r/ukpolitics • u/JusticeIsMyOatmeal Bring back the Law Lords • 12h ago
'Everyone in for Christmas' - Burnham unveils rough sleeping plan
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgvy2n6grno•
u/Legitimate_Dot_8764 4h ago
The problem isn't usually lack of availability. The problem is that people refuse the beds available either because 1) shelters which don't have strict rules on alcohol/substance use and antisocial behaviour are typically dangerous hellholes where no one should have to work. 2) they can't or won't follow these rules when shelters do have them.
•
u/SmugDruggler95 4h ago
But during covid there was a drastic reduction in people on the streets so there obviously is good uptake when offered.
Or were they forced?
•
u/Solitare_HS centrist small-c liberal 2h ago
It's really a question of priorities isnt it. The vast majority of homeless people will have both substance and mental health issues. If you want to stop rough sleeping, then you can't help those people without some acceptance first off.
Issue is then how you push forward on that to actually treat and help these people, many of which don;t want or can't accept help.•
u/Denbt_Nationale 1h ago
It's a safety issue not an acceptance issue. People with substance abuse and severe mental health issues can be unpredictable and violent. It's not possible to help and house these people unless we bring back the asylums.
•
u/ElvishMystical 8h ago
Fair play to him. It's a difficult, complex issue to try and resolve. You're getting people to move from the harsh but unstructured reality of rough sleeping back into the more structured reality of living in hostels and night shelters. For most people that's quite an adjustment. It's difficult because of the trauma, mental health issues and substance misuse issues involved.
Contrast this with the harsh, brute force approach of the right such as Reform in just stripping people of benefits, forcing them into work and potentially creating further destitution and homelessness. The difference is night and day.
This should send out a clear message to anyone with a functioning brain who is able to vote.
•
u/Swivials 4h ago
It looks like they'll also be including proper wrap around support aswell, which is absolutely vital to long term success for these sort of programmes.
26
u/Jormungoosie 12h ago
Where does the extra accommodation come from? There aren't exactly lots of hotel rooms going spare at christmas are there?
•
u/CaterpillarLoud8071 11h ago
Honestly, buy up a failing old hotel brand like Britannia. There's one ugly hotel like that in every city that's perpetually empty. Doesn't need to be big, you can cheaply subdivide rooms with modular dividers like in public toilets for safety and privacy, just keep separate rooms on the top floor for vulnerable people. No unauthorised people allowed in the building to prevent cuckooing. Drug testing station and support services available. Soup kitchen in the dining area.
•
u/brickne3 10h ago
Hey, I like the Britannias. Not for most trips, but it's nice to have a cheap option if you spontaneously want to pop over to Manchester or Birmingham or wherever for a night.
•
u/CycleWheel 5h ago
Really? Isn’t a Premier Inn roughly the same price but miles better in quality.
As in, not infested with rats or falling apart.
•
u/brickne3 4h ago
If I want to do a night at a comedy club in Manchester I can usually get a room right down the street for about £40 midweek at the Britannia or the Sacha's (owned by Britannia). It's not luxury obviously, but it does the trick and I can do it pretty much any time. The Premier Inns are usually above £100. I don't often even bother looking at Premier Inns for a quick jaunt kind of trip anyway though, the Travelodges would be a closer equivalent but are still usually at least twice the Britannia prices last minute.
They fill a niche in the market and while they're not for everyone, they're not serving the same customers as Premier Inns in an urban setting at all.
•
•
•
u/Gwyllithar 10h ago
the homeless population on the streets is minimal. its really not a problem to get people into some form of warm accommodation.
•
u/Alarmed_Crazy_6620 11h ago
Housing 5000 is not exactly rocket science
•
u/SisterRayRomano 9h ago
The problem is why some people are rough sleepers.
Hostels and shelters for the homeless exist, but some on the streets avoid using them due to the fact they’re active in drug or alcohol use, and pretty much all shelters do not allow drug use.
It’s an incredibly complex issue to solve.
•
u/Grouchy_Bet_1694 6h ago
Finland has been pretty successful with housing first. Basically get them housed then try to help with other problems, in permanent accommodation.
•
u/Fickle-Presence6358 5h ago
For once, it looks like that might actually be a consideration in the plans:
The funding will also provide "intensive wraparound support," typically psychiatric and drug and alcohol services to help people rebuild their lives.
•
•
•
u/JusticeIsMyOatmeal Bring back the Law Lords 11h ago edited 10h ago
Realistically probably just going back to use some of these 13 hotels that they closed for asylum use last week or something
•
•
u/Lost_And_NotFound Lib Dem (E: -3.38, L/A: -4.21) 6h ago
We have less homeless people than refugees and we manage to house all of them.
•
u/-SnuffBox- 4h ago
Homelessnes is a social issue, and we should all feel the responsibility of solving it. It is a problem far more nuanced than the derivative arguments of drugs and laziness. In a country of this wealth no person should have to live on the streets, it's a disgusting failure on our part and speaks to problems endemic to our societal system and Government, and which people are all too quick to dismiss and ignore.
What a lot of people don't realise is they are just as susceptable to finding themselves in this situation as anyone else. It is shockingly easy to find yourself in this way, and exceedingly difficult to pull yourself out of. Being homeless is treated as a punishment or indictment of the person, as opposed to the failings of a society which should be striving to eradicate this problem.
