Funding now will save money in the long run

I use the word ‘relative’ for obvious reasons – the United Kingdom has never been known for its cavalier attitude to the welfare of regular migrants, much less for individuals whose right to enter and remain is enshrined in international, rather than domestic, law. 

Before and after...

What has become increasingly apparent in recent months is the thin veneer that most likely dressed services prior to the crisis, and the now-quite-visible shortage of purpose-driven services for those seeking protection. 

This seems to be the case even without mentioning the destitution experienced by those with negative decisions, or those who continue to wait in limbo, including the thousands of so-called ‘legacy’ cases that after some ten years remain unresolved, despite assurances from the Home Office that these would finally be reconciled in 2011.

In the shadow of wholesale decimation of Local Authorities’ budgets, it is not in any way surprising that those seeking asylum would see a cut to benefits; after all, British subjects are themselves expecting the first static cap on non-single benefits since the Thatcher years.

What is surprising is how little foresight was put into the entire enterprise. Despite warnings as towards the ability of recognised refugees to successfully integrate without a graduated approach to service implementation, peripheral agencies who previously ensured the successful transition of these individuals were the first to fall victim to the ‘slash and burn’ tactic of the newly-elected Coalition government. 

The Refugee Council, a national charity whose remit includes assisting refugees in procuring accommodation and other basic services during and after the asylum application process, has for instance seen a 100% funding cut for its Refugee Integration and Employment Services (RIES). 

As larger national agencies scramble to find alternative funding streams, smaller charitable organisations are forced into direct competition to renew their grants. This often results in service closures of community agencies that once represented a valuable point of entry into a sustainable future for a newly-recognised asylum seeker – providing language, computer and other training services, as well as information on access to benefits. 

The long and short of it

However any savings that might have been purchased through service closures will in all likelihood be lost in the long run. After having found themselves unable to procure essential language and skills trainings, refugees will remain unable to find work and contribute back to the Government coffers. Refugees without permanent accommodation may suffer a host of physical and mental health problems, especially as many already need care upon arrival. These would be exacerbated through lack of immediate attention. At that point any intervention to help these individuals will cost more than it was saved.

Perhaps the best way of explaining the rationale behind such short-sightedness is the ability of media and politicians to use vulnerable groups as scapegoats for society’s ills. As resentment towards benefits recipients from all walks of life grows in accordance with funding cuts, the people who are left holding the proverbial bag are those who are seen as having no entitlement. If these groups of migrants also suffer from various problems, including fear of being persecuted by the selfsame authorities that are meant to protect them, the long-term picture isn’t pretty: thousands more wasted lives populating Britain’s shadow society instead of adding to the mainstream.