Housing refugees

What can we learn from the UK experience?

Sue Lukes

Housing refugees: UK

• Creating the guide and other experiences• Refugees and asylum seekers in the UK• Relevant UK housing developments• Some thoughts and conclusions

Creating the guide and other experiences

• https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/guide-housing-and-support-services-asylum-seekers-and-refugees

• Based on work of Housing and Refugee Network

• 2 years of visits and discussions involving all sectors

• Published 2005

Creating the guide and other experiences

• Guide based on UK asylum “system” • Focus on how UK housing providers can

engage with refugees and asylum seekers• Focus on role of local government and housing

associations• Followed by similar work programme on

housing and migrants– Which focused also on private rented sector

UK refugee programmes

• Chilean and Latin American 1974 – 1979, 3,000+

• Vietnamese and Indochinese 1975 – 1992 24,000

• Bosnian 1992 - 96 2,500 temporary protection• Kosovar 1995 – 99 4,000 temporary protection • Gateway 2004 - < 6,000• Mandate and Ten or More

Chilean programme• Run by very small voluntary organisation with government grant• Dispersal by agreement and community negotiation• Housing provided by individuals initially, some short term reception

facilities, negotiated with local authorities• Significant civil society involvement • Programme characterised by political commitment and engagement• Chilean community development and involvement

– Some organisations still active, but now focused on non refugees• Mixed integration results • Large-scale return after 1989

Vietnamese programme

• Run by “refugee agencies” on government grant = quasi-contract

• Dispersal integral to programme, often to more isolated areas

• Housing emphasis on local authority provision• Significant secondary resettlement to larger

cities via range of “dodges”• Integration problematic?• Some community organisations still active

Bosnian programme

• Explicitly temporary protection• Run by refugee agencies in cooperation with local

authorities • Dispersal integral and enforced to some extent• Housing via range of providers including private

rented sector• Clustering promoted• Resettlement and integration judged successful by

many– Some community organisations still viable

Kosova humanitarian evacuation programme

• Temporary protection and enforced return for many– Estimated 500 left in UK by 2003

• Kosovars also arrived via asylum system• Run by consortia of refugee agencies and local

authorities• Clusters, away from London, reception centres• Housing need seen as temporary• Community involvement not significant

Other UK programmes

• Gateway via local authorities in partnership with voluntary sector mainly north of England

• Housing via reception arrangements then longer term from mix of providers, emphasis on local authority and housing association

• Syrian Vulnerable Persons new programme to take 20k over 5 years emphasis on most vulnerable, direct from camps

• Local authorities to be funded for 1 – 5 years • Big civil society involvement in procuring housing has

helped persuade local councils

Uk refugee programmes

• Which sector runs them? • What role does local government play?• How temporary or permanent is refugees’

stay?• Dispersal and clustering (based on what?)• Role of civil society• Role of refugees and community development• Relative success in integration etc

Other work with migrants

• Toolkits including benchmarks and key factors mainly for local authorities via Eurocities

• Also useful for refugee resettlement work– anti-discrimination policies – promoting cultural diversity– introductory and language courses– public perception of diversity– reflecting and managing diversity in public administration– participation in diverse neighbourhoods– political participation of migrants in consultative bodies

Other work with migrants + refugees

• toolkits available – http://

www.integratingcities.eu/integrating-cities/resources/MIXITIES%20Toolkits

– http://www.integratingcities.eu/integrating-cities/resources/implementoring_toolkits

• Briefings for Migration Yorkshire – http://www.migrationwork.org/resources/

• Work with ICMC on refugee resettlement– http://www.resettlement.eu/– Project for cities new to resettlement and for developing volunteering

Refugees and asylum seekers in the UK

• Last year 25k applications • Asylum process can be lengthy, often 6 months• Government provides minimal support and

basic dispersed accommodation via contract with private sector providers

• Dispersal to low housing demand areas (mainly the north)

• Asylum seekers barred from employment

Refugees and asylum seekers in the UK

• Refugee status or other leave granted to 50%• Leave for 5 years, then can apply for indefinite

leave and then citizenship • Right to work, claim benefits, apply for social

housing• UNHCR estimate 117,161 refugees in UK ??– Does not include settled and citizens – Does not include subsidiary protection

Refugees in the UK

• Local authorities have lost key roles and associated resources in asylum support coordination

• Housing and support contracts now all private sector run and focus on private sector accommodation

• Integration and employment programmes now ended• 2013 loss of contracts led to major downsizing of refugee

agencies• Loss of coordination and overview• How will this affect refugee potential?

