Syrian Resettlement Programme

Ahead of the Public Accounts Committee’s hearing on the Syrian Resettlement Programme, I wrote an article for Inside Housing about how the government needs to support local authorities in providing homes for those fleeing war and human rights abuses.

The full article is below. For more information about the committee’s inquiry please click here

When the Government committed to resettle 20,000 Syrian refugees many welcomed the step. For the Public Accounts Committee the announcement was just the start of our work.

We are looking to see if the reality matches up to the government's promises and we now have some idea of the real impact on local authorities and landlords.

The Home Office's claim to have now 'secured' enough pledges from local authorities to meet its 20,000 target by 2020 should be treated with scepticism. In reality, there are real risks to councils' participation, particularly around their ability to provide enough suitable homes and school places to meet refugees' needs.

The long-term costs of the programme are unknown and will depend on the needs of the refugees arriving. The National Audit Office estimates that the total lifetime cost of the programme could be up to £1.7 billion – more than three times the £547 million the government plans to spend.

Overstretched local authorities will have to find around 10,600 school and childcare places and nearly 5,000 homes by 2020, at a time when schools and affordable housing provision in many areas are already struggling to meet demand.

The housing benefits cap makes it even more difficult for local authorities in areas like mine to find housing for refugees that they can afford. Benefits won't cover the cost of rents, and most refugees do not yet have a high enough level of English to be able to find work that pays enough to cover soaring rents in London and the south east. This may explain why only 11 per cent of the refugees resettled so far are in these areas.

This is the first resettlement programme to provide funding to support refugees after their first year in the UK, but local authorities are not always clear about their role in the second to fifth years. The UK has specifically taken in the most vulnerable refugees, who are likely to have ongoing complex needs. One of the criteria of being a "vulnerable" refugee, for example, is medical needs or disabilities, but to be entitled to Personal Independence Payments, anyone living in the UK must have been a resident here for at least 2 years.

As the longer-term needs of refugees and costs of resettlement become clearer to local authorities, there is a risk that they will withdraw their pledges, which are no more than a gentleman's agreement at this point.

My committee will be quizzing the departments responsible when they give evidence to us on 7 November. If the finances are not sorted then ultimately it is the vulnerable refugees who will suffer.