Jeremy Swain
Recent activity
Comments (3)
-
Comment on: Busting the myth
Joe - entirely with you on this. There is a difference between presenting what we do to different audiences to gain support (and sometimes money) which is reasonable and sensible and creating a distorted and ultimately dangerous misrepresentation of rough sleeping and homelessness. Many agencies, to be fair, work hard on staying on the right side of the line but a few cross it and I find it disturbing and frustrating.
On your point about numbers sleeping rough, I agree entirely and feel that there is a real laziness in explaining the approach driven by NSNO. In essence, if outreach teams work more hours on the streets and get to people more quickly to help them off the street, then of course numbers of contacts on the street will go up. This is a sign of increased efficiency and effectiveness, not a sign that the numbers sleeping rough are growing. And if we are measuring rough sleeping by length of time on the street, not just numbers of people met, then we need to commit to explaining that. At one extreme, if 4,000 people are met on the street in a year and they are all helped off within two days, that is a problem fast on the way to being solved, not a sign of failure.
In remains completey bizarre that - in my view - the worst example of rough sleeping in November 2011 is probably an encampment of men from the Indian sub-continent in an outer west London borough where the issues are essentially around immigration status. So the reality is: outer London, not UK nationals, immigration, older men. The picture received by the public is diametrially opposite: central London, UK nationals, housing, young people. Incredible really. -
Comment on: Busting the myth
Joe - entirely with you on this. There is a difference between presenting what we do to different audiences to gain support (and sometimes money) which is reasonable and sensible and creating a distorted and ultimately dangerous misrepresentation of rough sleeping and homelessness. Many agencies, to be fair, work hard on staying on the right side of the line but a few cross it and I find it disturbing and frustrating.
On your point about numbers sleeping rough, I agree entirely and feel that there is a real laziness in explaining the approach driven by NSNO. In essence, if outreach teams work more hours on the streets and get to people more quickly to help them off the street, then of course numbers of contacts on the street will go up. This is a sign of increased efficiency and effectiveness, not a sign that the numbers sleeping rough are growing. And if we are measuring rough sleeping by length of time on the street, not just numbers of people met, then we need to commit to explaining that. At one extreme, if 4,000 people are met on the street in a year and they are all helped off within two days, that is a problem fast on the way to being solved, not a sign of failure.
In remains completey bizarre that - in my view - the worst example of rough sleeping in November 2011 is probably an encampment of men from the Indian sub-continent in an outer west London borough where the issues are essentially around immigration status. So the reality is: outer London, not UK nationals, immigration, older men. The picture received by the public is diametrially opposite: central London, UK nationals, housing, young people. Incredible really. -
Comment on: Rough sleepers are eating rats
Just wanted to make a few things a bit clearer.
Firstly Joe Halewood. I think your right about the danger of the far right exploiting the issue of eastern and central Europeans sleeping rough, something we are very sensitive to at Thames Reach. The reason why we wanted to draw attention to the extreme levels of destitution they face is to increase the level of public sympathy and understanding and I believe we have achieved this given the responses to the issue on Twitter for example. We have now helped over 400 people to return home with the support of the Barka Foundation, linking people up with support networks so not simply giving them a ticket home. We also continue to help eastern and central Europeans get work in London where we can.
I'm sorry that you think I am a self-publicisit and position myself as omniscient on rough sleeping issues. I do have strong views but I also listen to and respect other different views and spend a lot of time listening directly to the views of rough sleepers. I'm not really sure how to respond to your comments about selling my soul for thirty pieces of silver linked to funding. Our views on issues may or may not be in line with the views of central government and funders. Of course we try and work collaboratively with local authorities and others but we have our own views and are well known for sticking with them, even if they might be unpopular.
I'm a bit bemused by your comment about ethnicity and diversity statistics. A number of my colleagues doing this work are Polish themselves and we have staff who speak a range of relevant languates including Russian. We don't need to complete surveys in the way you suggest. The eastern and central europeans sleeping rough are individuals we see every night and know well so I don't really understand your point.
Bob obob. Thanks for your comments. You're absolutely right in saying it's not just about well educated people having to do manual jobs over here, though there are examples of this. I fear that many of the eastern and central Europeans who are struggling on the street were also having difficulties back home. I don't think the drink problems many of them have started here, though easy access to cheap, strong alcohol will have excerbated their problems.
Anonymous - I'm not sure what I can say in response to your vitriolic diatribe, but I will work on the basis that you are attempting to make some rational points.
Firstly, all our efforts at Thames Reach are aimed at helping rough sleepers get off of the streets and move on with their lives. We do not seek to castigate homeless people. In fact 103 of my colleagues working here at Thames Reach are former homeless people.
You seem to be encouraging the myth that most rough sleepers are from central and eastern Europe. The most recent figure shows that around 26% are from central and Eastern Europe.
Can I confirm that I am firmly of the view that giving people handouts in central London is extremly counter-productive and creates a disincentive for people to move from the streets. Once they have made this move they can improve their health and well-being and move ahead with their lives. If people want to provide food locally and under cover, ideally with other services linked in, that's fine with me.
I'm getting very lost by the time you refer to Louise Casey. it must be nine years now since she left her post at the Rough Sleepers Unit. How is she relevant now?
Can I also confirm that I have no intention of resigning over my views that soup-runs create dependency and as far as I know my board of trustees does not intend to sack me. -
Comment on: Rough sleeping advisors axed
Are you serious? The estimates given by local authorities are highly questionable. Arun has five times as many rough sleepers than Manchester? Chichester has more rough sleepers than most London boroughs? Local authorities frequently over-estimate the number of people who sleep rough, as do the public as they confuse, for example, people using soup runs or begging with rough sleepers. These groups overlap but are not the same. I look forward to seeing the results of the actual street count in Arun that should now follow this estimate.
Discussions (0)
Jeremy Swain has not added any discussions yet.
Posts (0)
Jeremy Swain has not added any posts yet.