Refugee and Housing Network summary of findings and recommendations Presented at the final meeting on 15 December 2003 in the House of Lords This project is co-funded by The European Refugee Fund
1. The Refugee and Housing Network The Refugee and Housing Network has brought together people with expert knowledge of the issues facing refugees and those with expertise in the housing field. Its objective has been to draw attention to current problems and possible solutions for the housing of refugees. Membership includes representatives from central and local government, housing providers and refugee voluntary sector agencies and community organisations. The Network is funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), an endowed foundation, which aims to explore and tackle the causes of poverty through research, testing good practice and developing the policy agenda. It is run by hact (the Housing Associations Charitable Trust), which has been funding, undertaking research and brokering partnerships in the refugee sector for over 10 years as part of its focus on promoting social inclusion in housing provision. 2. What we have done The Network has met eight times over a period of two years, including five meetings over two days in Leeds, London, Portsmouth and Newcastle and Birmingham, which provided a combination of local visits, speakers and debate. Locations were chosen to reflect different aspects of asylum seeker and refugee housing issues with a particular emphasis on engaging with refugees in new areas of dispersal. The Network has been committed to sharing experience and knowledge, in particular to ensure that its concerns and thinking are passed on to policymakers and those in a position to effect change in national umbrella bodies. An interim report was produced in October 2002 and discussed with the Housing Minister, Jeff Rooker. Members of the Network have also participated in a range of other relevant initiatives including: the Home Office s National Refugee Integration Forum s (NRIF) accommodation sub-group; a Chartered Institute of Housing policy paper; the Housing Corporation s current updating of good practice guidelines; and the National Asylum Support Service s (NASS) reviews of their accommodation strategy and the role of regional consortia as potential delivery agents on behalf of NASS. 3. Purpose of this paper This paper updates the interim report; it highlights key stages in the integration process and shortcomings in policy and practice that require action so as to improve the housing circumstances of refugees. Broad and more specific recommendations are put forward. But the paper does not represent the full extent of the Network s deliberations. Evidence of innovation, good ideas and poor practice has also been gathered. 4. Key stages in the integration process and the importance of housing In an environment that is changing extremely rapidly and which is tainted by negative pronouncements from politicians and the media, there has been a keen sense that the Network should explore complexities and avoid oversimplification. The Network set out to focus on refugee housing issues, but soon identified that move-on housing for refugees cannot be viewed in isolation from other parts of the asylum process, for example, decisionmaking on applications for asylum, and the reception, accommodation and support systems in place for those awaiting a decision. Separating out these processes from those designed to facilitate integration does nothing to aid planning for transition and settlement, nor does it relieve antagonism and community tension in areas in which asylum seekers are housed. The experience of asylum seekers awaiting a decision will inevitably affect their choices and preferences about initial and longer-term settlement.
The availability of housing is critical to each stage of the asylum and integration process, as is the capacity and willingness of the local community and service providers, including housing agencies, to welcome and support both those seeking asylum and those who may remain in the area following a positive decision. Linking in to regional housing strategies and greater sensitivity to local housing markets and broader socio-economic circumstances must be integral to the Home Office s accommodation strategy and planning for move-on housing. Housing provision should also be linked to community development. Refugee communitybased organisations play a vital role in promoting community safety and facilitating effective links with services and other community and voluntary groups; their role requires recognition and support. 4.1. Accommodating and supporting asylum seekers A coordinated strategy for reception, induction and placement and support whilst awaiting the outcome of an application will aid transition, settlement support and longer-term integration, but requires available accommodation in strategic locations. Against a backdrop of rising numbers, policy over the past 10 years has been dogged by the twin problems of accommodation shortages in areas of high demand and local backlash. Designed to relieve pressure on areas of housing stress in London and the South East, the current system of dispersal was poorly implemented. The delivery agent, NASS, was highly centralised and process driven and conflicts arose with other policy areas including community cohesion and neighbourhood and (housing) market renewal. Local people and services were not informed or prepared for dispersal; and no extra resource was provided to local service providers to meet both the specific needs of new arrivals, as well as of the existing host communities. This has fuelled social strife and racial tension in dispersal areas, which are over-represented amongst the 88 most deprived localities as defined by the Government s Neighbourhood Renewal strategy. The first wave of NASS dispersal has been delivered mainly through national contracts with the private sector (58%) and with local authorities through the regional consortia. The role of private providers has proven to be an important and flexible resource but needs a framework for ensuring adherence to accommodation standards, transparency in provider responsibilities and engagement with local stakeholders in the interests of community cohesion. Housing associations could play a bigger role in all parts of the reception, settlement and integration process. Hopefully the current NASS review will result in a more robust framework that facilitates better joint working with regional and local bodies in the housing, regeneration and community development spheres. This would be assisted by an increasing acceptance by local democratic bodies of their responsibilities towards newcomers in their locality. 