DWP And Homelessness Charities Link Up To Bully Homeless Benefit Claimants

Johnny Void here points out another serious issue, which would otherwise go unnoticed. Unfortunately, he is right about the terrible conditions in some homeless hostels. The New York municipal shelter system in the 1980s was closed down and effectively privatised because of the violence and drug use amongst some residents. When Bristol Uni’s archaeology department ran a project on the archaeology of homelessness in Bristol, one of the project’s founders stated that one of the city’s hostels was actually so bad that one of the homeless people involved in the project actually moved out rather than stay there. As for altering benefits in order to force residents into such accommodation, you can see why both the DWP and the homeless charities will approve of it. The charities will get more money, while the DWP will use it to take homeless people of the streets. It will make them invisible, and so give the impression that homelessness has been solved. In the meantime, the sanctions system will lead to more people starving to death. It is also likely to lead to a massive increase in violent crime as people with absolutely no alternative source of income are forced to rob and steal simply to survive. Not that this will bother Cameron and Osborne, as they live in the leafy villages far from the urban centres affected by homelessness.
I also wonder whether these policies are deliberately designed to kill the homeless. In the 1990s during the war in Bosnia, extreme Rightists in Latin America took ethnic cleansing and decided to apply it to the social undesirables in their countries. They called it ‘social cleansing’. As an example, one of the British broadcasters showed footage of a tramp in Colombia being murdered by Fascist thugs on the street. Given the way a sizable segment of the present Tory party seems to have had links the Nazi right, would anyone be surprised if the Tories had cheered when the footage of this atrocity was shown, and thought it would be a good idea here in Blighty?

the void

HomelessThe homelessness industry is today welcoming an upcoming change in the law which could see homeless people forced to live in unsuitable or unsafe accommodation or face losing eligibility for benefits.

Homeless Link and St Mungo’s Broadway have published a gushing press release cheering amendments to the rules for Jobseeker’s Allowance set to come into force next month.  The changes mean that newly homeless people may only be considered meeting the criteria for benefits if they take “such steps as are reasonable for him (sic) to take to find living accommodation.”

Homeless people will have an easement of jobseeking requirements if they follow these conditions, but this will usually only last four weeks, despite the average length of hostel stays being significantly longer than that.  The minimum length of stay in one of St Mungo’s Central London hostels is eight weeks, with most residents staying an average of six…

View original post 339 more words

7 Responses to “DWP And Homelessness Charities Link Up To Bully Homeless Benefit Claimants”

  1. Joanna Says:

    So where are they going to house them eventually? I knew someone who ended up in a hostel for 3 years, he wasn’t too bothered because the staff turned a blind eye to cannabis smoking. I myself was in a hostel when I was 21, I was only in there for 4 months, which wasn’t too bad, it was a nice hostel in 1990.

    • beastrabban Says:

      I’m glad your and your friend’s experiences of life in a hostel aren’t too bad. If you read the comments for this piece, there are some real horror stories. As for where they’re going to house them eventually, I have no idea. I think that’s part of the problem. There are no plans to build genuine, affordable housing and the social housing sector is being effectively demolished. It means that the homelessness problem really hasn’t been solved, and the Tories and homeless charities are really just sweeping the problem under the carpet.

  2. Joanna Says:

    That is crazy Beast!

    Do you know what the nightmare scenario is? Hostels will silently become 21st century workhouses, it will change so slowly no-one will notice and the scary thing is it will be seen as acceptable!

    I really hope this is just me being my normal paranoid self, but I fear it will become reality.

    What do you think?

    • beastrabban Says:

      I think someone mentioned that as a real possibility on Johnny Void’s post about it, Joanna. I think it’s a possibility, especially given the way the Tories have fully embraced the 19th century principle of ‘less eligibility’, which was the foundation of the ideology behind the workhouse. More probably, it will simply mean a growing population of the poor and homeless trapped in hostel accommodation, who are too poor to move out… actually, come to think about it, that does describe a large part of the workhouse idea of ‘indoor relief’. It probably won’t quite descend to the absolute depths of the workhouse system. I can’t imagine them introducing oakum picking like they did in the 19th century. On the other hand, this government does love workfare, and so some form of compulsory labour is likely to be introduced, just as it is to the poor, who are still fortunate enough to possess their own flats and houses.

      So, actually thinking about it, I think you’re right, and that this will lead to a return of something like the workhouse system.

  3. Joanna Says:

    Sometimes Beast, I hate being right! But maybe salvation will come with a leader who possesses a social conscience!

    As for “The Void” I unsubscribed from that site because Jonny Void will not moderate the comments, I find the “c” word as ugly and insulting, and need I say completely unnecessary! It is such a shame because Jonny Void does write some very interesting articles.
    I am not a prude, I can put up with most language, but that one word! It also denies me and others a chance to learn other points of view, which is such a shame!

    • beastrabban Says:

      You’re not the only person I know who strongly objects to the ‘c’ word. I’ve met several women, who really hate it. A friend of mine, who taught English as a foreign language told me that they grade the offensiveness of particular words from one to six. Six is harmless exclamations like ‘wow’, or ‘Ow!’. Category one offensive language consists of only two words – the ‘F’ word, and the ‘C’ word. And there is a debate over whether the ‘c’ word is actually more offensive.

  4. Joanna Says:

    It just goes to show that people are more aware than we think and that’s without getting the heads up from other blogs.

    I have to write a diary to help with my mental health, the person reading it used to be a staunch conservative, but I am putting in little opinions from yours and mike’s site, I think he is changing now because I am much more well informed and so I pass it on. I think that is how things can change, I hope, by debunking the propaganda we are fed!

    I am glad I am not the only woman offended by the “c” word Thank you!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


%d bloggers like this: