The Government’s recent announcement of the closure of the Dungavel detention centre in Scotland highlighted the potential for a move away from detention.  The UK currently detains over 30,000 migrants a year, one of the largest detention figures in Europe.

Following on from scathing criticisms of the detention system and protocol in a recent Parliamentary Inquiry and the Shaw Review, this report recommends that alternatives to detention have the potential to lead to a long-term reduction in detention levels.

The report, What next after Brexit? Immigration and integration in post-referendum Britain, is released as new ONS immigration statistics are published, likely to show that the Government remains no nearer to its manifesto commitment to reduce net migration to ‘tens of thousands’.

It finds that only around a third of people (37%) think we are likely to meet the net migration target in the next five years, even after Brexit, according to ICM polling. More think we are not likely (44%). Of those who take a view (ie excluding those who say ‘Don’t Know’) 54% think it is unlikely, 46% likely.

The report says it would be unwise to predict what levels of immigration are best for Britain until the details of the Brexit deal are clear. But Brexit could offer “an opportunity to get immigration policy right” and the report calls for a comprehensive immigration review, once the shape of Brexit is known. This should involve the public through a “national conversation on immigration”, modelled on the consultation launched last month by the Canadian government. New research shows that such a review would reveal UK public attitudes to immigration that are more moderate and nuanced than most might think:

• Only 12% of people would like to see a reduction in the numbers of highly skilled workers migrating to Britain; nearly four times as many (46%) would like to see more of it, with 42% saying that it should stay the same. Among people who voted Leave in the referendum these numbers remain broadly the same: 45% would like to see an increase, 40% say that the numbers should stay as they are and just 15% would like to see them reduced.

• Only a fifth of people (22%) would like the number of international students coming to study at Britain’s universities to be reduced, less than the 24% who would be happy for them to increase. The majority (54%, including 50% of Leave voters) would rather the numbers stayed the same. Students made up over a quarter of immigration flows to the UK last year (1).

• Most people (52%) would be happy for the number of people joining immediate family in the UK to remain the same. 13% think it should be increased while 35% would prefer it reduced.

• People are less positive about low-skilled workers moving to the UK, however: while four in ten (38%) would be happy for numbers to stay the same (31%) or increase (7%), six in ten (62%) would prefer the numbers to be reduced.

The report calls for increased investment in a system that works.  It recommends improved funding for the Home Office to handle borders and immigration while coping with a higher workload as a result of Brexit. It also calls for the Government to honour a Conservative manifesto commitment for a fund to manage the local impacts of migration, particularly in areas of rapid population increase, focusing on housing, school places and pressures on NHS services.

The Comprehensive Immigration Review, the authors argue, must be undertaken at the highest level of politics, considering top-level issues and not just micro-policy. It should examine how migration can help provide the economy with the skills that it needs, as well as hearing the case for reductions in other areas. It also needs to consider family migration and public support for increasing the number of international students.

However, according to British Future there is a broad consensus for separating the status of
current EU nationals living in the UK, from future policy changes that may apply to new migrants.
The official Vote Leave campaign proposed that there should be “no change for EU citizens
already lawfully resident in the UK. These EU citizens will automatically be granted indefinite
leave to remain in the UK and will be treated no less favorably than they are at present”.

Since the referendum, there has been pressure to secure an immediate government
commitment to guarantee the rights of EU nationals living in Britain, as exemplified in the
Sunday Telegraph letter signed by Leave and Remain politicians, as well as the TUC, the
Institute of Directors and trade bodies representing specific industrial sectors. Polling from
ICM for British Future found that 84% of the British public supports letting EU
migrants stay – including three-quarters (77%) of Leave voters – with any future
changes applying only to new migrants.

The Government has delayed making a specific commitment on EU nationals, on the
grounds that it needs to seek reciprocity for British nationals in the EU. It has also voiced
concerns about managing immigration surges from those trying to beat cut-off points and
policy deadlines.

