Will you sign up to the new refugee sponsorship scheme?

[JoyousOpalLemur]

The Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood is apparently announcing next week a new refugee sponsorship scheme.

It would allow households to privately sponsor refugees from conflict zones.

Applications open this autumn, with the aim of resettling more than 10,000 people.

It’s modelled on Canada’s scheme and the Homes for Ukraine programme.

Sponsors would commit to providing financial, emotional and practical support.

What do people think? I just can't help thinking that with the current pressures on housing, schools, GPs and local services, how this will actually work in practice? Has anyone been involved in the Ukraine sponsorship scheme and can share what it was really like day-to-day?

Curious to hear everyone’s views.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/home-secretary-announce-scheme-refugees-uk-lgdr8ff25

I wonder if there's a program for British people, coz I could do with sponsorship. I'm homeless, I was evicted when the new rules come in last month and people who have never paid a penny into the British system get more help than I do.
I feel more like a stranger in my own country every day.

But anyone who has these views are apparently racist....

The articles make it clear it is not about individuals sponsoring refugees. Why are people ignoring that.

"The bill is due to be introduced within days and will include two safe and legal routes for refugees to open from the autumn – a sponsorship scheme allowing community groups to identify refugees to support, and a university student scheme – with applications taking place within months and refugees arriving next year. A third scheme will allow employers to sponsor refugees from next year"

Agree. I think this supports the story that once a refugee gains settled status they just bring the rest of their family over.

The cynic in me says it's purely a means to massage the "small boat people in hotels figures." Hotels are no longer being used because folk have moved into private accommodation instead.

That’s exactly what I was thinking! 😂

Yes, but the virtue-signallers wouldn't get any kudos for helping you. Only helping a refugee would earn them praise in their middle class bubble.

This allows people to privately sponsor refugees by committing to providing financial, emotional and settlement support for an initial 12 months after a refugee arrives in the country.

It’s similar to Ukrainian scheme.

It will be similar to the Homes for Ukraineprogramme that was introduced following Russia’s invasion in 2022, enabling households to sponsor Ukrainian refugees to come to the UK on temporary visas.

Interested in signing up?

But it isn't about individual households sponsoring refugees. Why are you pretending it is?

Eta: and yes, if there was a local community group sponsoring refugees and it needed money, I would donate to it.

Exactly. More smoke and mirrors from Labour and 'tough talking' Mahmood. Does she really want to reduce the numbers coming into the country? Never in a million years.

Those ‘willing’ to host never seem to have a spare room.

From what I read on bbc it’s primarily businesses, universities and other organisations that will sponsor refugees, not individuals. Obviously if you had a relative or member of your community in your country of origin you could choose to sponsor them. Eg your family are originally from Sri Lanka and the town you originate from comes under attack. People in your community here could sponsor them to come over as refugees. So yes in that scenario I would.

I had a largely positive experience hosting Ukrainian’s. But it was three 22 year old girls who moved into their own place after nine months.
I wouldn’t be tempted to open my home up to young men from a totally different culture who may have arrived in Britain on small boats, possibly destroying ID paperwork on the way, so we know absolutely nothing about their backgrounds.

Funny how they are so willing to spend other people's money so easily and can lap up that praise without having to put their hand in their own pockets.

I was involved with the Ukrainian sponsor scheme at work.

The media got so many people whipped up into a virtue signalling frenzy we were inundated with applications.

As we started to contact people to arrange DBS checks and check accommodation suitability most suddenly seemed difficult to contact, not answering their phone or responding to emails etc.

Those that did engage initially were either not suitable themselves e g giving up a bedroom would mean their kids would be forced to share or single men where the intention was dubious, property with no smoke alarm or gas certificates etc.

Of those few that did continue with their application, the placements tended to breakdown very quickly as people were very naive about how difficult it is to bring strangers into your home.

I suspect this new scheme will fail in a similar way.

How terribly inconvenient that you don't have a spare room. Perhaps you could look into moving?

You want to help but not with your home or money. Perhaps you could knit them some egg cozies?

So who is paying and actually supporting the person in accommodation as The Times has this.

“This allows people to privately sponsor refugees by committing to providing financial, emotional and settlement support for an initial 12 months after a refugee arrives in the country.”

A person housed, fed and supported for a year will cost a fair bit.

I don't understand the point. The sponsor is supposed to host them for a year, and then what? Send them back to a war zone? The Ukrainian scheme was based on the assumption the war would be short and the refugees would go home quickly, are we expecting the same of Sudanese refugees? Afghans? When the Ukrainian war did not end quickly, and/or when Ukrainians did not want to go home, many were placed in social housing. Which is presumably exactly where these ones will also end up, potentially leapfrogging an enormous queue of people already here waiting to be housed. Is this what the year sponsorship is for, so they have somewhere nice to stay while they wait for their council house to become available?

Then of course there's the issue of safety. Are we going to be checking that anyone coming in from misogynistic, racist, homophobic etc countries do not hold misogynistic, racist, homophobic etc views? If we are actually able to do that, why on earth aren't we doing that already? Also, the Ukrainians were female, disabled, elderly... fighting-age men were expected to remain home, fighting. Trying to save their country so all the refugees would have somewhere safe to return to. Can we expect the same with this scheme?

I have no idea what the government is trying to achieve with this. Why are they finding it so hard to understand that the majority do not want any more people, however lovely and however deserving. I obviously can't speak for everyone, but I suspect that most of us want the government to focus on making sure everybody already here has a home, medical care, food etc. I'm sure lots of wealthy do-gooders will leap at the chance though as they have little to lose; they can demonstrate how very virtuous they are by letting them have a small room in one of their massive houses, and then boot them out after a year to fight it out with the rest of us for ever-dwindling resources.

And what happens after 12 months? They go into temporary accommodation? Hotels? Army barracks? The top of the Council house list?

Yes I would.

Calling the poster “a truly vile person” is a bit strong.

I don’t think for a minute that the poster was suggesting that young women should be vulnerable to attacks by migrants.

And I already volunteer to supper refugees both at home and in Calais once a year.
I really hope a few of the people on this thread never need the help of a stranger.

No, it would be logistically fine - I’m just a massive introvert who, as I say in my post, wouldn’t have my mum or best friend to stay the night as value recuperation time in my house. I wouldn’t ever have a lodger, or flat share or sponsor a refugee in my home - but I accept some people do and would.

And this isn’t about just immigration - these are REFUGEES. If I needed refuge from my country, I’d be hoping other countries would take me in. Watch housemaids tale - do you think Canada should have closed borders to those trying to escape a regime that raped women and cut out their tongues? I don’t think something like that is outside of the realm of possibility in the western world nowadays…

I like Shabana but I am wondering if she's read Lionel Shriver's latest novel 'A Better Life'. I have and it's a resounding 'no' from me.

People really are full of nasty insults today aren’t they?

Yes, I was against the Homes for Ukraine scheme from the start. I have massive respect for the Ukrainians but bringing over some of them while others stay (the men in this case who stayed behind to fight) doesn't make sense.

We can help countries with our foreign aid budget. We don't need to bring people here. In the case of places like Sudan, Eritrea etc it seems to be the men that are coming over as 'refugees' which is completely crazy. But I wouldn't bring the women and children over either.

There will be the predictable excuses from
them. It’s for others to do!

What a ridiculous idea. I am surprised at the Home Secretary- she seemed ok before this. The back benches are something else. Actually those back benches could each take someone. Come back every month and report publicly how it’s working!!!