We've responded to Government proposals regarding volunteering and applying for UK settled status

GoVolHerts, with our host charity North Herts & Stevenage CVS, has responded to the Government’s consultation on its proposals to include volunteering as a factor that may be used to reduce the proposed new qualifying period for people seeking settled status in the UK. The consultation suggests this could result in a possible reduction of three to five years.

As the countywide volunteering service for Herts, GoVolHerts agrees that volunteering plays a vital role and makes an invaluable contribution to our lives and communities across the country. We see the scale, range of participation, and impact of volunteering every day in our county. We believe that everyone has something to contribute, and we support everyone to get involved in volunteering.

We are not in support of the proposal for volunteering to be a formal factor in reducing the period for UK settled status application.

Our response is based on the following principles and observations:

• Volunteering is a free and positive choice, of mutual benefit, and it should never be coerced or something people feel pressurised to do.
• Proposals to make volunteering a faster track route to settled status would distort the relationships between organisations and people that make volunteering so special. The volunteer’s choice to gift their time, attention, skills, experience, and more, has meaning and impact; volunteering loses value when participation is driven primarily by transactional considerations of personal benefit.
• The proposal risks placing voluntary organisations in a position where their recording or evidencing of participation could influence someone’s right to settle. VCSFE organisations are neither designed nor resourced to fulfil this role.
• Voluntary organisations are expressing concern about the extra administrative burden likely to be entailed by this proposal. Volunteering is not free and the proposals would have a significant impact on those managing volunteers.
• There are significant questions about the workability of this proposal for already overstretched VCFSE organisations. What would qualify as ‘volunteering’? Would organisations be under pressure to create qualifying opportunities? How would participation be evidenced? How would organisations address existing barriers — such as language needs and DBS requirements — without additional support? And how would volunteer managers manage the pressure to recruit, provide enhanced support to, and potentially retain individuals who may not be a suitable match for volunteering roles, given their vulnerable circumstances and the consequences for them of not volunteering?
• At a time of social division with asylum seekers, refugees and other migrants facing hostility, the proposals around volunteering could create unsatisfactory volunteering arrangements which risks backfiring and stoking further dissatisfaction and division.
• People shouldn’t be placed under pressure to volunteer, without regard for whether it’s accessible, suitable or safe for them to do so. Some individuals, especially those in vulnerable situations, may be particularly put at risk by this.
• Many people coming to the UK already do seek to take part in volunteering, but in practice there are currently barriers to volunteering (and people don't have an equal ability to take part). Barriers include location; lack of power to stay in one location; lack of transport; language skills; difficulties of conducting identity and safeguarding checks; personal circumstances, including physical issues and trauma. We would welcome efforts to reduce barriers to volunteering and support people such as asylum seekers to more easily be able to get involved. This requires investing in support and infrastructure for volunteering in the VCSFE sector, so people who want to volunteer can do so freely and safely, in ways that work for communities and VCSFE organisations.