutory framework (commitment made in 2021 Prisons Strategy White Paper but awaiting Parliamentary time)
- Substantive revision of Detention Services Orders on Rule 40/42 (interim order published but full revision ongoing)
- Development of new Detention Services Order on use of force in consultation with experts
- Development of operational standards for use of force on detained people with mental ill health (working with HMPPS, NHS England and DHSC)
- Review of Adults at Risk policy and Detention Centre Rules 34 and 35
- Development of NHS England interim clinical guidance to support GPs on Rule 35 assessments
- Comprehensive review of complaints and whistleblowing processes
Summary written by the tracker with AI assistance, 26 March 2026. Not part of the inquiry record; indicative, not authoritative.