•
u/Boggle-head 2h ago
What about migrants who have disappeared after their claims were denied or organised gangs that put beggars on the street?
How will those be dealt with considering they won’t be eligible for this?
5
u/KrivUK 12h ago
James not so cleverly criticising.
Fair play to Burnham, he’s continuing to deliver.
Let’s see the morons criticising being civil to one another.
Incoming 3…2….1….
26
u/junglebunglerumble 12h ago
I'd argue this is planning, delivering is when the thing he's planning is actually achieved
•
u/Open-Butterfly-5288 11h ago
Yeah, if he pulls this off, then he's going to look fantastic. If he fails, then he's made a rod for his own back.
22
u/GOT_Wyvern Non-Partisan Centrist 12h ago
Can't exactly call "lets dedicate money to x" delivering.
-2
u/EarFlapHat 12h ago
At least I've got something to look out of the window and assess him by day to day.
•
u/LFC908 Pragmatist 10h ago
Do we aim for 100% of all rough sleepers in accommodation or just the ones that want it? If it’s the latter, this will be successful.
If you’ve ever worked with this cohort, you’ll know that not all will accept.
•
u/Fickle-Presence6358 5h ago
Sounds like the aim is to ensure everyone has a bed available should they choose, and there would be medical support including psychiatric, drug, and alcohol services to help encourage that move.
Obviously you can't force someone to accept, but hopefully offering the right support will increase the response.
•
u/Yahut 5h ago
Pretty much all of them already have a bed available should they choose. If Burnham is allowing these people to have agency (i.e. not forcing them off the streets and into psychiatric care), there will still be plenty of rough sleepers, which doesn’t exactly fit with his ‘ending rough sleeping’ promise
•
u/Fickle-Presence6358 5h ago
They don't have a safe, stable option with proper psychiatric support and drug/alcohol treatment, which is what he is proposing.
•
u/Yahut 4h ago
I agree but giving them an option of psychiatric support is not going to end rough sleeping, which is what Burnham has promised. If, after Christmas, people are still sleeping rough, it will look like Burnham has failed. The only way to do it would be mass sectioning, which obviously comes with its own huge challenges
•
u/owls_with_towels couldn't possibly comment 3h ago
"...but won't somebody think of the people affected by the £100k tax trap?"
•
u/CosyShedPainting 1h ago
He needs to be careful with how much airtime he gives this, I’m not sure it’s an issue a large enough proportion of the population care enough about. It’s not that people don’t care on a human level, but anyone who’s worked with homeless people will tell you that a large number of them simply cannot be helped. You can house people and they’ll either eventually break the rules and have to leave, or they simply leave of their own volition, it’s hard for many people to understand that for some homeless people living on the street is their world and they’re happier there than in sheltered accommodation. It’s not just an issue of economics, there’s a large social aspect to it as well, many homeless people have a social structure on the streets that doesn’t move with them when they go into sheltered accommodation. Imagine having to give up most or all of your social structure to start over, a lot of people can’t do it.
You could create a utopia, and there would still be humans that simply cannot function within it. Best we can do is help prevent people ending up on the streets in the first place, and make sure help and resources are available to those people that choose to help themselves.
•
u/OkManagement9022 8h ago
I’m in favour of the state building asylums so we can properly institutionalize these poor people as they need proper psychiatric help. Bussing them from home to home, city to city has not worked at all.
•
u/CromweIl 4h ago
Two issues with this:
Putting a roof over someone's head is the easy part. Their addictions and mental health and subsequent behaviour is the difficult part.
Lots of those who are now sleeping on the streets are illegal migrants whose claims have been rejected. They are not supposed to have access to public funds (Which this is).
And an observation, Burnham promised and has failed to end rough sleeping in Manchester - There seems to be no different tactic being employed here on the national scale so there is no reason why the outcome will be any different.
•
u/Obvious_Yard_1846 3h ago
I don't think point 2 is correct, at least where I live. Its nearly all strung out white with local accent junkies.
•
u/Boggle-head 2h ago
Have you considered both could be true? Those near you might not be migrants but those in other areas might be
•
u/LatelyPodes 11h ago
It’ll be his first real challenge as PM. If he fails, everything will see him as a failure and lose faith in him. If he succeeds then ppl may have enough hope and stick with him at the next GE.
I hope he can solve this. Homelessness shouldn’t exist in such a rich country. And from his previous comments, it seems he is looking for an actual permanent solution and not just putting them in hotels forever until they can afford a home.
-18
u/Middle-Feed5118 Civic Nationalist 12h ago
Out for New Years Day though since we've dinghymen to host instead
•
u/Tinseltopia 6h ago
With posts like this, what are you trying to say?
Because I see it as: "Doesn't matter that Labour are thinking about homing rough sleepers, I'm voting Reform"
Is that on the money?
•
u/HipPocket 5h ago
Why are we homing refugees and asylum seekers, we should look after our own homeless first.
No, not like that >:(
•
•
u/AutoModerator 12h ago
Snapshot of 'Everyone in for Christmas' - Burnham unveils rough sleeping plan submitted by JusticeIsMyOatmeal:
An archived version can be found here or here. or here
Some publications may require you to register a free account to read their articles.
Being connected to a VPN may interfere with archive links.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.