The Government has said that it does anticipate that the principle of EU nationals being able
to stay and settle in the UK will eventually be agreed, but there will be many complexities
about how to uphold this in practice. Establishing legal residence in the UK will be difficult for
some EU migrants, for example.

To inform the approach of the Government, British Future is holding a short inquiry on the
status of EU nationals in the UK after Brexit. The Inquiry will meet in September 2016 and is
being chaired by Gisela Stuart MP. It has cross-party support and also includes business
and trade union representation. The Inquiry will report in autumn 2016, setting out practical
proposals about how to secure the status of EU nationals living in the UK.

To support the inquiry British Future has launched a Call for Evidence asking employers,
migrants’ organisations, migration and legal experts and other interested parties to provide
supporting evidence. Submissions should be less than 1,000 words, and additional documents
and appendixes can be included if relevant.  British Future’s deadline for receiving
submissions is 5pm on Wednesday 07 September 2016,  but if your organisation
requires a little more time, please contact Jill Rutter at British Future.  You can submit evidence here.

With more than 3 million EU migrants currently living in the UK, the Government faces an immense administrative exercise in securing their residence rights, according to a new report published today by the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford.

The analysis – Here Today, Gone Tomorrow? The Status of EU Citizens Already Living in the UK – looks at the existing process that EU citizens can use to apply for permanent residence, which gives an indication of some of the issues the Government may face in any new registration scheme post-Brexit.

The report finds that while the Government has signalled that it ‘expects’ to protect the long-term status of EU migrants already living here if the UK decides to end free movement, the process of doing this may be complex.

If all EEA citizens already living in the UK in early 2016 applied for permanent residence at once, this would represent the equivalent of around 140 years’ worth of work at recent rates of processing for this type of application.

If existing rules for registering EU citizens as permanent residents are used as the model for a post-Brexit registration process, a substantial minority of EU citizens could find themselves ineligible despite having lived in the country for several years.

Immigration lawyers report that there is particular confusion around the current permanent residence rules for students and self-sufficient people such as retirees, who may not know that they are expected to have comprehensive sickness insurance while in the UK.

As Brexit negotiations are still at an early stage, the Government has not yet laid out what any registration process for EU citizens would look like and who would qualify. It is possible that this process will be similar to the current permanent residence application, but it is also possible that a different and potentially simpler procedure will be introduced.

Read the full report

In September 2015, a group of UK-based foundations and NGOs met at the Paul Hamlyn Foundation to discuss responses to the refugee crisis that was engulfing Europe. The images of Alan Kurdi’s lifeless body on a Turkish beach had jolted many from unease or disbelief to shock, sympathy and compassion.  Although the UK was not experiencing inflows like mainland Europe, there was a groundswell of public support for refugees and positive coverage of an issue all too often mired in controversy.

Some of us thought that there was scope for collective action and the meeting led the establishment of New Beginnings, a pooled fund managed by the UK Community Foundations Network (UKCF). Although both Barrow Cadbury and Paul Hamlyn are strategic, long-term funders in the area of migration we thought it was important to help set up this responsive fund. Firstly, we were hearing that small local groups were over-stretched and overwhelmed by offers to volunteer. Often the first port of call for people who want to engage with this issue and welcome migrants and refugees, these groups were inundated with requests but ill-equipped to harness this new energy and interest.

As long-standing investors in work to understand public attitudes to refugee and migration issues, we were under no illusions that the crisis would lead to a dramatic and positive shift in views. However, this fund seemed opportune given that surveys have found that the public have more positive attitudes to migration in their local area than at national level. There is also extensive evidence to show that meaningful contact with migrants and refugees can be a very powerful experience that shapes how people feel about this issue.

We were also struck by the US experience of building a movement in support of migrants and refugees. There, advocates and their philanthropic partners have found that a healthy immigration movement requires investment in both large and small organisations. The ability of these organisations to engage meaningfully with the public, and not just their core supporters, has proved critical.

