Who will sort out the mess in the UK’s refugee crisis response?

Boris Johnson is hoping Priti Patel and Michael Gove can pick up the pace after a shambolic start to the resettlement of fleeing Ukrainians. Adam Forrest takes a closer look

The fact that the prime minister chose Gove to take control of the government’s new sponsorship scheme doesn’t say much for his faith in Patel (Getty)

The government’s response to the Ukrainian refugee crisis is not going well. The refusal to follow the EU and drop visa requirements has caused public outrage. Britain has proved to be a safe haven for only a tiny trickle of the millions of people fleeing the Russian assault.

Plans to open up an additional route have been subject to above-average levels of chaos in Whitehall, as No 10 and Home Office officials squabble over who is to blame for the failure to set out a clear plan that meets the scale of the crisis.

Home secretary Priti Patel has come in for the fiercest criticism from MPs of all parties. Tory backbenchers have attacked the “disgraceful” approach taken by her department and the “snail’s pace” at which help has been offered.

But Patel’s allies are now briefing that Boris Johnson and Downing Street are to blame for the sluggish rollout of routes for Ukrainian refugees to come to Britain.

No 10 intervened earlier this week to stop a plan by Patel to open up a more generous “humanitarian route” for refugees fleeing the war, sources told Sky News, saying: “The problem is No 10 – the PM and [chief of staff] Steve Barclay – who are personally slapping this down.”

So who will sort out the mess? Could Michael Gove, a man never shy of adding a job or three to his ministerial portfolio, come to the rescue?

The fact that the prime minister chose Gove to take control of the government’s new sponsorship scheme – expected to be set out on Monday – doesn’t say much for his faith in Patel and her department.

The sponsorship route is aimed at allowing Britain’s local authorities, community groups and individuals to provide a home and a support network to Ukrainian refugees. It is not a resettlement route, like the one opened up to 20,000 Afghan refugees, since it will not grant Ukrainians indefinite residence in the UK.

Although the government is branding the route a “humanitarian sponsorship pathway”, it doesn’t amount to the kind of humanitarian protection offered by the EU, which has lifted all restrictions on a temporary basis.

Refugee charities have warned that the existing community sponsorship scheme in the UK – which has taken in only around 660 refugees since 2016 – is wholly inadequate for dealing with mass displacement.

Charities have told The Independent that sponsorship also requires a lot of time, training and paperwork to organise. They warned that Ukrainians may end up in hotels and hostels, like Afghan refugees, because of the “decimation” of government funding in recent years.

Mr Gove’s department has said Britons offering accommodation to Ukrainian refugees through the new route will receive a “thank you” payment of £350 per month.

Sponsored refugees will be granted 36 months leave to remain in the UK, with entitlement to public services, while sponsors will be expected to guarantee a minimum stay of six months.

But a lot of questions remain. The government appears to be expecting refugees and sponsors to find each other on social media, or through family and friendship networks, before making an official application online. Both parties will have to be vetted and undergo security checks.

It’s why the Refugee Council has criticised the “bureaucratic hurdles” the government appears to be putting in the way – and said the scheme “will inevitably be restricted to those who are known to people in the UK”.

Gove has certainly proved more adept than Patel at adapting to these fast-moving events, and Johnson will have to hope he can also work sufficiently well with council chiefs, who are bound to take on much of the responsibility for arranging housing needs.

Conservative MPs will have to hope so, too. Tired Tories are pretty content with the prime minister’s handling of the big diplomatic issues around Ukraine, after several months stuck in the purgatory of Partygate.

But there are fears that the refugee response – if it continues to be viewed as an almighty shambles – could damage the party’s hoped-for poll recovery ahead of the local elections in May.

Ultimately, the responsibility lies with the prime minister. Ukraine may have put No 10’s birthday cake ambush antics and drinks parties in perspective, but failure to address the current crisis on his plate could put him back in the bad books of his notoriously fickle backbenchers.