4.2. Supporting the transition process finding and managing a home Transition is an important time for refugees who face complex emotions following receipt of a positive decision and, at the same time, are moving on from the all encompassing support of NASS to securing their own support, usually, in the first instance, involving registration with an array of overlapping but poorly co-ordinated processes and agencies including: NASS, the Home Office s Integrated Casework Directorate, the Benefits Agency, and Local Authority housing benefit and housing advice/homeless person s sections. Once accommodation is secured people are dealing for the first time in this country with the responsibilities of a tenancy, paying bills etc. The notice period remains inadequate (in spite of a welcome increase from 14 to 28 days) and continues to be a barrier, particularly as the actual period of notification is rarely a full 28 days. The Network hopes that the recent pilot to
streamline the processes at this time (particularly regarding the issuing of national insurance numbers) has been successful and will be rolled out. There is much anecdotal evidence of secondary in-country migration at this stage. Although significant numbers of refugees would be expected to move to areas with larger community support networks and greater employment opportunities, there has often been no advice and support mechanisms to underpin the option of staying in an area in which there may be other opportunities, including housing and access to education and training. A patchwork of transitional support projects is emerging across the country, some funded through the Supporting People framework, but there is no national policy to underpin this important stage and to join up the various agencies involved. Refugee Community Organisations (RCOs) are poorly resourced in spite of overwhelming evidence that their role is essential in providing support around transition and settlement. 4.3. Integration settling for the medium to longer term The Government has expressed commitment to longer-term integration. The policy document, Full and Equal Citizens, published in 2000, states that housing and community development are fundamental to successful integration. A planned updating in 2002/3, with input by the externally focused sub-groups of the Home Office administered National Refugee Integration Forum (see App.1), has been delayed. Overall, there is a need for greater leadership and coordination at Central Government level. Regional asylum seeker consortia have been required by NASS to develop integration strategies but there appears to be no ownership of these by NASS. The Refugee Integration Unit (RIU) sits outside NASS but has responsibility for the government s integration strategy. The RIU also administers the European Refugee and Challenge Funds but has made little use of regional integration strategies to influence the administration of these funds. The link between regional and national strategies lacks clarity. All too often, pioneering initiatives have been driven by individual champions working in a policy vacuum. As a consequence perhaps, refugee housing and integration issues have been a low priority within the agenda of the social housing sector. 5. Recommendations 5.1. Underpinning policy, the strategic framework and delivery mechanisms must be the notion of a relationship of respect and equality between members of the asylum seeker and existing ( host ) community. 5.2. Integration must be addressed within the context of other parts of the asylum seeker process so as to promote positive community relations and smoother transition. For example, unless the framework for dispersal is improved, it will not only bring the dispersal policy into constant conflict with other policy areas, but will also fail to facilitate settlement and integration in areas of dispersal. 5.3. A framework is required that clarifies national policy and the interface and relationships between relevant national agencies and units, regional players and strategies, and local involvement and delivery which should include Regional Housing Boards (RHBs), LAs, health bodies, the police and voluntary and community organisations, in particular RCOs who will require support and focused capacity building to actively engage. 5.4. Information and data collection and sharing must be improved as part of formulating and delivering on national policy. This should include a method of impact assessment to support effective planning and the allocation of resources from different central government
departments. Broader socio-economic analysis of areas that could support migration e.g. areas of labour/skills shortage and housing availability, could underpin longer term migration planning and should be linked to information about the experiences of refugees in these areas. 5.5. Within homelessness strategies, there should be a requirement for specific measures leading towards the effective housing of newcomers, including refugees. The ODPM should take responsibility for monitoring, evaluating and, if need be, enforcing this. 5.6. Leadership around the integration agenda is required, as well as a joining up of relevant Government departments and units to address specific barriers. 5.7. There is a specific need for improved coordination and support around transition. A welcome pack is required and a specific package of support should be considered, or access to existing provision, such as furniture grants, improved.