– View of refugees as potential motor of development in some areas in the past

Sheffield’s refugee strategy

Sheffield's integration strategy aims to:• encourage refugees to choose to remain in Sheffield and play a full and equal part in the life of the city• promote the development of high quality services that are responsive to theneeds of refugees• help refugees develop their potential and contribute to the cultural andeconomic life of the city• raise awareness of refugees as a positive resource for all sectors and peoplewithin the city, and to counter negative stereotyping and discrimination• support the development of refugee community organisations• ensure that the needs of refugees are included in the plans of local strategicplanning and regeneration partnerships.Source: Sheffield Refugee Forum/City Council (2005) New Lives: Refugee Integration Strategy 2005-2008.

Housing in the UK: relevant developments

• Local authorities facing severe cuts• Council housing declining in numbers and share– Sales to individuals, “regeneration” of estates,

transfers to housing associations• Housing associations – Some becoming large effectively private companies– Smaller ones squeezed and under threat

• Consequent fragmentation, lack of coordination, failure of regulation

Housing and migrants in the UK

• All in context of major housing crisis in parts of UK: unaffordable, unsuitable, some despair

• Evidence of significant migrant (including refugee) disadvantage in housing market across all sectors

• May indicate discrimination? Or “late to the party” + advantage to people already in housing? both affect refugees

• Will increase when current measures to ensure private landlords check immigration status rolled out

• Refugees have similar housing rights to citizens, but may face discrimination

Some thoughts and conclusions

• ‘As a result of refugees’ fears of hostility and their language difficulties, childcare commitments, unemployment and low incomes, many of them will spend a large proportion of their time in their own homes; therefore the quality and appropriateness of their accommodation is particularly significant for them.’ Carey-Wood, J (1997)

Some thoughts and conclusions

‘Housing is the key to stabilising a person’s mental health. They have lost their house,their farm, their city, their job, their country. We have to start to reverse this process.’Saeed Abdi, MAAN Somali Mental Health Project, Sheffield

Some thoughts and conclusions

• UK not generous provider of refuge: most programmes smaller than other countries– Syrian VPR programme ducks major issue facing Europe, denies

demographic need accepted by other governments and so loses out on potentially “advantageous” refugees

– Focus on the “most vulnerable” works against community development and extends period needed to integrate: has been a source of tension between central and local government

• ‘Successful integration begins on the day people arrive, not the day they get refugee status.’

• So reception facilities and arrangements are important– Tensions between doing it (too) well and creating dependence or

moving people on too fast so they don’t then settle well

Some thoughts and conclusions

• Failure to settle well leads to future problems and possible secondary resettlement – Either through refugees’ own efforts or because it

becomes necessary• Getting it right first time especially important for

refugees resettled in areas where we hope they may contribute to an area that needs new people

• Can be source of new demand for housing, creators of employment, maintain viability of schools and other services

Some thoughts and conclusions

• UK evidence: asylum seekers who do not get good advice at the move on stage (getting refugee status) stage may leave the area. “Reasons included incomplete resettlement advice, the short timescale before being required to leave accommodation, and wider community-related issues such as racist harassment, shortage of appropriate housing in the right areas, and lack of jobs or training facilities.”

Some thoughts and conclusions

• What is the role or usefulness of hosting?– People offer rooms in own home– Visible sign of acceptance and/or solidarity– Aid to integration?– Chileans certainly appreciated (but not so

culturally different and short periods)– May help move political debate on longer term

Some thoughts and conclusions

• Provision of good quality information often a key resource

• www.housing-rights.info • Based on empowering refugees• “Welcome packs” produced for refugees or

migrants proved popular with citizens at times of accelerating local change

Some thoughts and conclusions

BUT “professionalising” refugee services can be counterproductive• Enabling community development develops

crucial resource• People in the community can provide

information, befriend, mentor: good for long term aim of defusing tensions, increasing political support

Some thoughts and conclusions

• What are the important sites for resettlement/integration?– Often not what you think

• Schools vital for good relations and often cited by refugees– Fragmentation by religion/class/”ability” militates

against this• Partnerships vital because refugees need

holistic services

Some thoughts and conclusions

• Refugee community organisations can be challenging but they are also– Innovative– Safe places– Holistic– Providers of unofficial help– Potential growth points for community

development– They need space!

Some thoughts and conclusions

• Refugees are new communities and they need including in all targets relating to equalities etc

• Providing individual interpreters for appointments etc has proved expensive, inefficient and so now politically often unacceptable– Maybe focus on service access points (Wednesday an Arabic

speaker in the housing department) which also enables people to meet, get information collectively and so encourages community development

– Or resource “case management” approach focused on vulnerable users

Some thoughts and conclusions

• Providing legal advice about family reunion, renewing stay and citizenship encourages resettlement

• Key resources on torture– http://www.redress.org/

• What about self build? Ideal for resourceful refugees especially if working alongside others in housing need – http://www.canopyhousingproject.org/about.html

Communities welcoming refugees need support too

Try a community support plan (Eurocities toolkits have ideas too) which aims to • Improve understanding between people • Provide information/answering questions (myth busting) • Bring people together• Create local networks• Help people feel secure• Change perceptions more widely