With New Beginnings we were motivated by the chance to build on the momentum generated by external events and to help often fragile community groups become more resilient and reach out to newer constituencies. Given its short-term nature, the fund was not designed to fill gaps in service delivery – of which there are many – but to build capacity in engaging local communities in support of their work at a time of great demand. To that end, we are also in the process of developing workshops to enable some of the groups involved to strengthen their approach to communications and to tap into existing networks and reach new supporters.

In May 2016, New Beginnings awarded £506,000 in one year grants to 45 organisations, 39 of which received up to £10,000 and seven partnership projects that were awarded up to £20,000. Typical examples include Restore, a Birmingham based group that has seen massive increases in volunteer befriender requests over the past year. Also supported is Oasis Cardiff Partnership, which will work with new arrivals to help them integrate, partly through sessions organised by volunteers from the local community and also a ‘Friends and Neighbours’ group.

New Beginnings will launch a second round, of a similar size to the first, later this summer. Approaches from foundations or donors interested in contributing would be very welcome. One of the issues we and the other funders and partners hope to address this time round is the paucity of applications from refugee or migrant led organisations. How do we go about reaching these often over-looked and low profile groups that have the potential to make a significant contribution towards long-term change?

In this post-Brexit haze the refugee crisis now seems quite distant. However, the rationale for the fund remains, perhaps even more so now that some of the fault lines and anxieties that existed before the vote have surfaced and have uncovered a tension that risks undermining the UK’s long tradition of welcoming newcomers.

Trusts, foundations and other philanthropists and supporters now more than ever need to demonstrate collective and sustained support for the often unglamorous work of these community groups and the volunteers working with them.

Ayesha Saran is migration programme manager at Barrow Cadbury Trust.
Alex Sutton is senior grants manager at Paul Hamlyn Foundation.

This blog represents the views of the two trusts and not the views of all funders of the New Beginnings Fund.

Foundations contributing to the pooled fund include: Comic Relief; Barrow Cadbury Trust; Paul Hamlyn Foundation; Pears Foundation; Lloyds Bank Foundation for England and Wales; The Rayne Foundation; City of London Corporation; BBC Children in Need and Oak Foundation.

Based on IPPR’s research the briefing finds that:

• Since the 2004 accession, EU migration flows have risen dramatically risen to over 100,000 a year
• There are now more than 3 million EU-born migrants in the UK
• EU Migrants are more likely to be in employment than other people working across the UK

• Eastern European migrants mainly work in low skilled temporary roles, such as food processing and machinery operation
• EU Migrants are more likely to claim tax credits and child benefit than UK nationals, but less likely to receive out-of-work benefits
• EU Migrants are four times more likely to be living in overcrowded accommodation than others
• EU Migrants on average are more qualified, with 59% of migrants having university or college qualifications, compared to 34% of British residents
• British residents who were interviewed as part of the research raised major concerns about EU migrants’ access to welfare, pressures on public services, crime and personal security and wage undercutting

You can read the full report here

The report also suggests that an EU exit for the UK could mean tighter controls on the migration of EU citizens. It found that some non-EU countries however, like Norway and Switzerland have implemented free movement in return for access to the EU’s single market.

Read the full report here

‘Fear and Hope 2016’ aims to understand how adults across England look at race, religion and identity in modern society, exploring how attitudes amongst different demographics compare.  It also builds upon views and opinions generated from the 2011 ‘Fear and Hope’ report.

