'Homelessness is an individual difficulty, not a social problem.' Discuss in relation to current policies.
'Homelessness is an individual difficulty, not a social problem.' Discuss in relation to current policies.
The provision of shelter is a basic human need which is identified in Maslows hierarchy of needs as an 'essential' need in order to progress to 'higher order' needs such as belonging and love. Those without shelter are collectively termed as 'homeless'.
This report will examine some of the reasons for homelessness in Britain, the problems that homeless people face and how the government has tackled these in the past. A brief history of housing policy is included which then leads on to current legislation intended to prevent homelessness.
Stewart, (2002, cited in Davies, 2002:156) remarks that homelessness is the most extreme form of housing need and that it is a failure of access to a secure home. It is therefore important to study homelessness as a social problem as Britain is a welfare state in which poverty and the housing problems and conditions of pre-war Britain were intended to be eradicated by increasing welfare provision such as social housing and social security benefits.
The Beveridge Report 'Social Insurance And Allied Services' Published in 1942, sought to address five giant 'evils': Want, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness. With the introduction of contributory based benefits, subsistence level benefits, and child benefits provided under the National Insurance Act 1946, families who found that their income was reduced either due to lack of work or sickness would not have to suffer hardship. 'Squalor' was tackled with 'slum clearance' and an extensive and ambitious council house building scheme which provided 'Homes for hero's' in recognition of the services that had been given during the Second World War. In 1945 alone, Madgwick, Steeds and Williams (1982:37) state that over 200,000 council houses were built meaning that four out of five houses in Britain were council owned. The introduction of the NHS, the aim of full employment and an education system intended to be the best in the world meant that the 'five giants' detailed by Beveridge should have disappeared.
Indeed, the number of people seriously lacking in food, clothing, shelter and warmth was dramatically reduced (ibid) in comparison to 1930's statistics and a massive growth in Social Service professions in the 1960's and 70's meant that people had greater access to quality health care, housing and advice.
Unfortunately, many problems exist today which mean that people are still experiencing problems associated with poor living conditions and the reasons why this is happening in a so-called 'welfare state' need to be investigated and addressed.
Pierson and Thomas (2002: 220) term homelessness as 'The condition of being without a home or shelter or of living in circumstances wholly inappropriate to personal and social needs.' Definitions of homelessness tend to vary widely with those who campaign against homelessness often taking a holistic approach and defining all those who are in 'inadequate accommodation' as homeless.
Homelessness can be seen as a condition of detachment from society characterised by the lack of the affiliative bonds that link people into their social structures. Homelessness carries implications of belonging nowhere rather than not having a bed.
The Housing Act 1996 describes someone as being homeless in the following way:
"A person is homeless if he has no accommodation available for occupation in the United Kingdom or elsewhere..."
However the act also takes into consideration people who may have accommodation but who cannot secure entry to it, or if it portable but there is nowhere available to secure it (e.g. houseboats and caravans). People in these situations are also termed as homeless.
The emphasis in this definition is on 'accommodation' and although someone may have a roof over their head and be sheltered, this does not necessarily constitute a 'home'. However, the act does address the issue of people who have no legal right to occupy the accommodation that they may be residing in and thus includes them as 'homeless people'.
Homelessness statistics are often unreliable as many people do not report themselves to local authorities as being in need of housing and figures usually reflect people who are accepted as homeless by local authority housing departments and thus are grossly underestimated (Pierson and Thomas, 2002:202). However in order to give an indication of the extent of the problem of homelessness according to local authorities in Britain, some statistics are included here.
The Office of the Deputy Prime Ministers Statistical Release (2002: 1) gives the following information:
* In December 2001, the number of households in accommodation arranged by local authorities under homelessness legislation was 85,780
* 12,670 of these households were in bed and breakfast of Annexe-style accommodation with shared facilities and 5,600 of these households were expectant mothers or already had children.
* There were 9,600 households in hostel accommodation which includes women's refuges.
For the whole of 2001, there were 184,290 households that were classified as homeless by local authorities in England (Office of the Deputy prime Minister, 2001:1). Shelter (2002: np) estimate that this represents over 440,000 people. Shelter blame homelessness on the shortage of affordable housing (ibid), and recognise that homelessness affects single people and families alike. They also link the problems of homelessness with difficulties associated with employment, access to healthcare and education.
