Suchergebnisse

AbstractWhile the concept of migrant integration is a contested one, national, sub-national and local governments over the past forty to fifty years have professed support for integration in various forms. However, practical measures have been rare, with broad race-relations policies from the 1960s being the primary means of 'inclusion'. Under New Labour, refugees were identified as a migrant population with particular challenges and they have been the only migrant group subject to specific integration programmes. Nevertheless, policy and rhetoric about asylum seekers and refugees more generally have tended to operate against integration and have made it increasingly difficult for refugees to rebuild their lives. This paper examines refugee integration from the perspectives of the refugees themselves, using both qualitative and quantitative methods. It also looks at the governance of integration in Scotland and highlights Scottish distinctivenessvis-à-visthe UK. The article suggests that the consequences of broader UK Government policy around asylum and refugee issues negates any positive support in the form of refugee integration programmes and actively inhibits integration.

Between the two UK referendums on European Community/European Union membership, the issue of migration came to dominate the entire debate. The period between 1975 and 2016 corresponds almost exactly to the neoliberal era in capitalism, in its British manifestation, and this is not coincidental. This article traces the shifting periods of neoliberalism ('vanguard', 'social' and 'crisis') across these 40 years, focusing in each case on how the policies associated with them specifically impacted migration into the United Kingdom. In particular, it will argue that the current migration crisis is at least partly an aspect of the wider crisis of neoliberalism as a form of capitalist organisation. It concludes that current levels of anti-migrant sentiment are a displaced expression of hostility to the social effects of neoliberalism, and which may nevertheless cause difficulties for British capital through the imposition of anti-free movement policies to which it is opposed.

Western states are concerned about maintaining and securing national borders. Across Europe, one response has been to implement restrictive asylum regimes that prevent 'bogus' applicants and grant refuge only to the 'deserving'. Alongside these concerns, states are eager to encourage socially cohesive communities. One recent tool adopted by the UK government has been citizenship policy, including English language/life in the UK tests and citizenship ceremonies. By drawing upon in-depth interviews with refugees in Scotland (UK), this paper explores the impact of the current asylum regime and citizenship policies from the perspective of individual voices that are often absent from wider debates. It explores how temporary refugee status impacts upon individuals' everyday lives including employment and education, and impacts upon children. The data also question the reasons for refugees deciding to become British citizens (or not) and highlight instrumental reasons alongside less tangible factors such as gaining a sense of security. Taking the discussion forward, the study explores some unintended consequences of immigration and citizenship policies in the UK. The research suggests that not only do restrictive asylum policies negatively impact upon refugees and their integration but also serve to elevate fear and uncertainty, which can unintentionally spur individuals to seek naturalisation.

Western states are concerned about maintaining and securing national borders. Across Europe, one response has been to implement restrictive asylum regimes that prevent 'bogus' applicants and grant refuge only to the 'deserving'. Alongside these concerns, states are eager to encourage socially cohesive communities. One recent tool adopted by the UK government has been citizenship policy, including English language/life in the UK tests and citizenship ceremonies. By drawing upon in-depth interviews with refugees in Scotland (UK), this paper explores the impact of the current asylum regime and citizenship policies from the perspective of individual voices that are often absent from wider debates. It explores how temporary refugee status impacts upon individuals' everyday lives including employment and education, and impacts upon children. The data also question the reasons for refugees deciding to become British citizens (or not) and highlight instrumental reasons alongside less tangible factors such as gaining a sense of security. Taking the discussion forward, the study explores some unintended consequences of immigration and citizenship policies in the UK. The research suggests that not only do restrictive asylum policies negatively impact upon refugees and their integration but also serve to elevate fear and uncertainty, which can unintentionally spur individuals to seek naturalisation.

Access to social rights is crucial to refugee settlement and integration, and a whole range of social policy measures determine the limits on those rights. In the United Kingdom (UK) various relevant social policies are divided into devolved and reserved categories. This has resulted in a distinct territorial variance in social rights and welfare provisions within the country. The aim of this article is to explore how young Syrian refugees experience this territorial divergence in two jurisdictions: in Scotland, where they are part social citizens; and in England, where access to social rights is more limited. We use the prism of social citizenship as a means of examining the experiences of settlement and integration of Syrian refugees in the two nations. We draw out contrasts between these experiences and locate them within the interactions between the politics of welfare and refugee politics in the two nations. We argue that fine variances in England's and Scotland's social rights and welfare regimes have an impact on the settlement experiences of refugees. England's less supportive regime fosters self-reliance and faster labour market integration among refugees. However, this environment pushes refugees in England to accept any job that they might find, no matter how precarious, or how far it may be from their educational qualifications, past professional experience or aspirations. This has overarching implications for refugees' outlook on life and long-term planning.