Written evidence submitted by Lichfield Hope Support Group

Introduction

Lichfield Hope Support Group arose out of a concern by Lichfield Quakers for the plight of refugees and asylum seekers. The group includes non-Quakers as well as Quakers and has generated much wider support across the city through promotional and fund-raising activities. For that reason we are able to speak for a wider constituency within Lichfield than the group itself.

Although we are not aware of refugees or asylum seekers living in Lichfield, Birmingham is nearby and is home for many.  Our main purpose is to support Hope Projects, a Birmingham based charity, which works specifically with asylum seekers who find themselves destitute or struggling to survive because the systems in place fail to recognise the extent of their difficulties and the realities of the dangers they have fled. This locates our specific interest and expertise in Asylum seekers and we shall restrict our answers to your questions accordingly except where the experiences of all immigrants coincide.

Questions

What approach should the Government take to different kinds of migration – for example skilled, unskilled, family migration, students and refugees?

We should very much like to see Government give a strong lead in changing public attitudes towards immigrants of all kinds and towards asylum seekers in particular.  Such a lead would enable Government to respond with compassion as opposed to the current approach of wanting to demonstrate a form of toughness which is unnecessary and sometimes inhumane.

We should like to see Government taking a fair and consistent approach towards refugees treating them like human beings and supporting then appropriately in their claims. This would include:

Facilitating applications through a fair and reasonable legal aid system.

Setting clear and understandable criteria for applicants to meet without hidden snares which makes it possible for so many to fail at the first hurdle.

Providing basic housing and income support throughout the application process including the appeals process,,

Permitting people to work during their period of application.

Providing easily accessible health care.

Abolishing detention centres where so much mental and emotional harm is done and utilising the funding resources released to support communities in welcoming asylum seekers. (This complements our answers to your later questions about managing the impact of immigration on communities and building greater consensus about immigration.)

What are the benefits and problems with different kinds and levels of migration, for the economy and society?

The benefits of welcoming asylum seekers to the UK are wide-ranging and have been well-documented in many studies. A diverse society is dynamic and healthy and refugees from the past have made enormous personal and group contributions to British society. Perhaps it is easier to demonstrate this by naming names. Lord Dubs is an obvious starting point, but also there is Sir Montague Burton, Lord Lew Grade, Lucian Freud, Yasmin Alibhai Brown, Sir Ludwig Guttmann and many other people living out their lives in quieter but equally useful ways.

Many of the problems for society are generated by ignorance and media portrayals that lead to inaccurate and damaging stereotypes, which those affected have no opportunity to change. Unfortunately at present there is a belief, encouraged by inaccurate campaigning and media portrayals, that the shortfalls of the work economy and low pay in particular can be laid at the door of immigrants. They are likewise blamed for the deficits and inadequacies of public services and especially those relating to health, housing and education. Our earlier plea for a Government lead in speaking truth and responding with compassion would go a long way towards combating these misconceptions.

What approach should be taken to EU migration as part of the Brexit negotiations – for example, points-based systems, or work permits; and geographical variations

We do not have a view on this.

What steps should be taken to manage the impact of migration in communities?

The impact on communities is a major factor in the settlement of asylum seekers and we would urge Government to support those local authorities who for different reasons are expected to accommodate and educate significant numbers.  We have suggested already where some of the funding might be found to facilitate this. Whether real or perceived, local feelings about asylum seekers absorbing more than their fair share of resources has a major impact on community relations. Allocation of additional resources has proved possible in the case of the small number of Syrian refugees who have been welcomed to the UK and a similar formula to that used to fund their reception could be adopted for asylum seekers in general

Is it possible to build greater consensus behind immigration policy? What steps would be needed to do so?

We believe that it is more than possible to build greater consensus behind immigration policy. We have directly experienced this in a small way here in Lichfield. When people are given factual information rather than subjected to media hysteria they listen and welcome the opportunity to rethink. As we said in our first answer, the Government itself is in the best position to lead on this. It requires a move away from seeing immigration just as an electoral issue and it requires Government to lead public opinion as it has done successfully in the past rather than to follow it. Examples from the past include the Kindertransport , the response to the Hungarian crisis in 1956, the Vietnamese boat people resettlement programme, and the resettlement of Asians from both Kenya and Uganda. There was little public outcry at any of these initiatives because of the strong Government lead.

How should trade-offs between immigration policy and economic policy be handled?

We do not have a view on this.