The Borders Bill Will Rip New Holes in the Social Safety Net
An estimated 1.3 million people in Britain are already at risk of destitution as a result of No Recourse to Public Funds – and Priti Patel's Nationality and Borders Bill would make the situation even worse.
Priti Patel delivers her keynote speech during the Conservative Party Conference at Manchester Central Convention Complex on 5 October 2021 in Manchester, England. (Ian Forsyth / Getty Images)
Priti Patel’s Nationality and Borders Bill is currently undergoing its committee stage in the House of Lords. Despite its advance through the House, the Bill has already received widespread condemnation, much of it focused on Clause Nine which, if passed, would make it possible to strip six million people in England in Wales of their citizenship without warning. It has opponents on both sides of the House, in civil society, and in the wider international community.
At its core, the Nationality and Borders Bill seeks to dramatically reshape the process of applying for asylum in the UK. It targets the survivors of dangerous journeys to the UK, cutting the rights of refugees, potentially ruling people inadmissible, and even criminalising them as a punishment for their desperation.
Clause 11 divides refugees into two classes according to how they arrived in the UK. Anyone arriving by so-called ‘irregular’ means whose asylum claim is recognised—which, in practice, will mean almost all refugees—will be relegated to a second-class status with fewer rights. Critically, people in this new category of refugee will be unable to access the vast majority of publicly funded benefits.
Under the provisions of Clause 11, ‘Group 2’ refugees will be granted leave to remain for only thirty months at a time. After that point, they will have to reapply, with the threat of removal hanging over their heads. They will need to do this every two and a half years for a decade before they can apply to remain in the UK permanently, which refugees at present can do after five years, and there’s currently no clarity as to whether refugees will also be expected to pay extortionate visa fees at each application as is currently required of other migrants.
The Refugee Council estimates up to 9,200 people could be given this kind of temporary protection every year. Of these, many will already have been left destitute by our brutal asylum system by the time their claims are recognised, so they should have access to government funds—although this, perhaps tellingly, isn’t reflected in the Bill. However, up to 3,100 who are not destitute by the time their claims are recognised could be denied access to any social safety net at all.
Enforced Destitution
Many people with temporary permission to stay in the UK—an estimated 1.31 million, at least—are already denied access to the social safety net by government policy. This is a policy officially known as ‘no recourse to public funds’, or NRPF.
People with NRPF status are barred from accessing almost all forms of public support, including Universal Credit, social housing, and statutory homelessness assistance, regardless of the hardships or crises they may face. The 1.31 million figure also excludes undocumented individuals, who by default are denied access to a safety net—so the true figure is likely to be much higher.
Unsurprisingly, these individuals are regularly pushed into precarity and poverty. Many end up in inadequate housing because they cannot afford private rents and are ineligible for social housing. While local authorities have a duty to support families where a child’s health is at risk, or adults with special care needs if they face destitution, support is inconsistent from one council to another and can often be inadequate; some local authorities wrongly deny support to those with no recourse to public funds, or provide accommodation of extremely poor standards. As Liz Davies noted in Tribune last year, a large contingent of those worst hit by the rowing-back of supports for the homeless introduced during Covid were subject to NRPF conditions: ‘they had been occupying insecure accommodation, and had found themselves suddenly without a job.’
Members of Praxis’ Action Group all have direct experience of being denied access to a safety net by this policy. They have described how the policy forces them to live in unsafe conditions which disregard their dignity as human beings (research by the JCWI last year found that the majority of people with NRPF status wouldn’t be able to self-isolate safely if they got Covid), which is why the group collectively chose to name its campaign ‘Living with Dignity’. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has argued this ‘lower class of refugee status’ enshrined by the Nationality and Borders Bill is without legal basis, and Freedom from Torture has said ‘the denial of security and the threat of impoverishment [to the new tier] is likely to drive more people into conditions of forced labour, trafficking and abuse.’
Living with temporary protection is living in limbo. Long-term plans for employment, children’s education, or serving local communities are constrained by narrow visa deadlines which could all too easily end in rejection. Some members of the Praxis Action Group find themselves in this position, with no influence over how the UK updates its country guidance policies and bilateral deals, yet at imminent and constant risk of having their lives derailed as a result.
Being denied access to this basic safety net already has devastating consequences for thousands of people. We must work urgently and in solidarity to oppose every element of the racist Nationality and Borders Bill, and prevent thousands of refugees from being pushed into poverty every single year.