“I DON’T think, under current resources, that the challenge of Brexit can be met, and certainly not met smoothly.” David Wood’s verdict on the Home Office was damning. On October 10th Mr Wood, who until 2014 was head of immigration enforcement at the department, told a parliamentary committee of his grave doubts about his old employer’s ability to deal with Britain’s exit from the European Union. John Vine, a former chief inspector of borders who also gave evidence, said that at the Home Office “management of change was always an issue”. That does not bode well for a department about to face its biggest upheaval in recent times.

As the department responsible for immigration and customs controls, among other things, the Home Office will shoulder a good chunk of Brexit’s administrative burden. Yet a number of indicators suggest that the department is already under strain. Last year, of those of its immigration decisions that went to appeal, 43% were overturned, compared with 34% a decade ago, suggesting that the quality of the Home Office’s initial decisions is declining. The average waiting time for appeals to be heard in immigration tribunals—run by the Ministry of Justice—is 46 weeks, compared with 29 weeks two years ago; waiting times hit 51 weeks this summer. The number of judges dealing with such cases fell by a third between 2012 and 2016.

In 2015-16 three-quarters of the complaints made against the Home Office were upheld, according to the official ombudsman. That is more than any other government department examined, and twice the average. The Home Office is also worse than any other department at handling freedom-of-information requests, and the second-worst at fielding parliamentary questions, according to an analysis by the Institute for Government (IFG), a think-tank. Surveys of the civil servants who work there suggest that it is not a happy ship (see chart).

Austerity has made life harder for all branches of government. But if anything, the Home Office has had it somewhat easier than many others. Since 2010 its staff numbers have fallen by 6%, compared with 21% for the civil service overall. It has partly offset the cuts to its budget by steeply increasing some immigration fees. The cost of obtaining indefinite leave to remain, for instance, has more than doubled since 2014, from £1,093 to £2,297 ($3,000).

Nonetheless, the most recent report by the official immigration watchdog raised concerns, also highlighted the previous year, about the Home Office’s capacity to implement change. That inspires little confidence in its ability to manage the demands that will be thrown up by Brexit. Already, the department has been tripping up. In August around 100 EU citizens living in Britain were accidentally sent letters by the Home Office ordering them to leave the country or face deportation. Some were better connected than most previous victims of the department’s bungling, and wasted no time publicising their cases. Theresa May described the dispatches as an “unfortunate error”.

An estimated 3m EU citizens live in Britain, their status after Brexit uncertain. No one knows how many might apply for permanent residency. Two-thirds already qualify for it, and the numbers applying are rising. In the year to June, over 145,000 documents certifying permanent residence were issued to foreign citizens in Britain, around 90% of them to EU nationals. That is more than five times the figure for the previous 12 months. To process all such potential claims by March 2019, when Britain is due to leave the EU, the Home Office would need to make roughly 3,600 decisions each day, up from about 650 at present, says the IFG. To do that it would need an extra 5,000 civil servants. So far, it has recruited 240 in Liverpool. The alternative would be to deploy staff from other parts of the department, though that would risk creating backlogs elsewhere.

In the longer term, ending free movement to and from the EU, as the government wants to do, will require the Home Office to make many more immigration decisions. Britain has long relied on Europe for low- and medium-skilled migrants. Any new immigration system will have to determine how many and which such migrants should be allowed to enter the country, introducing further complexity.

The sharpest and most immediate pressure may be on the Border Force, the agency within the Home Office that enforces immigration and customs controls. The main challenge will be on the customs side, argued Mr Wood. If Britain leaves the EU’s customs union and single market, as Mrs May has signalled she wants to do, the Border Force (and tax office) would need many more staff. CHIEF, the computer system that deals with customs declarations, would be overwhelmed, said Mr Vine in his evidence to MPs. It is due to be replaced but concerns are growing that the new system may not be ready in time for Brexit. Hiring new people is a slow process—the training alone takes six months—as is improving or replacing IT systems.

With Brexit just 18 months away, there is no sign of large sums of money being assigned for this purpose, says Joseph Owen of the IFG. Colin Yeo, a barrister specialising in migration who deals regularly with the department, says he can see no evidence that the Home Office is preparing seriously for Brexit at all.