(a)

the report included information upon asylum seekers however primarily focused upon support the council was providing to those seeking support through Home Office managed migration schemes and therefore had recourse for public funds;

(b)

the Syrian Vulnerable Persons and Vulnerable Childrens Resettlement Scheme – the Council was successful in meeting its target to resettle 200 people under the scheme – this also supported vulnerable families in the Middle East and North Africa.

(c)

the Afghan Home Office Pathways in Plymouth – the Afghan Assistance and Relocation Policy and the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme were schemes the Council had been working on in the city.  They were home office managed migration schemes to relocate afghan civilian personnel employed by the Ministry of Defence in recognition of their commitment and bravery shown to UK forces since 2014, and Afghan citizens who may be at particular risk because of assisting UK efforts in Afghanistan to help vulnerable people; 53 people and 12 families have been resettled as a result of these routes;

(d)

Homes for Ukraine: 97 hosts in Plymouth welcomed 166 guests from Ukraine. Hosts were continuing to accommodate guests beyond the initial six month period and re-matching levels were far below that of other local authorities and was considered to be because of the intense wraparound support that was offered as part of the scheme;

(e)

Plymouth had been an asylum seeker dispersal area for over 20 years supporting individuals once they had received their refugee status to settle and integrate into the local community had enabled a diverse and burgeoning local economy in the city where people felt welcomed;

(f)

in terms of the relevance of this work to the Council’s corporate plan and Plymouth Plan, Plymouth was a friendly and welcoming city and would continue to work to support cultural activities and events in Plymouth for Plymouth residents and visitors. Since the start of the Homes for Ukraine scheme, 4 welcome events had taken place at the Council House hosted by the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor. A request to host an event for those arriving through the Afghanistan and Syria scheme and this would take place in February/ March 2023;

(g)

commissioned services were available for those arriving in the city to access the employment market including self-employment and accessing skills training where required and this would ensure the diversity and business and community offer in the city continued;

(h)

support through the Afghan Assistance and Relocation Policy and the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme offered incentives to landlords to renovate their homes to enable them to enter the private rental market at affordable local housing allowance rates. The Homes for Ukraine’s Scheme required an initial property check at the start of the placement; the success of the scheme had widened the scope and enabled the council to provide a similar scheme for homeless families.

(i)

in terms of the Homes for Ukraine Scheme, the Government allowed for people to move and change hosts if required to do so; the Council was successful in encouraging hosts to stay with their guests for a further six months by offering a top-up to the initial £350 paid by the Government up to 12 months – the Council offered an additional £150; this also supported the increased cost of living. Where the relationship had broken down, guests had moved to other hosts. 31 people had been supported by their home to move directly into private rental accommodation;

(j)

two people as part of the Homes for Ukraine Scheme that wanted to move on from their hosts were currently in bed and breakfast accommodation however did have move-on plans in place;

(k)

the Government had yet to advise as to plans for the Homes for Ukraine Scheme after the initial 12 month period; the Council were to work closely with partners to source private rented sector accommodation where appropriate and funding would be looked into to see if the Council could continue to provide a top-up;

(l)

there hadn’t been any relaxing of planning laws, however there were a number of properties in the city that had the correct legal framework in place to support schemes; as a result of a directive from Government, those people hosting a Ukrainian that claimed a single person council tax discount could continue to claim it whilst hosting;

(m)

in terms of safeguarding, those arriving into the UK had to undergo normal checks prior to being granted a visa from the Home Office. Hosts were required to undertake a Home Office police national database check and the council would conduct a DBS check and also check the Council’s safeguarding system for flagged individuals. A property visit was undertaken in person with the host and safeguarding concerns could be raised; a wellbeing check was also undertaken on arrival of the guests;

(n)

an individual was resettled to Plymouth in the Afghan Locally Employed Scheme in 2014 however his wife and children, even though eligible, weren’t able to be evacuated from Afghanistan but were able to flee to Pakistan; the Council held accommodation and negotiated with the Home Office until the process could come through and they arrived in Plymouth – this was considered a success story;

(o)

the Council was able to support a further people seeking refuge from Afghanistan in the coming 12 months; the Council was supporting families that wished to move to Plymouth and source their own accommodation – they were supported by the schemes also;

(p)

in terms of asylum seekers, the Home Office target was to make a decision on applications within the first six months however on average this was taking 2.8 years to receive a decision; asylum seekers had no recourse to public funds until they received a positive decision upon their case however after six months could attend English classes, they were also eligible for primary care and school admissions;

(q)

the majority of asylum seekers were housed in PL1 – PL4 postcodes because it was a central location and would enable easier access to services. With the Homes for Ukraine Scheme people were housed across the city in all postcodes. For the Afghan Scheme the approach was to be more flexible about where the Council supported people to move however it was critical that a community infrastructure was there so that people could access support within their locality;

(r)

the aforementioned schemes didn’t have a big impact upon the housing market because that was in its own form of crisis; landlords were leaving the housing market, social housing tenants were remaining in accommodation for longer periods of time, affordable housing delivery had stalled and private rent had increased. The schemes weren’t big enough to make a massive impact however sourcing accommodation was becoming more difficult. In terms of the impact upon the budget, asylum seekers were Home Office funded and funding was also provided for other schemes therefore there was no impact on council budgets;

(s)

Clearsprings ready homes would talk to the council before they took on any properties and in terms of hotels the Home Office had now promised to liaise with local authorities before opening up further hotels in local authority areas;

(t)

funding for the schemes for ESOL (English for Speakers of Other Languages) came via the Department for Education and there wasn’t enough funding especially with increased demand across the country – in Plymouth the Council was using funding received through participating in these schemes to commission via the refugee integration service women’s only classes with a crèche to enable women with children at nursery age and below attend women’s only classes, this was considered to be really successful;

(u)

people arriving in the UK via the aforementioned schemes could work from day 1 on arrival – they all had an immigration status that enabled them to work. Asylum seekers could only work once they had received a positive decision on their asylum claim;

(v)

the Safer Communities Partnership liaised with the Police if they had any concerns of suspected modern slavery/ illegal workers; the providers working closely with asylum seekers would also highlight concerns to the Council if required;

(w)

it was important to recognise that there was a general widespread misunderstanding of the distinctions between a refugee, an asylum seeker and an illegal immigrant; work needed to be done to re-educate.

1.

to recommend to Cabinet that the Council explores with the Local Government Association how pressure could be put on the Government to provide additional funding for ESOL (English for Speakers of Other Languages) in support of the three schemes in order that people are more able to quickly access it;

2.

to recommend to Cabinet that work to communicate the schemes to the city was undertaken on a regular basis, specifically focusing upon the following:

·       the numbers involved in the schemes, definitions of terms, what the city was gaining from the schemes, case studies and stories;

3.

to note the  update.