Britain’s brutal regime for refugees has not been eased for Ukrainians. Mateusz Zuk, who has long supported refugees explains the legal problems and what we must demand for them 

Some believe that schemes for Ukrainian refugees give them preferential treatment but there is never a discussion about dangers created by this scheme and threats for any future refugees if the government decides to mimic the Ukrainian schemes for future refugees from other conflicts.  

First of all, let’s not forget that the program to grant visas to Ukrainians was not introduced without governmental resistance. Many ideas proposed in February and March 2022 were immoral, maybe even unlawful. For example, a week after the invasion, Tory minister Kevin Foster suggested that Ukrainian refugees should use agricultural workers visas. Those visas are issued for up to six months and are not adequate for the people fleeing a conflict zone. 

Finally, in March 2022, Foster announced a package of special humanitarian visas. However, the launch of this scheme was provided a bumpy road for many Ukrainians refugees. Those attempting to reach the UK without necessary paperwork risked deportation to Rwanda.  

Some controversial ideas included ruling out family reunifications. Only public outrage, after the revelation of mismanagement, forced the government to fix the scheme. This was very clear especially when the Home Secretary decided to cut red tape and waived the requirement to submit biometric data before entering the UK. 

Homelessness 

The government was aware that it did not possess adequate numbers and quality of social housing stock. By introducing, in March 2022, the Homes for Ukraine scheme, the government effectively outsourced the housing of Ukrainians to the wider public. This of course carried a risk of exposing vulnerable people to sexual predators. Hosts were also given an opportunity to withdraw from the Homes for Ukraine program, which meant that their Ukrainian guests faced a risk of eviction and homelessness. 

The consequences of such an approach are staggering. Over 1,000 Ukrainian households  faced homelessness in the first year of the program. By end of the second year, at least 9,000 such cases were reported and many people were placed in emergency accommodations. Currently several thousand people are at risk of homelessness if they are not able to find another host or rent a room or flat. According to the Red Cross, in 2025, Ukrainian refugees in the UK are twice more likely to face destitution than an average person in the general population. 

Initially, three-year visas were replaced in February 2024 and Ukrainian refugees were asked to renew visas every eighteen months, causing additional challenges. The Immigration Act forces landlords to check if a person wanting to rent a room or flat is legally in the UK. This is done by checking a share code of the potential tenant with information about legal status. Unfortunately, landlords are less inclined to rent an accommodation to somebody whose visa is set to expire in two or three months. 

Similar issues are encountered when an Ukrainian refugee needs a job. Employers prefer to hire candidates who have a right to stay longer than several months. Those with settled status are preferred. Which brings us to another problem with those visas. They do not lead to settlement. 

Settlement 

Under current legislation, a person has to be legally in the UK for at least five years to receive settled status, that is ILR. After another year, the person can apply for naturalisation as a British citizen. However, visas issued under the Ukrainian scheme do not lead to settlement. Neither Tory nor Labour governments want Ukrainians to stay permanently in the UK. The only reason for this denial is the expectation that all Ukrainian citizens will return after the war ends. Yet it has already been over three years since the war started, and it is difficult to predict the end. Under the current scheme, even after ten years in the UK, Ukrainians would not be able to settle. 

Human-rights activists had warned about such problems already in 2022. For this reason, multiple petitions were launched to ensure that visas for Ukrainian refugees are extended automatically. One of the several petitions has already gathered over 35,000 signatures. 

Threat of replacing Refugee Convention with visas 

Although the Ukraine scheme grants temporary humanitarian protection with a safe route, it is not a resettlement scheme of the type we saw previously. Refugees from Syria and Afghanistan were allowed to settle and even naturalise. Even those granted visas under the Hong Kong scheme were able to naturalise after a short dispute. Such an approach to refugees creates a temporary fix which may put refugees in vulnerable situations. Refugees’ protection switches from international law to ad hoc decisions of the Home Secretary. 

Here lies the biggest threat for any future refugees. Governments might be tempted to rely on such programs instead of using traditional solutions based on the Refugee Convention and European Court of Human Rights. 

We must demand abolition of any attempts to base humanitarian protection on the mood swings of the Home Secretary. We also must demand more respect for international law, including for the Convention and the ECHR. We must demand better actions from the government to secure housing. And foremost, we also must abolish laws that discriminate against refugees, providing stronger or weaker protections based on the route refugees ‘choose’ to arrive in the UK. Last but not least, we must end the limitation of the right to settlement. Choosing precarious methods of humanitarian protection is stressful for refugees. It also has tangible financial costs. Inability to settle and constant threat of destitution prevent refugees from participating in our society.