Good for them! It’s when the government is picking on the vulnerable that protests are most needed, and they don’t come much more vulnerable than the homeless.

Why are you using a picture of Boris to illustrate this story?

well said Chaise guevara, whats it got to do with Boris (i’ve no time for him but it was obvious whyt he won after seeing livingstone on Politics show the other day), sme why a picture of the police,I was homeless for a year in 1993 and I joined the police for a year in 2002 ,I didn’t blame the police for my situation in 93.

“On Sunday 20th March, hundreds of protesters will show their opposition to Westminster Council’s proposed byelaw that will make rough sleeping and charities feeding and supporting the homeless illegal in central London.

“The protest will be a vibrant, community event that celebrates the positive contribution the charities make in supporting and caring for some of the most vulnerable in central London, showing the wide spread opposition to this inhumane ban.”

This is a little odd. How does the writer of this know? It hasn’t happened yet. I don’t want to sound too picky but how does the writer know hundreds will turn up? Although that sounds terribly defeatist in itself. How does the writer know it will be a vibrant event? Or what it will celebrate?

And, if anything, only a few hundred people show how utterly indifferent most people are.

Does Westminster Council have the right to outlaw lying down? Or one person giving a sandwich to another?

No of course not.

And I trust the organisers will welcome the support and participation from those of us who come at this from a libertarian perspective.

@ 3 SMFS

“How does the writer know it will be a vibrant event? Or what it will celebrate?”

Call it advertising.

@ pagar

“And I trust the organisers will welcome the support and participation from those of us who come at this from a libertarian perspective.”

Out of interest, how would that differ from a leftist liberal perspective in this case?

This thread so far is very one sided. This is about a particular issue in a particular area.
That for more than twenty years, the area around Westminster Cathedral has been the chosen place where a number of hard core homeless people with very accute needs have spent their days and nights.

It could be any place but just happens to be there in Victoiria. If it was a suburban park or parrade of shops it woulds be an equal issue. And people who live there have a right to not have their property used as a ”hobo jungle”.

I don’t expect a lot from Liberal Conspiracy (in general) on issues like this. It was evident when people had no practical solutions for what French authorities should do with Roma families living in squatter camps last year.
Apart from ”Oh my God – the fascists” kind of responses.
There were a couple of exceptions, but that was about it. I would like to hear of practical measures. There are shelters that will take these people and help them deal with issues they have.
http://www.broadwaylondon.org/Home

At least, we now have a much clearer understanding of what the concept of the Big Society really means.

What sort of civilised society denies the destitute a cold corner in a street to sleep and the ability of others to offer them a sandwich or warm meal ?

Where the hell will the homeless go when they are run out of London ? The same problems will still exist, only to move on else where.

If I remember rightly the Chinese Authorities done this to the homeless just before their Olympic Games and that was considered a breach on civil or human rights was it not.

In addition to this more and more people are going to end up on the streets when these cutbacks really kick in. When that happens we will truely have an army of homeless, then what will this Coalition do about it ? Build Gas Chambers !

@ 7 damon

“That for more than twenty years, the area around Westminster Cathedral has been the chosen place where a number of hard core homeless people with very accute needs have spent their days and nights.”

What are hard core homeless people? In any case, obviously this is relevant to a particular area – it wouldn’t come up somewhere with very few homeless people. That doesn’t mean that the moral issues can be ignored though.

“It could be any place but just happens to be there in Victoiria. If it was a suburban park or parrade of shops it woulds be an equal issue. And people who live there have a right to not have their property used as a ”hobo jungle”.”

Their property? Owning a nearby home does not make the street (or bus shelter or bridge underpass) your personal possession. I can’t make demands about who can access the road I live on, and quite rightly so.

“I don’t expect a lot from Liberal Conspiracy (in general) on issues like this. It was evident when people had no practical solutions for what French authorities should do with Roma families living in squatter camps last year.”

Here’s one for you: keep the situation as it is, without the new by-law. Yes, it’s a long way from perfect, but that doesn’t justify bringing in a “solution” that is even worse. The by-law you seem to be backing seeks to make the lives of the well-off better at the expense of making the lives of the poorest even worse. And fucking with everyone’s civil liberties into the bargain.

Interesting how an inner-city London council wants to push this law through just as inner-city London homelessness is due to massively rise (source:everyone).

@10 CG

But it’s going to help reduce the deficit!!!11 Also Labour are bad.*

*This rebuttal brought to you from Insta-Rebut.com, (c) Coalition Government & the New Politics ™.

@ 12

LOL!

You should be asking why the Big Issue and Shelter aren’t involved in this protest.

@3 makes a valid point, that if (as expected) a very small number of people turn up, it will actually undermine the cause. Anti-cuts nuts were saying that 50,000 would protest at the LD conf this weekend, the most there were at any point was 1,000, and on Sunday there was only 1 protester for much of the day.

“You should be asking why the Big Issue and Shelter aren’t involved in this protest.”

If this is the case – and it probably isn’t – then I’d imagine they are afraid of being seen to be political and thus violating party political rules.

15 – John Bird has been saying that soup kitchens do no good, and some harm to the homeless for years now.

Here from 2005
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4234942.stm

And from 2007
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7155783.stm

@ 15 Planeshift

“If this is the case – and it probably isn’t – then I’d imagine they are afraid of being seen to be political and thus violating party political rules.”

Dunno about Shelter, but the Big Issue bans its staff from doing pretty much all the things Westminster is outlawing (sitting down in the street, begging for money or food), at least when they’re on duty. So they possibly think that this is outside of their remit, or at least that it would send a mixed message.

On the other hand, maybe Baker’s just making it up as he goes. It would be in character, after all.