There are many stereotypes of homeless people. They are often perceived as being 'beggars', 'tramps', addicted to drugs and alcohol and are often blamed for their own predicament. A common misconception is that homeless people are all 'rough sleepers' (Maidstone Borough Council, 2002:3) but the vast majority of homeless people are not rough sleepers and still need the help of a local authority housing department (ibid) and the voluntary sector.
Homelessness is characterised by poverty, but homeless people may not be poorer than the lower ranks of the housed population, for instance, Dispatch Online (2003:1) reports that ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
There are many stereotypes of homeless people. They are often perceived as being 'beggars', 'tramps', addicted to drugs and alcohol and are often blamed for their own predicament. A common misconception is that homeless people are all 'rough sleepers' (Maidstone Borough Council, 2002:3) but the vast majority of homeless people are not rough sleepers and still need the help of a local authority housing department (ibid) and the voluntary sector.
Homelessness is characterised by poverty, but homeless people may not be poorer than the lower ranks of the housed population, for instance, Dispatch Online (2003:1) reports that a Dutchman is believed to be living rough as a tramp somewhere in Amsterdam, unaware that he has inherited a fortune. Lawyers are now searching the streets for the 43 year old, the sole surviving heir to a rich uncle who died in Heerlen. However, their state does render them more insecure and vulnerable to violence and threats especially when they are living rough.
Shelter (2002:np) state that people lose their homes for many reasons such as relationship breakdowns, domestic violence and eviction by landlords, however there are groups of people who may lose their homes because of the 'system' that they are part of. These include young people leaving care, the mentally ill leaving hospitals, low paid and unemployed people and people who are leaving the armed forces. In addition, asylum seekers not only face discrimination but severe restrictions on or the refusal of state benefits.
Young people in the care system are at a higher risk of becoming homeless according to Hutson and Liddiard (1994:60). With less than one per cent of young people being taken into care in the United Kingdom, Hutson and Liddiard (1991:25 cited in Hutson and Liddiard, 1994:60) found that twenty two per cent of their research sample group had been in care at some point in their lives. In London alone, O'Mahoney (1988:10 cited it Hutson and Liddiard 1994:60) found that thirty to forty per cent of people using the homeless facilities have had experience of the care system.
Children in the care system have often had disrupted and traumatic childhoods and may have suffered from a wide range of abuse which in turn could create difficulties in coping with independence when they leave care between the ages of 16-18.
"Care leavers setting up home for the first time require advice and emotional support which may not be available from family and informal networks...care leavers - notwithstanding the difficulties and disruption and...the psychological damage which they may have experienced in their early lives - are expected to cope on their own from a much earlier age than other young people." (Watson, 1988: 124 cited in Hutson and Liddiard, 1994:60).
This quote raises the issue that the problem of homelessness experienced by care leavers may be a result of the inadequacies of the care system itself, however the Homeless Act 2002 which will be discussed in more detail later, places care leavers under the age of twenty one who were 'looked after' local authorities when they were 16-17 in 'priority need' of accommodation. This, in conjunction with the Children (Leaving Care) Act 2000 which lays important duties on local authorities such as mapping out routes to independence and providing personal and practical support during and after the transitional stage, is intended to improve the life chances of children leaving care.
People in the armed forces normally have accommodation provided for them by the Ministry Of Defence, however when they leave the service, inevitably they are required to leave the accommodation that was provided for them and this can effectively render them as 'homeless' if they cannot secure alternative accommodation. Shelters Armed Forces Project (2002:4) identify that a significant number of ex-service personnel have not had a home since leaving the forces and experience a range of difficulties resettling into civilian life.
The Military Corrective Training Centre (MCTC) is one of many locations from which personnel leave or are discharged from the armed forces and research conducted by Shelter had identified that a large proportion of personnel discharged from the MCTC were vulnerable and homeless and as such at risk of sleeping rough.
Similar difficulties are faced by people who are due to be released from institutional accommodation which includes prisons, psychiatric hospitals, bail hostels, and community homes who have no existing accommodation or a household to join (op cit: 28).
