The Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme (VPRS) comprised the UK government's primary response to persons forcibly displaced by the Syrian civil war. Recipients were granted immediate recourse to public funds and a locally-based 12-month integration support plan, designed at the discretion of practitioners. Drawing on forty in-depth interviews with refugees and practitioners in two areas with contrasting local approaches, this article explores the tensions that emerged when broader central government policies (distinct from the VPRS), intersected with resettlement support in recipients’ lives. Two current welfare reforms are identified and evaluated as having impacted resettled families’ housing experiences: firstly; the Two-Child Limit and secondly; the Benefit Cap. The article demonstrates how the financial precarity produced by both policies undermined local practitioners’ resettlement support. In doing so, the article challenges dominant policy narratives of exceptionality, locating those resettled within the routinised systems of precarity and conditionality embedded in the welfare system.

弱势群体重新安置计划 (VPRS) 是英国政府对因叙利亚内战而被迫流离失所的人的主要应对措施。接受者可以立即使用公共资金和一项基于当地的为期 12 个月的融合支持计划，该计划由从业者自行决定。本文通过对两个地区的难民和从业者的 40 次深入访谈，采用不同的地方方法，探讨了当更广泛的中央政府政策（不同于 VPRS）与接受者生活中的重新安置支持相交叉时出现的紧张局势。目前有两项福利改革被确定并评估为影响移民家庭的住房体验：第一；二孩限制，其次；福利上限。这篇文章展示了这两种政策造成的财政不稳定如何削弱了当地从业者的安置支持。在这样做的过程中，本文挑战了主流的例外政策叙述，将那些重新安置在福利制度中嵌入的不稳定和条件的常规系统中。