Across the UK, people seeking sanctuary face discrimination and adversity. While public debate often highlights hostile rhetoric on social media or from far-right movements, a quieter but equally powerful form of dehumanisation emerges through the very systems designed to support refugees and asylum seekers. Bureaucratic processes, uneven policy implementation, and resource constraints all contribute to a deepened sense of fear and displacement.
This blog post draws on findings from 30 interviews with civil society organisations working with refugees and asylum seekers in Scotland, Wales and England. It explores how devolved governance shapes place-based experiences of support, and the limits of that support within a wider hostile immigration environment.
Devolution and the promise of sanctuary
Immigration and asylum policy remain fully reserved to the UK Government. However, many of the policy areas that shape everyday life such as healthcare, education, housing and transport are devolved in Scotland and Wales. This creates an important tension because while immigration decisions are centrally controlled, the lived experience of seeking sanctuary can be deeply localised.
Scottish and Welsh governments have consistently pushed back rhetorically against the UK Government’s hostile immigration environment approach. Initiatives such as Scotland’s New Scots Refugee Integration Strategy and Wales’ Nation of Sanctuary articulate a commitment to inclusion, dignity and support.
These narratives can potentially shape organisational priorities, enable partnerships and signal a political willingness to do things differently. However, our WISERD research shows the reality on the ground is more complex.
The crucial role of civil society
Our research highlights how civil society organisations are central to the UK’s asylum landscape. They shape research agendas, influence policy debates and adapt their work to the needs of communities. However, their capacity varies significantly across England, Scotland and Wales reflecting differences in funding structures, organisational ecosystems and political contexts.
Scotland: progressive vision with limited powers
The New Scots Refugee Integration Strategy with its emphasis on equal outcomes, offers a clear framework for integration which is notably absent at the UK-wide level. However, this vision is constrained by structural limitations. Civil society organisations reported several ongoing challenges:
- The impact of UK-wide asylum policies (e.g. restrictions on family reunion)
- A severe shortage of legal advice
- Lack of long-term funding security
- Overstretched resources, both financial and human
Despite these constraints, there remains a perception that Scotland offers a more supportive environment than England, underscoring the importance of political tone and institutional culture.
Wales: positive relationships but persistent gaps
In Wales, devolution has enabled more collaborative relationships between government and civil society. The Nation of Sanctuary framework, alongside practical initiatives such as subsidised transport schemes reflects a strong commitment to inclusion.
Yet significant barriers remain:
- A “legal advice desert” limits access to justice
- A postcode lottery in services and support
- Transport challenges, particularly in rural areas
- Higher levels of hostility reported in some rural communities
- Disruption to education due to frequent moves and travel costs
Organisations also highlighted difficulties in communication between the Home Office and local authorities, creating uncertainty and delays at the frontline.
England: fragmentation and heightened hostility
In England, the picture is more fragmented, and in many cases, more hostile. There is often limited awareness of how devolved approaches differ, and civil society organisations operate in a more politically volatile environment.
Key challenges identified include:
- Rising fear linked to far-right activity and public hostility
- Safety concerns for staff and volunteers
- Significant variation in local authority responses, often shaped by political control
- The emergence of “good refugee/bad refugee” narratives, reinforcing a two-tier system
For people seeking asylum, everyday struggles dominate:
- Poor mental health linked to uncertainty and prolonged waiting times
- Extremely low financial support (as little as £9 per week)
- High travel costs to access legal advice or English classes
These challenges highlight the cumulative impact of policy, rhetoric, and resource constraints.
Blurring narratives and lived realities
What emerges from this research is a complex interplay between national narratives, devolved policy frameworks and hyper-local living. Supportive rhetoric in Scotland and Wales can coexist with systemic barriers such as limited legal aid or uneven service provision. At the same time, the hostile environment created at the UK level permeates all contexts, shaping perceptions, policies, and everyday interactions. All in all, this creates a fragmented and often contradictory landscape for people seeking sanctuary.
Conclusion: the limits of devolution and the importance of civil society
Devolution has enabled important policy innovations and more inclusive narratives in Scotland and Wales. However, its capacity to transform the lived experience of those seeking asylum remains constrained by the overarching framework of UK immigration policy.
In this context, civil society plays a vital and often under-recognised role. Organisations not only provide essential services but also act as advocates, intermediaries, and sources of stability in an otherwise uncertain system.
Ultimately, the findings point to a key tension: while place-based approaches can soften the edges of a hostile system, they cannot fully counteract it. Addressing the challenges faced by sanctuary seekers requires not only local innovation but also fundamental changes at the national level.
Image credit: Doc_Steele via iStock.