Over a year on from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, a more comprehensive welfare safety net needs to be provided for Ukrainian refugees arriving in the UK.
The UK government has provided a ‘bespoke humanitarian support package’ for Ukrainian refugees which goes beyond the level of provision provided for most other groups arriving in the UK, certainly those who rely on the general asylum system. But this should not hide the fact that provision is inconsistent and short-term, and often fails to provide adequate safeguarding measures.
There is a gap between the language used by the UK government in the early weeks of the war and evidence on the ground. Over the last year, much of the support provided to Ukrainian refugees has not come from direct government intervention but from the goodwill of people in the community or the ability of refugees to pursue existing connections with family members in the UK. There is increasing evidence of the strain being placed on these arrangements and concerns about longer-term solutions. This is not to criticise the altruism shown by the British public. But an approach where the government fails to take sufficient responsibility inevitably leaves significant question marks about funding, governance, safeguarding, access to support services and the ability to challenge improper or unethical practice.
My analysis outlines that the UK government introduced emergency regulations to allow Ukrainian refugees to have immediate access to welfare benefits such as Universal Credit, disability benefits and benefits for children. In terms of accommodation, two schemes have been rolled out. The Ukraine Family Scheme allows Ukrainian nationals to apply to join a family member or Ukrainian national already residing in the UK (50,300 have arrived in the UK under this provision). The Ukrainian sponsorship scheme, known as ‘Homes for Ukraine’, allows Ukrainians with no established links to the UK to apply for accommodation provided by individual or group sponsors in the community (120,400 have arrived in the UK through this scheme). There is no cap on the number for either of these schemes; eligible applicants are issued with three years’ leave to remain, the right to work and recourse to public funds.
There are several issues with the welfare benefits provision. Fundamental problems with the Universal Credit adjudication process (e.g. provision of evidence, interaction with job coaches, managing a digitalised system) are likely to be more acutely experienced by Ukrainian refugees who often lack professional support. The interaction between immigration status and benefit entitlement is one of the most complex in the field of social welfare law. Where decision-making errors are made, unpicking these complexities is not straightforward, and problems are often evident with seemingly routine practical issues, such as the issuing of a National Insurance number or ensuring that the value of capital in property in Ukraine is ignored.
There are inconsistencies in the way in which the benefit rules have been laid out which can have significant implications for families accommodating a refugee under the Family Scheme. Hosts through this scheme who are themselves claiming benefits may have their entitlements reviewed and reduced as the income of the refugee that they accommodate is considered when looking at overall household income. This is the not the case for the Homes for Ukraine scheme as the government has stated that hosts will be made ‘no better or worse off’ by the income of the refugee that they host.
There are significant discrepancies between the two housing schemes. Under the Homes for Ukraine scheme, hosts received a ‘thank you’ payment of £350 per month increasing to £500 per month if a guest remains in the household for over a year. There is no equivalent payment under the Family Scheme. Local authorities are allocated funding for each person who is accommodated under the Homes for Ukraine scheme, but these provisions do not extend to the Family Scheme. Local authorities play a key role in inspecting properties to ensure that they are suitable for a Homes for Ukraine placement. This includes a safeguarding and health and safety check and an in-person welfare check. Again, these checks are not required for the Family Scheme.
Problems are evident when housing arrangements break down. A refugee accommodated under the Homes for Ukraine scheme can be rematched with an alternative host, but there is not an equivalent provision for the Family Scheme. This is pushing many refugees to the insecure, and increasingly unaffordable private rented sector. Some private landlords are refusing to rent to Ukrainians in receipt of benefits or are demanding proof of earning and income in the UK which cannot be provided; many other refugees are struggling to find funds for a deposit or to secure a guarantor. By April 2023, the short-term and unstable nature of these housing provisions has contributed to over 5,000 Ukrainian refugees presenting to local authorities as homeless.
Significant concerns have been raised about safeguarding and exploitation associated with the Homes for Ukraine scheme. The lack of structure and robust monitoring has led to its being described as ‘DIY policy’ and ‘Tinder for traffickers’. The United Nations Refugee Agency and The Charity Commission have warned of the increased risks of sexual exploitation, especially for women and children.
Changes are urgently required to ensure that Ukrainian refugees are more appropriately supported in the UK. There is a need for consistency across the Homes for Ukraine and Family Schemes; hosts through the Family Scheme should be entitled to ‘thank you’ payments and should not see their own welfare benefit entitlement affected when accommodating a family member. Refugees need to be able to switch between the two schemes where provisions break down. Systems to match sponsors and refugees have improved over the last year but a safe and efficient central process has yet to be developed. Specialist housing advice is needed to facilitate the move to longer-term housing options and to intervene when problems arise. Many refugees will require health and wellbeing support because of the trauma they have experienced. The government has recognised the vulnerabilities of Ukrainian refugees but persists with a hands-off policy approach. Without further resources, local authorities and voluntary sector groups will struggle to monitor and maintain current provisions and to support refugees with longer-term, safe and sustainable support.
Richard Machin is Senior Lecturer in Social Work and Health at Nottingham Trent University
The UK – a home for Ukrainians? An analysis of social security and housing policy by Richard Machin for the Journal of Poverty and Social Justice
is available on the Bristol University Press website here.
Bristol University Press/Policy Press newsletter subscribers receive a 25% discount – sign up here.
Follow Transforming Society so we can let you know when new articles publish.
The views and opinions expressed on this blog site are solely those of the original blog post authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of Bristol University Press and/or any/all contributors to this site.
Image Benjamin Marder via Unsplash