The low paid and unemployed tend to be more vulnerable to homelessness largely due to 'class' status and the linked inequalities in being able to access good quality affordable housing. There has, over the last fifteen years, been a shift away from local authorities building social housing to the current emphasis on 'owner occupation" (Redeyedigital, 2003:1).
The number of owner occupiers has risen considerably but in line with the increase, a significant number of people have not been able to keep up with their mortgage payments and there has been a consequent rise in the number of repossessions. In the 1980's and 90's Negative Equity was a serious problem following the house price collapse. This is the term used to when a property is worth less than the money that is owed on it. Thousands of people were forced out of their homes because interest rates rose, their wages did not, the repayments on their mortgages were too high and they were forces to sell their homes for less than they bought them for. This meant that in addition to the inheritance of a debt which they did not previously have they lost their homes.
Many of the functions previously carried out by local authority housing departments are now actioned by Housing Associations, but the insistence that Housing Associations charge a 'market rent' in relation to the value of the property means that many associations are not able to offer affordable housing to people on low incomes, and they are only able to offer most of their new properties to people on council waiting lists under the 'common waiting list' strategy thus creating a barrier to people in immediate need of quality housing.
There have been a number of changes in the law which have progressively decreased the security of tenure within the private rented sector. Private tenancy agreements can now commonly last as short as six months and there greater powers for landlords to evict tenants in rent arrears. Again, for people on state benefits and low income, this means that it is far more likely that they will become homeless (ibid) even though there are housing benefits in place which are meant to subsidise the rent for those in need.
Law (1996:98) states that it is "...important to consider how homelessness has affected black and minority ethnic groups." As there has been an increase in the level of homelessness in the last twenty years which reflects the widening of general social inequalities we would expect to find significant ethnic differentials reflecting those found in wider patterns of income, wealth and housing inequality (ibid). Bangladeshi, Pakistani and black people would be particularly affected by the growth of homelessness, with the lowest levels amongst White, Indian and Chinese people (ibid). As there is a significantly younger age structure of ethnic minority groups and withdrawal of benefits for young people in general, particularly those in the 16-18 age bracket there is a potential for the growth of homelessness amongst young, single people from the most vulnerable minority groups.
Research conducted by the University of Leeds (Davies et al. 1995 cited in Law, 1996:98) confirms that black and ethnic groups are overrepresented amongst the residents of bed and breakfast hotels, hostels and temporary accommodation. They are much more likely to have stayed with friends rather than sleep rough and so are not as visible on the streets and young people and women from ethnic minority groups are the highest users of temporary accommodation such as that mentioned above.
The problems that homeless people face are numerous, with health problems and addictions being the most abundant. Crisis (2003:np) report that nearly one in fifty homeless people suffers from tuberculosis and are nearly forty times more likely not to be registered with a GP than the general public. According to Crisis's "Critical Condition" survey 2002 (cited in Crisis, 2003:np) 55% of their respondents had no contact with a GP in the previous year.
81% of homeless people are addicted to either dugs or drink (Crisis, Home And Dry?, 2002. Heron is the most common drug with alcohol a close second. Drug addiction is also cited as being a cause for homelessness in the first place. Such addictions can contribute to the refusal of services for homeless people by homelessness projects.
Mental health problems are up to eight times more common in the homeless population (The Health Of Single Homeless People, Centre For housing Policy, University of York, 1994 cited in Crisis, 2003:np) and at least one in five homeless people have mental heath problems (ibid).
Homeless people are often victims of crime and shockingly this is often by members of the public (ibid). 45% of rough sleepers have been assaulted at least once and one in three have been wounded at least once (IPPR/Crisis, Unsafe Streets, 1999 cited in Crisis, 2003:np). The most shocking statistic of all is that 78% of rough sleepers have been a victim of crime at least once during their period of sleeping rough (ibid).
The average life expectancy of a person sleeping rough is 42 compared with the national average of 74 for men and 79 for women which is not surprising when one considers all of the above factors and the suicide rates amongst rough sleepers are 35 times higher than the general public (Crisis: Still Dying for a Home, 1996, cited in Crisis, 2003:np).