Oh Tim, I know about that, both organisations have called for far better policies to both prevent and deal with homelessness. It’s just that neither wish to make it an offence to give food to rough sleepers either.

The problem is some people are using such statements by Bird to provide support Westminster’s decision, when in reality no homeless charities would support the criminalisation of soup kitchens.

I kind of see the pov that says soup runs exacerbate the problem, but what people forget is that organisations like the Big Issue always follow up by saying we need to do a lot more to sort out the homelessness problem. Anyone see any plans from Westminster Council to help reduce homelessness? Me neither.

This policy is cruel especially as homelessness in London is going to rise soon without any plans for what to do to help folk who find themselves in dire straights.

19 – That’s not entirely fair. Westminster (and specifically the area around Westminster Cathedral) has been a centre for homelessness in the UK since at least the 1980s – a situation exacerbated, ironically enough, by the charitable work done by Cardinal Basil Hume in providing, ahem, soup kitchens, and made worse by the proximity of Victoria Coach Station and the influx of A8 nationals.

The Council do have pretty active homeless policies in place.

http://www.westminster.gov.uk/services/housing/housingoptions/hphoptions/

@20 Tim J

The link to which you point is primarily about homeless families. Additionally, I recall a council spokesperson on Radio 4 “Today” stating that the council would be providing more resources in the near future. I’m not saying that it is all bad news in Westminster.

However I cannot suspend my belief that Westminster Council want to shuffle street dwellers out of their way. Street dwellers make people feel uncomfortable and generate complaints. They cause real problems. And they have needs.

It is not chance that street dwellers congregate in Westminster or other central boroughs; it is the knowledge that they are more likely to receive assistance — charity or mutual aid — by being in those particular places. If they are driven from Westminster, street dwellers will congregate elsewhere.

It would be good to hear what people’s practical ideas would be, and what you would do if you had a position in Westminster council where you could get things done in this regard.

How about giving every homeless person their own room? I have some experience of this with the Simon Community hostels. People end up living there long term and can eventually be moved on to a flat of their own.
Very few of them actually got jobs though. Especially the young people with particular problems. My own view was that the staff were wasting their time, as all the meetings with clients and all they did for them, was mostly taken for granted. Many people would not even wash their own plates and saucepans after cooking in the shared kitchen.
Many of the residents were happy for their room, their dole money, and just wanted to spend their days watching TV, smoking weed, taking drugs and drinking into the early hours and hanging out in each other’s rooms making a racket all night. Then sleeping through till past noon.

Should Westminster make a commitment to give every homeless person at least a room like that? Wherever they were from?
I wouldn’t mind living in Westminster for free.

Damon, part of the solution to that lies with welfare reform, which isn’t a matter for westminster council. All I’d do – if I was a councillor there – was ensure it met its legal obligations (which many local authorities still do not do), and encourage the voluntary sector to do whatever it wanted in finding ways of bringing people back into mainstream society. But the ban on soup kitchens and feeding homeless people looks like an anti-vol sector move to me, and won’t encourage the kinds of experimentation needed to find longer term solutions.

There is a wider point about soup kitchens that everyone is missing as well. Whilst nobody seriously thinks soup kitchens alone offer anything other than a short term sticking plaster, they certainly do not harm matters or create an incentive for people to be homeless as some tories who should know better have claimed. What they do is keep people alive, and offer them a safe place to get some hot food and warmth. Whilst they are there, the workers at the kitchen can engage with them, refer them to other places where help and support is available etc.

@3 So Much For Subtlety

If you’d bothered to read through the article you could have answered your own question, the figure of hundreds is based on those who have already signed up to attend, the reliability of such a figure is a different matter. Presumable the ‘vibrant, community event’ prediction is based on knowledge of the various grassroots groups involved. Maybe you should read through to the end of the article before your next bit of trolling.

What’s really odd is how you are on this blog around the clock trying to pick holes in anything that you possibly can. Your post, true to form, was completely bereft of any meaningful point or cogent reasoning. Clearly your views are diametrically opposed to the political content of this blog and the articles irritate you endlessly. You’re not here to engage in discourse – given the general thrust of your comments – and invariably attack rather than discuss, which is the behaviour of a troll. A wordy troll perhaps, but a troll nonetheless. It’s quite pathetic really that you take so much time out of your day to seek to snipe at and undermine the views of others. Which warrants a one-off post from me to troll back at the troll.

Planeshift – welfare reform? What would that be, cutting welfare?
The world of low paid menial work is so unattractive that deciding to give it a pass is actually an option. I’ve done it myself at times. You can make a life of sorts, living on the dole, and even living on the street. Particularly when you have people giving you free stuff. The city I live in has Romanian gypsies sitting on crates outside shops all over the city, selling the Big Issue. It’s not much of a life but they are there six and seven days a week all day long. Not just in the city center, but out at suburban shopping parades as well. As long as people keep giving them money they will stick it out it seems.

Street homeless can be also as stoical. Once you lower your sights and standards it’s not so bad. In American cities the homeless reached epic proportions in some places.
I remember Denver public library used to have a bad smell because there were so many homeless people hanging out in there all day. I was doing it myself. They even took the whole doors off the sit down toilets to deter all the goings on that were going on there.
Peple sleeping in them, drinking and taking drugs in them.
The library had to use security guards to police the place.
The first time I saw people sitting on the toilet and there being no door, I was shocked, but the library felt they had to do it I suppose.

I have an open mind on this action by Westminster council. You do have to police the homeless too sometimes. Ask the police in central San Francisco, where the homeless situation is almost overwhelming. One district was a proper ”Skid Row” in the 1980s. It was my favourite neighbourhood, But the police had to patrol it otherwise people would take liberties. Sitting on people’s cars drinking in the street and stuff like that.