This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/11/newport-begging-homelessness-public-space-invisible
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| What kind of society tries to make its beggars invisible? Our does | |
| (5 days later) | |
| Of course it is distressing to see people sleeping on the street – but we should be demanding real solutions, not using legislation to hide the problem | |
| Contact author | |
| Thu 11 Jan 2018 06.00 GMT | |
| Share on Facebook | |
| Share on Twitter | |
| Share via Email | |
| View more sharing options | |
| Share on LinkedIn | |
| Share on Pinterest | |
| Share on Google+ | |
| Share on WhatsApp | |
| Share on Messenger | |
| Close | |
| Newport has attracted headlines and opprobrium for considering a blanket ban on begging in the city. Vox pops are made of this, and predictably passersby cornered for news bulletins offer a mixed response: some say the begging on the streets led them to avoid the city centre; some were angered at the lack of empathy for people in such a dire position; others simply haven’t noticed a street homelessness problem. | Newport has attracted headlines and opprobrium for considering a blanket ban on begging in the city. Vox pops are made of this, and predictably passersby cornered for news bulletins offer a mixed response: some say the begging on the streets led them to avoid the city centre; some were angered at the lack of empathy for people in such a dire position; others simply haven’t noticed a street homelessness problem. |
| Wider public opinion has been surprised at the idea of a ban, but as time passes the notion is becoming less surprising and Newport, my home town, is far from unique. The council has powers under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 that allow town halls to enact public space protection orders (PSPOs), banning certain behaviours in specified areas. Many cities and towns have banned rough sleeping, begging and various behaviours considered antisocial. The human rights group Liberty has warned that these orders are too wide-ranging and could, in some cases, impinge on the individuals’ right to a private family life. | Wider public opinion has been surprised at the idea of a ban, but as time passes the notion is becoming less surprising and Newport, my home town, is far from unique. The council has powers under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 that allow town halls to enact public space protection orders (PSPOs), banning certain behaviours in specified areas. Many cities and towns have banned rough sleeping, begging and various behaviours considered antisocial. The human rights group Liberty has warned that these orders are too wide-ranging and could, in some cases, impinge on the individuals’ right to a private family life. |
| There are any number of ways to criminalise begging, but to do so attacks the problem from entirely the wrong angle | There are any number of ways to criminalise begging, but to do so attacks the problem from entirely the wrong angle |
| But this isn’t just a draconian solution. It is also the wrong one. We can find any number of ways to criminalise begging, but when we do so, aren’t we attacking the problem from entirely the wrong angle? Banning begging or rough sleeping treats street homelessness as a lifestyle choice that can be discouraged through threats of legal action and heavy-handed policing. Homelessness can be complex, and some rough sleepers will refuse help when living on the street becomes entrenched. But fining people, confiscating tents, and forcing people to move on from certain areas will do nothing to combat the core issues that cause homelessness. | But this isn’t just a draconian solution. It is also the wrong one. We can find any number of ways to criminalise begging, but when we do so, aren’t we attacking the problem from entirely the wrong angle? Banning begging or rough sleeping treats street homelessness as a lifestyle choice that can be discouraged through threats of legal action and heavy-handed policing. Homelessness can be complex, and some rough sleepers will refuse help when living on the street becomes entrenched. But fining people, confiscating tents, and forcing people to move on from certain areas will do nothing to combat the core issues that cause homelessness. |
| The truth is that this approach is about the discomfort of the people witnessing, rather than those experiencing, homelessness. Passing a beggar who asks for money causes discomfort – and so it should. The act of facing and acknowledging human suffering and hardship on this scale ought to imprint itself on a society that has such glaring divides in income and comfort. Life would be easier for us all without having to acknowledge the humanity and suffering of people living on the street: PSPOs seek to reinforce that comfort, to spare us from the darker elements of the public realm. | The truth is that this approach is about the discomfort of the people witnessing, rather than those experiencing, homelessness. Passing a beggar who asks for money causes discomfort – and so it should. The act of facing and acknowledging human suffering and hardship on this scale ought to imprint itself on a society that has such glaring divides in income and comfort. Life would be easier for us all without having to acknowledge the humanity and suffering of people living on the street: PSPOs seek to reinforce that comfort, to spare us from the darker elements of the public realm. |
| It should be obvious that banning begging or criminalising rough sleeping will do little to combat homelessness. In July Oxford council considered fining rough sleepers up to £2,500 and attached notices warning of the incoming fines to the bags and belongings of homeless people. Most people in work couldn’t afford a £2,500 spot fine without a considerable impact on their day-to-day finances: someone forced to sleep in a shop doorway because they can’t afford their rent cannot possibly have the cash to hand. The fine is thus about engendering fear, rather than anything one might regard as a workable solution. When homelessness and poverty is hidden from the high street, you can pretend it no longer exists. | It should be obvious that banning begging or criminalising rough sleeping will do little to combat homelessness. In July Oxford council considered fining rough sleepers up to £2,500 and attached notices warning of the incoming fines to the bags and belongings of homeless people. Most people in work couldn’t afford a £2,500 spot fine without a considerable impact on their day-to-day finances: someone forced to sleep in a shop doorway because they can’t afford their rent cannot possibly have the cash to hand. The fine is thus about engendering fear, rather than anything one might regard as a workable solution. When homelessness and poverty is hidden from the high street, you can pretend it no longer exists. |
