Audrey's father worked at a shipping container terminal; her mother served as a nurse’s assistant at a local hospital in Sheffield. In the 1973, the family returned to Jamaica when Audrey was just 3 years old after her father became gravely ill. Unable to afford the journey alone, he relied on the British government to help relocate the family — a promise of care in sickness that seemigly echoed his contributions they had made in health.

Voluntary Repatriation Scheme

The Home Office’s so-called “help to return” schemes in the 1970s and 1980s were part of a broader, deeply controversial policy framework aimed at encouraging voluntary repatriation of Black and Asian British residents—many of whom were legally settled and had lived in the UK for decades. While not always explicitly branded as Windrush-specific, these schemes disproportionately affected members of the Windrush generation and their descendants.

Advertisement

One of the most notable was the “Assisted Voluntary Return” programme, which offered financial incentives — such as airfare and modest resettlement grants — to individuals willing to leave the UK. Though framed as humanitarian or supportive, these schemes were widely criticised for being coercive in practice. Many people accepted repatriation under duress, often after facing discrimination, unemployment, lack of healthcare or threats of deportation under tightening immigration laws.

Some, like Audrey Brooks’ father, reportedly relied on such schemes when illness or hardship made staying in the UK untenable. But the return was rarely dignified. Many who left under these programmes later found themselves unable to return to the UK, even if they held indefinite leave to remain.

Audrey still vividly remembers applying for a British passport at the British Embassy in Kingston in 1997, just before travelling to visit family in Canada. That passport was granted without issue. Yet, years later, she now finds herself in a Kafkaesque struggle with UK passport authorities, who are demanding layers of documentation she simply does not possess.

Audrey and her cousin at Centre Island in Toronto Canada circa 1997

Making matters worse, when Audrey turned to Jamaican authorities for help, they claimed they had no record of her. Audrey now exists in a grey zone of legal limbo — neither recognised by the country of her birth nor the place she now calls home.

Her family’s pain doesn’t end there. Audrey’s brother Adrian, also born in Sheffield, has been confined to a mental health infirmary in Jamaica for years. His status, like Audrey’s, remains uncertain and unresolved.

Despite support from Sheffield MP Gill Furniss — who has written to the Home Office on her behalf — Audrey’s case remains stalled. “The response was not very helpful,” she told JamRadio.uk. "The Passport Office has continues to demand documentation over and beyond" what I can reasonably provide. I do not have a Jamaican passport and the local governmen here in Jamaica say they have not record of me."

Audrey is now calling for intervention from the Windrush Taskforce, (also based in Sheffield, UK) saying her situation mirrors the very scandal the taskforce was created to fix.

“I feel let down by my own government,” she said. “They’ve turned their back on me.

Audrey's case was reffered directly to the government's Minister for Citizenship, Seema Malhotra who promised action on difficult passport cases like Audreys, but was merely passed down the ranks to subordinates who sent a generic response and a promise to do better, Meanwhile Audrey has been left in limbo.

A Home Office spokesperson said:

“Thank you to Jam Radio for highlighting this case, the Passport Office is happy to speak to Audrey Brooks to help resolve this pressing issue. But it continues to be longstanding policy not to discuss individual cases.

“The Home Secretary is determined to put right the appalling injustices caused by the Windrush scandal, making sure those affected receive the compensation they rightly deserve, and ensuring cultural change is embedded permanently into the fabric of the Home Office.”

Advertisement

Audrey’s story is a chilling reminder of how the hostile environment policies—infamous for demanding decades’ worth of paperwork from people who often never needed documentation in the first place — continue to haunt their lives today. Her case illustrates how the system still fails to believe, validate, or support those who were promised belonging, but instead received suspicion.

As Britain continues to reckon with the legacy of the Windrush scandal, stories like Audrey’s raise a painful question: what has truly changed?