Homelessness on the island-What are they DOING about it?

[Barlow]

10 minutes ago, Moghrey Mie said:

But the people who are homeless are not looking to buy. They want somewhere decent to live.

What would you propose the Isle of Man Government DO about it?

[Gladys]

2 minutes ago, Barlow said:

What would you propose the Isle of Man Government DO about it?

Provide more social housing, allow housing associations, properly licence and inspect HMOs.

 

[John Wright]

1 hour ago, Barlow said:

What would you propose the Isle of Man Government DO about it?

 

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

Provide more social housing, allow housing associations, properly licence and inspect HMOs.

 

Many, if not most, of the current homeless are single young men who lead disorganised chaotic lives. The sofa surf. They’re hidden until something goes wrong.

There isn’t  enough supervised half way housing provision. 

I know of a young person, in care from age 3, at 18 placed in a bedsit with outreach  from a government contracted outsourced agency. Easily led, exploited, bullied. Their place used by others under the guise of friendship. Outreach care removed. Now homeless, facing criminal prosecutions.

They need a structured supervised living arrangement, room in a group home,  with residential social workers 24/7. 

There are a lot of 18-30 year olds in that trap. But we have virtually no such resources. It’s a funding issue.

[Dirty Buggane]

Will have to disagree with you there, if you supply free living all found for one set of people where would be the cut off point. Used to be young and feckless once, but still had to go and work to earn money to keep roof over my head and feed myself and later family. Father always said go and get pissed if you want but when it means you can no longer go to work and earn it's time to cut it down. If you are giving free lodging's and cash where is the incentive to go to work. And whilst they may be a few vulnerable people around there is a dam sight more scroungers. I may get burned on this but stand bye my beliefs.

[Moghrey Mie]

2 hours ago, Barlow said:

What would you propose the Isle of Man Government DO about it?

Pass legislation which recognises the government's responsibility to house homeless people.

And develop a housing policy for the island.

'Housing policy refers to the activities and legislation which a government, central or local authority implements or intends to implement in relation to the construction of homes and connected social issues such as renting, taxation, homelessness and so on.'

[John Wright]

2 hours ago, Dirty Buggane said:

Will have to disagree with you there, if you supply free living all found for one set of people where would be the cut off point. Used to be young and feckless once, but still had to go and work to earn money to keep roof over my head and feed myself and later family. Father always said go and get pissed if you want but when it means you can no longer go to work and earn it's time to cut it down. If you are giving free lodging's and cash where is the incentive to go to work. And whilst they may be a few vulnerable people around there is a dam sight more scroungers. I may get burned on this but stand bye my beliefs.

You really have no idea.

[Moghrey Mie]

2 hours ago, Dirty Buggane said:

Will have to disagree with you there, if you supply free living all found for one set of people where would be the cut off point. Used to be young and feckless once, but still had to go and work to earn money to keep roof over my head and feed myself and later family. Father always said go and get pissed if you want but when it means you can no longer go to work and earn it's time to cut it down. If you are giving free lodging's and cash where is the incentive to go to work. And whilst they may be a few vulnerable people around there is a dam sight more scroungers. I may get burned on this but stand bye my beliefs.

This is a problem that could be sorted. Out of a population of 80,000 how many need help? Surely we are talking hundreds rather than thousands.

[The Voice of Reason]

2 hours ago, Dirty Buggane said:

Will have to disagree with you there, if you supply free living all found for one set of people where would be the cut off point. Used to be young and feckless once, but still had to go and work to earn money to keep roof over my head and feed myself and later family. Father always said go and get pissed if you want but when it means you can no longer go to work and earn it's time to cut it down. If you are giving free lodging's and cash where is the incentive to go to work. And whilst they may be a few vulnerable people around there is a dam sight more scroungers. I may get burned on this but stand bye my beliefs.

Despite what John says there are such feckless people. I do know of single parents ( mothers) who are happy not to work, watch daytime TV all day and rely on benefits, who say that pursuing the father(s) for any financial contribution would leave them worse off.

I wish this was not the case. But it is. I could put my naturally left leaning hat on and say that this doesn’t happen and such people are being demonised. But it does and people take the piss.

However until the state finds a way to weed out the deserving from the undeserving I would rather keep the status quo even if it means some people do abuse the system but those that need it get the help they need.

[Roxanne]

1 minute ago, The Voice of Reason said:

such people are being demonised.

You mean, like you've just done?

[The Voice of Reason]

Just now, Roxanne said:

You mean, like you've just done?

Except I haven’t. I’ve merely pointed out that there are some who abuse the system.

And that’s not right.

[thommo2010]

3 hours ago, John Wright said:

 

Many, if not most, of the current homeless are single young men who lead disorganised chaotic lives. The sofa surf. They’re hidden until something goes wrong.

There isn’t  enough supervised half way housing provision. 

I know of a young person, in care from age 3, at 18 placed in a bedsit with outreach  from a government contracted outsourced agency. Easily led, exploited, bullied. Their place used by others under the guise of friendship. Outreach care removed. Now homeless, facing criminal prosecutions.

They need a structured supervised living arrangement, room in a group home,  with residential social workers 24/7. 

There are a lot of 18-30 year olds in that trap. But we have virtually no such resources. It’s a funding issue.

So at what point does the person need to take some responsibility and help themselves? 

[John Wright]

19 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

However until the state finds a way to weed out the deserving from the undeserving I would rather keep the status quo even if it means some people do abuse the system but those that need it get the help they need.

And except that those with real need of high level support often aren’t provided with support until, or unless, they’ve fallen through the cracks and their mental health deteriorated to the extent that they are sectioned. At discharge wholly different options, including funding, become available.

[John Wright]

30 minutes ago, Moghrey Mie said:

This is a problem that could be sorted. Out of a population of 80,000 how many need help? Surely we are talking hundreds rather than thousands.

Let’s say it’s 100. And we have appropriate accommodation for 20.

[John Wright]

23 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Despite what John says there are such feckless people. I do know of single parents ( mothers) who are happy not to work, watch daytime TV all day and rely on benefits, who say that pursuing the father(s) for any financial contribution would leave them worse off.

I wish this was not the case. But it is. I could put my naturally left leaning hat on and say that this doesn’t happen and such people are being demonised. But it does and people take the piss.

However until the state finds a way to weed out the deserving from the undeserving I would rather keep the status quo even if it means some people do abuse the system but those that need it get the help they need.

I never mentioned or discussed “feckless” people. It’s not a term I would ever use. It was Dirty Buggane.

I don’t think it’s appropriate to make these type of generalisations.

As for your first paragraph. The single mothers that you demonise in a Thatcherite style. There is no truth in your suggestion that they’d be worse off if they pursued the father.

Paragraph 2. You live in fantasy land when  you claim to have a left leaning hat.  Of course a few people take advantage of the system. But the numbers and amounts are de minimis when compared to tax evaders, yet the staff and resources are concentrated on the benefits overpaid rather than the tax under collected.

3. I’ve dealt with people you try to divide into deserving and undeserving all my working life. In court and as chair of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal ( for 25 years ). I’ve yet to work out if the two categories exist, and, if they do how to work out who would fall into each category. I’ve long ago decided to deal with each case on it’s very individual facts.

I referred to one specific case. I made no generalisations. I certainly made no assumptions.

[Dirty Buggane]

And I never referred to anybody but myself being feckless, I would  of thought with your dealing with all kinds of the general public you would a least get your fact's right, No need to apologise.