Over 4,000 people  aged 18 and over were surveyed by online community organisation Populus, taking into account people’s age, gender, social grade and ethnicity.  Based on the survey findings the report found that:

• England is a more tolerant and confident multicultural society than five years ago
• Attitudes towards race, immigration and migration are more positive, due mainly to growing optimism about the economy
• Almost a third of people surveyed were very positive towards England’s multicultural society (compared to 24% five years ago)
• The proportion of people who are strongly hostile to immigration and living in a multicultural society has dropped to 8% (compared with 13% five years ago)
• Immigration attitudes have become more flexible and welcoming, despite record levels of net migration
• People support the celebration of diversity and making minorities feel welcome, but they oppose the alteration of British laws to accommodate practices and beliefs
• Muslims are regarded as a uniquely different religious minority, with 43% of English respondents saying they feel Muslims are “completely different to them”
• There is a growing separation between those who follow a faith and those who don’t. Those who don’t, represent a much higher number than five years ago.

You can read the full report here.

The public wave of sympathy in response to the refugee crisis has led to an increase in the number of people looking to volunteer.   One of the aims of this fund is to help groups build their capacity to process these offers of assistance. This is especially important at a time where demand is rising and groups are working with larger numbers of people who have been through traumatic experiences.

The New Beginnings Fund has been contributed to by a number of leading charities including Paul Hamlyn Foundation, Pears Foundation, The Rayne Foundation, Lloyds Bank Foundation for England and Wales, and Comic Relief.

The fund will be disbursed through UK Community Foundations’ (UKCF) network of local community foundations.  The application process will be managed across the four nations of the UK by: Community Foundations for Lancashire & Merseyside, Community Foundation in Wales, Community Foundation Northern Ireland, Foundation Scotland, Heart of England Community Foundation, Kent Community Foundation and London Community Foundation.

The fund is aimed at small, local groups.  Those groups with an income of less than £250,000 will be prioritised. Applications for up to £10,000 will be considered but, in exceptional circumstances, grants for up to £20,000 will be awarded for collaborative bids involving multiple local partners.

The funding can be used for new or existing activities that involve local communities in welcoming and supporting new arrivals. A key view of this fund is that early integration helps dispel tensions and prevent misconceptions within local communities. Applications from projects which emphasise the value of integration and work with communities to become stronger and more connected, encouraging refugees and asylum seekers to make an active contribution and engage positively, will be welcome.

If other organisations are interested in contributing to the New Beginnings Fund, they should contact UKCF for further information.

Applications can be submitted up to 29 March 2016 following a six week application window. Application forms can be found on the UK Community Foundations Website as well as on the website of each participating community foundation.

[1] Home Office National Statistics: Asylum https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-statistics-april-to-june-2015/asylum

“The idea of being bothered about immigration made me laugh! I’m from Birmingham. It’s never been a concern of mine. I can’t imagine caring about someone else being born in a difference place to me. (Black British born female participant).”
The Runnymede Trust has launched a new report about British ethnic minorities’ views on immigration and Europe. The publication entitled ‘This is Still About Us – Why Ethnic Minorities See Immigration Differently’ used high-sample surveys and focus groups across several different areas of the country to gauge opinion.

Produced by the UK’s leading independent thinktank on race equality and race relations, its findings show:

• Immigration is seen more positively by BME groups, because they focus on the economic and cultural contributions an immigrant can make to British life.
• BME people are more likely to feel that the public debate around immigration negatively impacts on them personally, even if they or their parents were born in Britain;
• They feel sometimes they need to ‘prove’ they are British;
• Most broadly share concerns of the wider population around the pace of immigration, but they are more worried about the pressure on services than on cultural impact;
• Participants were more ambivalent about Europe and are less likely to take advantage of free movement within EU borders;
• People were more concerned about Britain being a ‘hostile environment’ for immigrants;
• BME people are more likely to be concerned about the impact of benefit cuts on immigrant families;
• On citizenship and the immigration system, BME groups are more likely to be concerned about the cost of the citizenship process, family visa policies and Home Office responses to immigration queries;
• There were variations between different BME groups: Long-settled communities were more likely to believe newer migrants had easier experiences;
• BME people are more likely to view Europe in explicitly ethnic or racial terms.

You can read the full report here.