Highland Council’s ‘virtue signalling’ bid for refugee ‘sanctuary’ status is rejected as supporters struggle to articulate the case for the proposal at the local level
Highland Council’s bid to be recognised as a Council of Sanctuary has been rejected by opposing members who felt that now is not the right time to apply for the award.
Proponents of the plan foundered and appeared to find it difficult to articulate the case for the proposal at the local level and what it was for.
Some even resorted to bringing in party political allegiance, wider issues around refugees, and even social media but without reference to the actual proposal.
That contrasted with those against the move who were clear about their concerns – none of which related to refugees arriving or not in the region.
They cited unanswered questions around housing supply, sufficient education places, and having a satisfactory framework in place to help refugees.
And given the reluctance of the council to look again at its housing allocation policy at its last full meeting that issue became live again.
Gaining the City of Sanctuary Award meant engaging in a £2100 process and if it was successful entailed an ongoing commitment from Highland Council.
But it was not entirely clear to a lot of members who questioned precisely what would change, what the benefits are and most of all what the obligations are.
Some issues were explained in the accompanying paper such as creating “a welcoming environment for people seeking sanctuary” while also being “active in the wider movement of safeguarding and promoting rights for those in need of sanctuary”.
It also highlighted what was unanimously praised as the good work on the existing government-funded refugee and asylum programmes in the region.
They include the Syrian and Afghan Resettlements, Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children, and Ukrainian Displaced Persons.
Councillor Duncan MacDonald proposed an amendment to refuse the application for City of Sanctuary status.
He said: “I worry about veterans and others who've fallen on hard times, believing that they are playing second fiddle – it might not be so, however, perception is very important.
“We don't have enough houses to house our own people at the moment so I would propose that we continue to support the refugees in the manner that we have done for years: quietly, meaningfully and respectfully.
“Refugees do not want to be put on a pedestal or have reason to be singled out for preferential treatment, whether it is actual or perceived”.
Cllr Angela Maclean repeatedly expressed her “disappointment” and “surprise” at some of the comments – saying: “Every person that I have met that has been involved in these schemes have made a positive contribution to their communities and to the Highlands and isn't that what we want?
“Aren’t we supposed to be a welcoming country and a welcoming area? And be respectful of what many of these individuals have been through the trauma that they have been through just to set foot in Highlands”.
Cllr Russell Jones agreed with her statements about refugees, but added: “I don't think this is the right time to sign up to this document, and I will be supporting the amendment”.
The vote was called the move was defeated seven votes to nine.
