George Lapshynov responds to the government’s White Paper on immigration in light of his upcoming report on the integration of refugees and asylum seekers. 15/05/2025

Earlier this week, Sir Keir Starmer, using muscular language, unveiled plans to reduce legal immigration in his controversial ‘island of strangers’ speech. The Prime Minister’s robust language likely reflects two things: that the government acknowledges the importance of immigration to many Brits, as evidenced by the surge in support for Reform UK, and that Starmer is conscious of the fact that successive administrations have failed to deliver on promises to reduce migration. This puts him under very considerable pressure to deliver a reduction in overall numbers.

While Starmer’s speech is one thing, the real substance of the government’s plan to “return migration policy to common sense,” outlined in the newly published White Paper, Restoring Control over the Immigration System, is another. I have spent the last 10 months travelling around the country conducting research for our upcoming report, From Strangers to Neighbours, which focuses on how churches facilitate refugee integration. I was pleasantly surprised to read the Home Secretary Yvette Cooper describe integration as one of the core principles underpinning these reforms, given a notable lack of focus on this area in recent years. However, while the government’s intentions are commendable, its approach has some major shortcomings.

Firstly, the government significantly underestimates the task at hand. The White Paper states that: “For too long, integration within the immigration system has focused only on those seeking refuge and asylum in the UK.”

Although refugee integration has clearly been a concern, it is difficult to see that they have benefited from special focus or positive action. Rather, their integration is actively discouraged by Home Office practices and policies, including long waiting times, restricted employment via a ban on work, enforced idleness, frequent relocation, a precarious legal status, and limited access to healthcare. In most places, refugees granted asylum are forced to present themselves as homeless in order to receive council accommodation. They emerge from an often–traumatic process de–skilled and unprepared for the labour market. It takes decades for them to catch up with the local population.

Secondly, in her foreword to the White Paper, the Home Secretary writes: “As a nation, we need to be able to control our borders, control who is lawfully in the country… and how people should be able to integrate in local communities.”

The UK certainly has an obligation to control who is lawfully in the country through a legal framework, just processes and viable institutions, but the idea that the government can control how people integrate is deeply flawed. When you meet migrants and refugees who have settled in the UK and integrated into communities, it is clear the process has been local, relational and practical – qualities that neither central nor local government is well placed to deliver, even at the best of times.

Churches and civil society organisations, on the other hand, are a natural fit. During my fieldwork across England, Scotland, and Wales, I discovered many churches consistently supporting the integration of refugees and asylum seekers (though inevitably, some do it better than others). They excel in this work precisely because they are not driven by abstract policy frameworks or national targets. Instead, their efforts stem naturally from their profound ethical commitment to the key Christian idea of welcoming the stranger.

Setting aside the White Paper’s rose–tinted view of the state of affairs and flawed centralised paradigm, it is right to focus on integration for the flourishing and well–being of migrants and native–born individuals alike.

Actually, I am cautiously hopeful. Besides discussing integration – which we must acknowledge is a necessary first step – and tighter English language requirements, no concrete integration policies have been proposed. I want to interpret this as the government’s tacit acknowledgement that it does not know what integration would entail. Perhaps it recognises that policies alone cannot determine a fundamentally relational process that occurs within neighbourhoods through everyday acts of hospitality, friendship and support. Perhaps it knows that the shared sense of local identity that emerges when diverse groups work together at a grassroots level is beyond the remit of central government.

If so, then surely the Home Office must be looking for ways to deliver on their aspirations. I would advise them in the strongest terms not to reinvent the wheel, but to look around them and learn from those churches across the UK that already do the work of integration, not through grand, centralised schemes, but through patient and persistent community engagement. I have seen it with my own two eyes: authentic integration is possible.

This does not mean that the government has no role to play. Central government could devolve asylum and refugee resettlement support systems. Local authorities could act as moderators of local integration partnerships, facilitating and optimising the practical and relational engagement of civil society and churches. Integration can be made easier through genuine partnerships between all levels of government and civil society.

As it happens, there are some partnerships – but these systematically exclude churches from strategic discussions, despite their frontline role, even when other civil society organisations are invited. This is why our upcoming report will strongly recommend granting churches and other faith–based organisations a formal seat at the integration policy–making table. Local churches have unique insights, established networks and practical experience that could greatly enrich policy and practice. By inviting churches to share in strategic decision–making, policymakers can help transform integration from a bureaucratic aspiration into a vibrant reality.

––

If the government aspires to create an immigration system in Britain that is oriented towards integration, there is a long way to go. The Prime Minister’s tough rhetoric may be effective to gain popular support, but it is not suited to the slow and deeply personal process of integration. Let us therefore hope that the government will heed the wisdom of our churches and communities and recognise their essential contribution to the discussion on integration.

In the meantime, any policymaker, MP or minister looking for examples of successful integration is welcome to write to me (and read our upcoming report). I will personally take them on a tour of places where people who arrive on this island as strangers become our neighbours.

Interested in this? Share it on social media. 

Join our monthly e–newsletter to be the first to hear about our new report From Strangers to Neighbours: The Church and the Integration of Refugees. And check out our Supporter Programme to find out how you can help our work.