In Britain, the majority of housing has been provided by the private sector and state intervention has both regulated and stimulated the private market (Alcock, 1996:32). At the turn of the last century, about 90% of housing was provided by private landlords with the remainder being owned by the occupiers. However, this had reduced to around 15% by the 1970's. Half of the property was owner occupied and a third provided by local authorities, but in the 1990's, owner occupation rose further to two-thirds, the private sector rentals decreased to ten per-cent and local authority rentals were less than a quarter (ibid).
Part of the reason for the decline in privately rented property is demolition due to unfitness as part of 'slum clearances'. Other reasons include the building of public rented property and the construction of houses for sale. Owner occupation was arguably one of the most significant features of housing development in the twentieth century (ibid).
The opportunity for one to purchase ones own home through a mortgage paid over a staggered period has made owner occupation more accessible. Since the 1950's, it has also been supported by governments with indirect tax subsidies exempting owner occupiers from income tax on the money that they used to repay the interest on their mortgage debts.
Up until the 1980's, the government had also supported the development of public rented property, but during the 1960's most new build property was in the form of flats which became unpopular with residents and policy analysts alike and created a negative image of public rented housing in the last quarter of the century, many were actually demolished in the 1980's less than twenty years after being built (ibid).
The unpopularity of public housing was accentuated by the Conservative government of the 1980's with policies designed to increase the rents of rented property and to encourage existing council tenants to buy their homes under the 'right to buy' scheme. Public subsidies for rent were transferred to Housing Associations which became major suppliers of public housing.
Housing Benefit payments have replaced direct subsidies for people who are unable to afford all or part of their rent, but as these direct subsidies have been removed, rents have risen, meaning that a reliance on housing benefit has increased. Most council tenants are also now claiming Housing Benefit (ibid:35).
The current legislative framework for homelessness in Britain was originally established by the Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977, the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Act 2002. The 1977 Act established a statutory obligation for local authorities to accommodate 'vulnerable' homeless people. Such groups included pregnant women, children, women at risk of violence and the elderly. Additional vulnerable groups were non specific and as result, open to interpretation by individual councils. This meant that groups such as care-leavers, ex-offenders and people with serious and often long term mental illnesses, were sometimes helped by local authorities but often not.
The 1977 Act also included a clause which required people to establish a 'local connection' before they could expect to be helped by housing departments and they had to prove that they were not 'intentionally homeless'. The policy although intended to be helpful was vague and non-inclusive and did not address all of the problems it intended to remedy.
The 1996 Act amended the broad framework of the 1977 Act, and brought in three changes. Firstly, the 'recognised' homeless were offered help for a minimum, of twelve months and reviewed before two years had elapsed. Secondly, the duty of local authorities to provide accommodation to those in priority need could be halted if the local authority was satisfied that alternative accommodation could be found in the area which would usually be in the private sector. The third change was that secure accommodation would only be offered to those on the council's waiting lists which do not usually include homeless people (Pierson and Thomas, 2002:221).
The changes increased the difficulties faced by homeless people as professionals and other people working with them sought to define and establish vulnerability (ibid). People who had been regarded as 'queue jumpers' such as teenage pregnant women, were no longer given priority over people who were considered more 'worthy' (ibid).
Homelessness grew in the 1980's and peaked at 144,780 in 1991. By 1995, it had fallen to 120,810 (Stewart, 2002 cited in Davies, 2002:157) This was one year before the current Housing Act 1996 came into force and this pattern tends to reflect the points made earlier that less council housing was available during the 1980's because of the 'right to buy' scheme, demolition of unfit and unpopular properties. However the fall in homelessness between 1991 and 1995 can be misleading due to the number of people on council housing waiting lists who were not classified as homeless under the legislation. Also, because the homelessness legislation was under review in the 1990's and the rights of even priority groups to permanent housing provision was reduced.
Under the Housing Act 1996, councils had a duty to house priority need homeless households in temporary accommodation for a period of two years. This can be from the local authorities own stock, short term housing from registered social landlords, private landlords, bed and breakfast accommodation or hostels. People in these groups are then included in national homelessness statistics, but this practice is undoubtedly oppressive and reform was needed which came in the form of the Homelessness Act 2002.
