The Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 is to ensure that everyone who is at risk of homelessness, or who is homeless, is legally entitled to meaningful help from their local authority regardless of their current status. It does this by defining the service that local councils and other public bodies must provide to those who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. The law requires councils to provide that help at an earlier stage than previously, with the objective that this will decrease the likelihood that people will become homeless.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
@9QQNPX610mos10MO
Yes, but improve Social housing and Homeless shelters to make them safer and more accessible for the homeless
@9QKHFF410mos10MO
It depends on the circumstances that got them there, there should be more social programs to direct them to the appropriate care or advice that they need dependant on their circumstances.
@9QGMB7W10mos10MO
Homelessness shouldn't exist at all. There are enough empty and unused properties across the UK to house people in need. Stop building new houses.
I think it's important to understand why they refused it what are the conditions of the shelters offered
Yes but if they refuse programs to educate, integrate and accommodate then they could be considered “lost causes”
@9MV6NFV11mos11MO
Depends on why they refused. Maybe not public property, but we should definitely create more social programs to help them if the e.g. housing isn't good or isn't safe.
@9M3ZWPFConservative12mos12MO
the public plan should not be hostile, forexample making the part seat non sleepable or adding functionless barrier to prevent people to stay. however, encouraging them to get back to work, more reasonble pay for citizen to live for normal life, drugs and criminals need more cleans up by better police force and better working attitude, better education, more recreational resources for younger generation. less non productive welfare benefits person that doesn’t work for generations
It depends on the programs avaible and the circumstances of the person. Is the shelter housing safe? are they expected to do something in return? are they attempting to remove themselves from certain people and need to prevent a papertrail? Would they have to leave their animal or be spilt from a group? If it's a simple no i want to sleep on the street and beg then it's diffrent.
@9G2F4Q52yrs2Y
Only if the accommodation that they refused was safe, secure, free of mould, clean, healthy, not a tower block, etc
@9PQBSFM10mos10MO
depends on the owners of the public property, but create more safe shelters for the homeless to reside in
@9PNKB9Q10mos10MO
As long as not on private property and not impacting on the use of other users and causing environmental and social problems.
@9PBQ78S10mos10MO
Yes, if the available shelter is pathetic. No, and make it a criminal offense if the available shelter is good and provides health programs too.
@9NWNYDB 10mos10MO
freedoms and liberties aren't without cost. public property is owned and maintained by the state and our taxes - to allow encampments with zero accountability is illogical. and punishing is an even worse idea.
@8XVBNSR3yrs3Y
Depends on circumstances of refusing shelter
@8XVBHKG3yrs3Y
No, but provide more programs so they don't have to
@99FT3PRConservative2yrs2Y
No, however there should be places adopted for use of shelter
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