| It seems foolish and unfathomable, but it also lends us a vision of local and national government for the next few years. With town halls finding budgets whittled down to the bone and struggling to fund the most basic services, addressing the root causes of poverty becomes an impossibility. | It seems foolish and unfathomable, but it also lends us a vision of local and national government for the next few years. With town halls finding budgets whittled down to the bone and struggling to fund the most basic services, addressing the root causes of poverty becomes an impossibility. |
| Street homelessness has more than doubled since 2010, when the coalition government was formed, but so, too, has the number of people in temporary accommodation and people approaching councils for help due to eviction and losing their home. But councils have few options when it comes to rehousing. Predictably, many are ending funding for domestic violence and homelessness services and hostels. With no resources to combat the causes of poverty, some councils adopt this backwards approach of criminalisation. | Street homelessness has more than doubled since 2010, when the coalition government was formed, but so, too, has the number of people in temporary accommodation and people approaching councils for help due to eviction and losing their home. But councils have few options when it comes to rehousing. Predictably, many are ending funding for domestic violence and homelessness services and hostels. With no resources to combat the causes of poverty, some councils adopt this backwards approach of criminalisation. |
| Threatening people with fines or legal action may temporarily move the sight of rough sleeping away from British high streets, but those people don’t evaporate, they can’t be coerced into a more acceptable lifestyle; they won’t rise up and rent a house on a whim. Without the resources and support, they will remain homeless, but under the radar, in the shadows. We will not see them, but they will still exist. | Threatening people with fines or legal action may temporarily move the sight of rough sleeping away from British high streets, but those people don’t evaporate, they can’t be coerced into a more acceptable lifestyle; they won’t rise up and rent a house on a whim. Without the resources and support, they will remain homeless, but under the radar, in the shadows. We will not see them, but they will still exist. |
| It would be wrong to demonise those searching for answers, even when they reach the wrong ones. Councillors seeking these powers have seemed sincere, discussing the issues with me: they feel their hands are tied, and that without the cash to beef up hostels and widen homelessness outreach, a short, sharp shock for rough sleepers could encourage those for whom homelessness has become entrenched to seek out help and assistance. We disagree. I don’t think that will work. But they’re right that there are few other options at their disposal. | It would be wrong to demonise those searching for answers, even when they reach the wrong ones. Councillors seeking these powers have seemed sincere, discussing the issues with me: they feel their hands are tied, and that without the cash to beef up hostels and widen homelessness outreach, a short, sharp shock for rough sleepers could encourage those for whom homelessness has become entrenched to seek out help and assistance. We disagree. I don’t think that will work. But they’re right that there are few other options at their disposal. |
| In their heart of hearts, or perhaps with a little meaningful research, they would know that getting people off the street has to be a collaborative process between councils, services and rough sleepers. What works, in places such as Finland, where homelessness has almost been eradicated, is an unconditional offer of accommodation with social and health services embedded in the so-called Housing First approach. The schemes are both more successful and less costly than the standard piecemeal approach of hostel beds and temporary accommodation: but only when executed properly and with adequate funding. | In their heart of hearts, or perhaps with a little meaningful research, they would know that getting people off the street has to be a collaborative process between councils, services and rough sleepers. What works, in places such as Finland, where homelessness has almost been eradicated, is an unconditional offer of accommodation with social and health services embedded in the so-called Housing First approach. The schemes are both more successful and less costly than the standard piecemeal approach of hostel beds and temporary accommodation: but only when executed properly and with adequate funding. |
| The government here has signalled support for the scheme, and pilots are planned in Sheffield, Liverpool and London, but none has proper funding. And when town halls institute bans that stigmatise the homeless, how can any of them claim to be acting in good faith? That’s the worst of all worlds, a botched and watered-down scheme that further destroys trust and leaves vulnerable people back on the streets. | The government here has signalled support for the scheme, and pilots are planned in Sheffield, Liverpool and London, but none has proper funding. And when town halls institute bans that stigmatise the homeless, how can any of them claim to be acting in good faith? That’s the worst of all worlds, a botched and watered-down scheme that further destroys trust and leaves vulnerable people back on the streets. |
| In the hope expressed by Windsor council’s leader, of sweeping visible homelessness from the streets ahead of the royal wedding, we saw a new feudalism in our attitudes towards poverty. This mixture of arrogance and impotence is a ruinous one, but it is very much of this time and very revealing. A society that sees legislating inequality and homelessness into invisibility has unquestionably lost its way. | In the hope expressed by Windsor council’s leader, of sweeping visible homelessness from the streets ahead of the royal wedding, we saw a new feudalism in our attitudes towards poverty. This mixture of arrogance and impotence is a ruinous one, but it is very much of this time and very revealing. A society that sees legislating inequality and homelessness into invisibility has unquestionably lost its way. |
| • Dawn Foster is a Guardian columnist | • Dawn Foster is a Guardian columnist |
| Homelessness | |
| Opinion | |
| Social exclusion | |
| Housing | |
| Poverty | |
| Austerity | |
| Newport | |
| comment | |
| Share on Facebook | |
| Share on Twitter | |
| Share via Email | |
| Share on LinkedIn | |
| Share on Pinterest | |
| Share on Google+ | |
| Share on WhatsApp | |
| Share on Messenger | |
| Reuse this content |