The Homelessness Act 2002 is the most recent addition to homelessness legislation and it changes the way in which homelessness is tackled in Britain.
"Over time it should enable homelessness services to move from short term crisis management towards a long-term strategy based on early intervention and support to help people keep their homes." (Shelter, The Homelessness Act in Brief, 2003:1)
There are four main aims of the act:
* It requires local authorities to take a multi-agency approach to the prevention of homelessness and the rehousing of homeless households
* It should ensure that everyone treated as unintentionally homeless and in priority need is provided with suitable accommodation until they get a settled home.
* Housing Authorities should have greater flexibility to assist non-priority households, by being able to secure accommodation where there is scope to do so and a strengthened duty to provide advice and assistance. This is particularly aimed at areas of low demand and where local authorities have excess housing stock.
* To create sustainable communities by making lettings policies more 'user friendly' and offering greater choice. Social exclusion is to be tackled and local authorities are to make better use of national housing stock.
The act extends provision to 16-17 year olds, those leaving institutions and it requires councils to produce preventative strategies for homelessness and review these initially after twelve months and every five years thereafter. Social services will also have to give reasonable assistance and work in partnership with local housing authorities.
The limitation to provide temporary accommodation for two years under the 1996 act has been repealed and replaced with a duty to provide unlimited assistance until a defined event such as an offer of a secure tenancy brings it to an end, and the clause that stated that local authorities could discharge their responsibility by asserting that suitable accommodation was available in the area has also been removed, meaning that local authorities must now face up to the fact that they have a duty to assist people who are homeless whether they are in priority need or not.
Priority need categories have been widened to include people who are vulnerable as a result of violence or threatened violence, and people who are vulnerable as a result of a prison, armed forces or care background.
However, if the local authority decides that it does not have a duty to house a homeless household, perhaps because they are considered 'intentionally homeless' social services and the housing department must co-operate in order to assist them.
Housing authorities are no longer required to maintain a housing register which effectively means there is no queue to 'jump' anymore and local authorities must set out eligibility criteria that a person must meet to be considered for housing. This will enable the government to move towards its "choice-based" lettings schemes.
A "right to apply" has been introduced for housing that requires the local authority to provide advice and information to enable people to make an application. Finally, the reforms require local authorities to have an allocations scheme and to publish a statement describing how choice will be applied. It lists the groups to whom "reasonable preference" will be given. These include homeless people, homeless people in temporary accommodation, people in insanitary, overcrowded or otherwise unsatisfactory conditions, people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds, and those who would suffer hardship unless they are moved to a particular locality.
In addition to this allocation policy, local authorities are required to provide free advice and information to those who wish to make an application and assistance to people who might have difficulty in doing so, such as those who have difficulty reading and writing. Every authority is required to consider every application.
The new act is a welcome addition to legislation and represents a significant achievement for organizations and individuals who have campaigned for increased protection and support for homeless people and those who have called upon local authorities to take a more strategic response to homelessness.
However, too few houses are being built at present. Dean (2002:1) reports that 53,000 houses were sold in 2001 under the right to buy scheme, only 18,000 new builds have been completed and each one costs around £50,000. The average council house is sold for around £28,000 including discounts.
The problems of 'squalor' were intended to be tackled quickly and efficiently with the provision of new homes under Beveridges scheme, but house building alone cannot rid society of all of the problems associated with poverty, crime, addiction and low income. Although conditions in Britain are not what they were before the introduction of the 'welfare state' in 1945 the problems that people face have changed meaning that the original plans do not fit into todays society.
Whilst we may see a hopeful reduction in the number of people who present themselves as homeless and who are sleeping on the streets, more must be done to increase the incomes of those most at risk and to provide more property that is affordable and acceptable to live in.
Although councils now have powers to utilise surplus housing stock, much of this stock is in disrepair and in areas which are not desirable because of crime, hence the reason they are surplus! This in effect could create ghetto's of previously homeless people, but as these areas are usually undesirable anyway, does this mean that some of the problems that made them homeless in the first place such as violence, the threat of violence or being a victim of another crime would still be present but in a different area?
Strategies to improve housing stock, tackle 'problem estates' new build programmes and affordable housing would undoubtedly be more welcome.