Dutch Safety Board: emergency accommodation puts thousands of children at risk
The Dutch Safety Board is demanding improvements within six months to conditions in emergency asylum accommodation centres.
Around 7,000 children in the Dutch asylum system are staying in emergency accommodation centres where their safety and development are structurally under pressure, according to the Dutch Safety Board. The board says the situation is no longer a temporary crisis, but the result of administrative choices.
On Monday, the Dutch Safety Board (OVV) published the report Children in Need, on the safety of children in emergency asylum accommodation. According to the board, children there are exposed to conditions that pose serious risks to their development. The Minister of Asylum and Migration has received an urgent recommendation to improve the situation within six months.
The board puts the number at around 7,000 children. They are staying in centres that were once intended as a temporary solution but are now being used for long periods. Examples include empty offices, ships, event halls and temporary container homes. According to the OVV, some children live in such facilities for years.
The problems vary by location, but the board cites a lack of space to play, peace and privacy. Access to education and care can also be inadequate. In addition, the living environment is unstable: children regularly have to move when centres close, change or are no longer available.
The OVV says that more than 60 per cent of all reception centres now provide emergency accommodation. As a result, the board says, emergency accommodation is no longer an exceptional emergency measure, but a permanent part of the reception system. According to the board, the Dispersal Act (Spreidingswet) has not produced enough additional regular places to end that dependence.
The conclusion builds on warnings issued for years. In 2025, inspectors wrote that conditions for children had not improved sufficiently and that more than 7,000 children were staying in emergency accommodation. They also pointed to interrupted education, inadequate care and the large number of relocations.
The minister has said that emergency accommodation must be phased out more quickly. According to the initial response, this should be achieved by opening more regular reception centres, holding municipalities to their obligations, limiting arrivals and returning rejected asylum seekers. No concrete timetable or new package of measures had been announced by Monday.
The OVV cannot impose sanctions itself. However, the board says the recommendation is not optional and is calling on the cabinet to provide structural governance instead of repeatedly introducing new temporary solutions. The coming months will show whether sufficient regular capacity becomes available and what immediate measures will protect children in existing emergency accommodation centres.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The OVV concludes that children in emergency accommodation are structurally exposed to unsafe conditions.
- Around 7,000 children are staying in emergency accommodation centres.
- According to the OVV, more than 60 per cent of reception centres provide emergency accommodation.
- The minister must respond to the urgent recommendation within six months.
Left
Arguments The government has a special responsibility for children who depend on its accommodation. The solution lies in quickly placing them in stable, child-friendly locations, providing sufficient education and care, and expanding regular reception.
Values Children's rights, human dignity, the protection of vulnerable groups and public responsibility.
Consequences This requires additional public funding and local reception capacity, but according to this approach it prevents lasting developmental harm and constant relocations.
Centre
Arguments The report calls for workable governance: more regular places, clear minimum standards, better cooperation between central government, the COA and municipalities, and a measurable timetable. Both children's safety and the capacity of the reception system must be safeguarded.
Values The rule of law, administrative reliability, practicality and continuity.
Consequences A phased approach may be more stable than emergency measures, but it requires municipalities and central government to honour their agreements in practice.
Right
Arguments Emergency accommodation can only be phased out sustainably if pressure on the system decreases. In addition to more regular centres, this approach includes faster procedures, the return of rejected asylum seekers and limits on arrivals.
Values Manageability, national control, safety and responsible use of public funds.
Consequences Lower demand for reception capacity can create room for better facilities, but the immediate problems of children currently staying in emergency accommodation will meanwhile persist.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The main findings and figures were checked directly with the OVV and compared with earlier inspection reports. The passage about the minister is based on ANP reporting and makes clear that concrete implementation measures are still lacking.
- confirmed On 21 September 2026, the OVV published a report on children in emergency asylum accommodation. — The publication date and the report appear on the OVV's website. source
- confirmed Around 7,000 children are staying in emergency accommodation centres. — The OVV refers to around 7,000 children in the asylum system. source
- confirmed The OVV cites risks to development and inadequate facilities such as peace, privacy, care and education. — These findings appear in the OVV's report and summary. source
- confirmed More than 60 per cent of reception centres provide emergency accommodation. — The OVV mentions this as part of its analysis of the reception system. source
- confirmed The minister must respond within six months and improve the situation. — The OVV makes an urgent recommendation with this deadline. source
- confirmed The minister advocates a faster phase-out of emergency accommodation centres, but has not yet provided a concrete package of measures. — ANP reports this response and the absence of immediate concrete measures. source
Editor's note
The OVV's conclusions, the estimated number of children, the scale of emergency accommodation and the six-month deadline are certain. It is uncertain when concrete improvements will be implemented; a complete implementation plan and definitive policy response were still lacking.Sources
- Crisismaatregelen houden onveiligheid voor kinderen in noodopvang in stand — Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid
- Nog onvoldoende verbeteringen in situatie kinderen in noodopvang — Inspectie Justitie en Veiligheid
- Minister pleit voor minder noodlocaties na rapport asielkinderen — ANP via ZeelandNet
More on this in Dutch media
- Het Parool — „asielopvang noodopvang”
- Trouw — „asielopvang noodopvang”
- NRC — „asielopvang noodopvang”