Migration control through social policy – the case of migrants with no recourse to public funds (NRPF) in the UK.

Internal border control through social policy often occurs indirectly (Van Der Leun, 2006; Spencer, 2020). For example, migrants in the UK with ‘no recourse to public funds’ (NRPF) are at high risk of destitution due to their exclusion from most welfare benefits and statutory housing support. This is a longstanding issue that has been highlighted by campaigners, academics and the migration sector. Migrants with ‘no recourse to public funds’ (NRPF) are at high risk of destitution due to their exclusion from most welfare benefits and statutory housing support. This is a longstanding issue that has been highlighted by campaigners, academics and the migration sector. This paper explores connections between migration control and social policy at local level of government, focusing on NRPF policy implementation and outcomes for migrants in the UK with with ‘no recourse to public funds’ during the COVID-19 pandemic. It highlights systemic issues with access to support for people with NRPF and shows how provision varied considerably across England (most notably in the case of single adults with NRPF who would not normally be eligible for support but were included in the COVID-19 homelessness response) and even within individual local authorities. Local authorities have statutory duties towards two categories of people with NRPF: families with ‘children in need’; and adults with care needs. There are, however, significant variations in how these duties are implemented, with many migrants in need of support unable to access their entitlements under normal (pre-pandemic) circumstances. A key problem in this area is that local authorities are not funded by central government to provide support to people with NRPF - an issue that has been consistently raised by rights advocates. This issue became more urgent during the pandemic as local authorities were called upon by central government to provide support to a third group of people with NRPF who would not normally be eligible for assistance: single homeless adults without care needs. Our paper shows that, while some councils put in place effective emergency support for this group, the England-wide response of local authorities was frequently characterised by confusion, a lack of information about support options, the ‘gatekeeping’ of access to accommodation, and gaps in essential provision (e.g. food). Our paper indicates that while some local authorities are trying to respond to this issue in a way that respects people’s rights and dignity, others do not want to continue to support people with NRPF, with a number planning to resort to so-called ‘voluntary returns’ or ‘reconnection’. In the view of many of our research participants, only an urgent end to the NRPF system can adequately address the problems that have been highlighted by COVID-19.