Former Edinburgh council chief involved in Ukraine sponsor scheme despite resigning following allegations of inappropriate conduct with refugees
Cammy Day, the former leader of Edinburgh City Council, is still actively participating in the UK Government’s Homes for Ukraine scheme despite stepping down amidst accusations of sending sexually explicit messages to Ukrainian refugees. Day, a councillor in Edinburgh, is currently registered as a sponsor under the scheme, which aims to provide accommodation for vulnerable refugees across the UK, including Scotland. The scheme has facilitated housing for 18,700 Ukrainians in Scotland, with hosts receiving monthly payments ranging from £350 to £500, funded by taxpayers. However, Day has not confirmed whether he has accepted these payments.
The Sunday Mail reported that Day is hosting a Ukrainian refugee in one of his four properties in Edinburgh, even after his resignation as council leader. While the council conducted a welfare check on the individual, concerns have been raised about Day’s continued involvement in the scheme. Simita Kumar, SNP group leader at the council, emphasized the importance of supporting individuals who come forward with complaints and raised apprehensions regarding the safeguarding of vulnerable adults. She called for Day to immediately remove himself from the sponsorship programme.
In addition to the controversy surrounding his participation in the refugee scheme, Day is also under investigation by the council for allegedly having someone residing in one of his properties without being a registered landlord. Reports indicate that Day owns three properties outright and has a share in two others. Authorities are looking into whether he is profiting from individuals living in his properties and how he is managing his rental arrangements.
Moreover, a police investigation is underway to examine allegations of inappropriate behaviour by Day, including his communications with Ukrainian refugees. Disclosure Scotland highlighted the responsibility of organisations to ensure that hosts are suitable for accommodating refugees. Despite these ongoing investigations and controversies, the council declined to comment on the situation, and Day did not provide a response.
In conclusion, the case of Cammy Day highlights the intricacies and challenges involved in providing support to vulnerable refugees and the importance of upholding ethical standards in public office. The scrutiny surrounding Day’s involvement in the Homes for Ukraine scheme underscores the need for transparency and accountability in such initiatives to ensure the safety and well-being of those seeking refuge.