International Rescue Committee: Written Evidence SCI0507

Summary

The International Rescue Committee submission draws on its refugee integration work in the UK, Europe and the United States. It says IRC UK has worked with 2,615 refugees and people seeking asylum in England since 2021, and describes programmes covering employability, English for work, orientation, wellbeing, capacity building and community sponsorship support.

The evidence argues that England lacks a coherent national integration strategy, that support is inconsistent by location, nationality and immigration status, and that short-term funding weakens continuity for both service users and providers.

It records programme evidence including 95% of Orientation for Newcomers participants reporting greater confidence in UK life and legal rights, around one third of Refugee Employability Programme participants entering employment during the first 18 months of the scheme, and 83% of surveyed IRC integration-programming participants being in employment or education 6-12 months after leaving IRC programming. The submission also compares permanent residence for refugees across peer countries. It says the UK's current five-year route is already longer than many Commonwealth and European comparators, and argues that extending refugee ILR eligibility to twenty years would put the UK completely outside peer-country norms. IRC warns that such a change would discourage integration, increase stress and mental anguish, and risk creating a long-term underclass in British communities.

Why this matters for the archive

This record is important because it connects settlement timelines to integration evidence rather than treating permanent residence as a purely administrative endpoint. IRC's submission shows how early orientation, rights awareness, English support and employment support affect confidence, labour-market movement and community participation. Its international comparison also gives the archive a concrete benchmark: a twenty-year wait for refugee permanent residence would be far outside peer-country practice and could weaken integration by prolonging insecurity.

Key Observations

• IRC frames integration as a practical support question: people need orientation, English, employment support, wellbeing support and clear information about rights to participate safely and effectively in community life.
• The evidence says England lacks a national integration strategy, leaving support uneven by location, nationality and immigration status and limiting consistent data on whether integration is improving.
• IRC's programme evidence records reported gains from early support, including confidence in UK life and legal rights, employment movement through targeted refugee employment support and post-programme participation in work or education.
• The international comparison is central: IRC argues that a twenty-year wait for refugee permanent residence would be outside peer-country norms, while the UK's existing five-year approach is already longer than many comparators.
• The relevance to settlement reform is that prolonged conditionality may itself damage integration, create anxiety and make family, employment and community stability harder to build.