Controversy over metal studs in ground to deter rough sleepers A council is facing calls to investigate the placing of metal studs on the ground in front of a block of flats to deter rough sleepers. Controversy over the metal studs, installed outside a block of luxury apartments and opposite a homelessness hostel in Southwark, south London, has grown since a picture was posted online last week by Andrew Horton on his way to work. Homelessness charity Crisis condemned them and said such methods would ‘never tackle rough sleeping’. Reports suggest a number of formal complaints have been launched to Southwark Council, on top of an online petition to remove the studs. However a statement by the council suggested it might be powerless to act unless the spikes contravened health and safety or planning rules. Peter John, council leader, said: ‘Southwark Council is aware of concerns raised regarding the installation of spikes outside a privately owned building on Southwark Bridge Road to prevent rough sleeping. ‘The council can look into health and safety or planning concerns that are reported to us. With regards to people sleeping rough, the council has a dedicated officer who works closely with organisations like [homelessness charity] St Mungo’s, who have a “no second night out” policy to ensure rough sleepers are found shelter and support.’ Katharine Sacks-Jones, head of policy and campaigns at Crisis, said: ‘It is a scandal that anyone should sleep on the streets in 21st century Britain. Yet over the last three years rough sleeping has risen steeply across the country and by a massive 75 per cent in London. ‘Behind these numbers are real people struggling with a lack of housing, cuts to benefits and cuts to homelessness services to help them rebuild their lives. ‘They might have suffered a relationship breakdown, a bereavement or domestic abuse. They deserve better than to be moved on to the next doorway along the street. We will never tackle rough sleeping with studs in the pavement. Instead we must deal with the causes.’ Readers comments (17) Narra | 09/06/2014 9:07 am This was probably only after the plans for chained attack hounds at the front of the property were turned down due to animal rights. The poor dogs may have choked on the bones of one of the homeless people. The issue of homelessness aside, how the developer thought that this would go down is beyond me. Maybe it was a selling point on the flats Look, no homeless people can sleep on your doorstep unless they always want to receive acupuncture therapy! Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment J H | 09/06/2014 9:12 am Is the steep rise in rough sleeping as much to do with the failure of programmes such as No Second Night Out? NSNO is portrayed as a success yet how successful can a programme be if rough sleeping numbers have had a steep rise? The general public showing outrage over these spikes - and new pictures are appearing over the weekend not limiting these to Southwark or even to London - is telling the rough sleeper champions who run NSNO services that this is not acceptable and more needs to be done. Or as i cynically put it , its not even Christmas yet Joe Public are feeling sorry for rough sleepers and the homeless! Yet why do I get the feeling this story will die away and pretty soon we will be back to NSNO providers lauding their services and seeking to ban soup runs and of course its all down to Johnny Foreigner? Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment Ambivalence | 09/06/2014 9:25 am I think they probably anticipate that, with the current cuts in supported housing services and accommodation, the cuts in services to people with challenging problems and the refusal of the government to address the issues of lack of social and affordable housing, there are inevitably going to be a lot more homeless and rough sleepers, so are probably preparing in advance. Some places are already going around removing any cardboard or items that can be used for rough sleepers to bed down. Maybe soon we will have fenced off estates where the rabble can be kept out ... or maybe fence the rabble in somewhere. Then they can all be kept in place with Boriss water cannon. Or just maybe someone will come up with the very simple answer Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment F451 F451 | 09/06/2014 9:27 am Im waiting for the first precious little darling to trip and puncture their pretty face on one of these devices specifically designed to inflict pain and harm on another human being. The baying hounds will really be out in force then, and of course our well stuffed Government Ministers will be arguing with each other over who is protecting the deserving better than the others. (Of course, the Other Side will claim precedent on Darling Protection, and hence the immoral high-ground!) Is there a sea-change beginning if the Media are caring to offer a story in defence of those they previously demonised as undeserving? Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment Jonathan Wilson | 09/06/2014 9:57 am There was another picture posted related to this one of a Tesco with the same spikes in a deep recess window. One thing it reminded me of was the ornate spikes (like mini spear heads) that were almost every where circa Victorian era (possibly earlier) which had the same effect. Good to see we are returning to such an inequitable time thanks to the ConDems. Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment Gresley | 09/06/2014 9:58 am NSNO was never intended to resolve street homelessness.It was designed to shunt homelessness people away from prosperous areas (so called reconnect) where they ruined the view. Returned, like misdirected post, to poorer places, be they in Britain or abroad. Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment goozer321 | 09/06/2014 10:12 am Sort of like the spikes to deter pigeons roosting. Classy. Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment Iron Fist Iron Fist | 09/06/2014 10:48 am It wont deter those rough sleepers trained as fakirs. Makes you despair that this sort of idea gets approved by the powers that be. Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment SocialHousingWorks | 09/06/2014 11:15 am Controversy over the metal studs... has grown since a picture was posted online last week The only controversy seems to be being whipped up by the Guardian (how much tax do they avoid?), Unite (the union, with a leader earning a 6 figure salary), Laurie Penny (champagne socialist), and Inside Housing. The far-left in action! Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment bizarreloverectangle | 09/06/2014 11:44 am This story was originally reported by that left-wing, rabble-rousing rag, the Daily Telegraph, actually. Dont let the facts get in the way, though, eh? Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment Iron Fist Iron Fist | 09/06/2014 12:15 pm In the off-beam musings SocialHousingWorks you forgot to state whether youre in favour of the metal studs or not. I can take a guess. Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment SocialHousingWorks | 09/06/2014 12:23 pm bizarreloverectangle | 09/06/2014 11:44 am This story was originally reported by that left-wing, rabble-rousing rag, the Daily Telegraph, actually. Dont let the facts get in the way, though, eh? ------------------------------------------------------- You are a little bit confused. The Telegraph simply reported the story - the installation of the studs has provoked criticism from some after a picture was uploaded to Twitter - their article was simply presenting the facts. Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment SocialHousingWorks | 09/06/2014 12:28 pm Iron Fist | 09/06/2014 12:15 pm In the off-beam musings SocialHousingWorks you forgot to state whether youre in favour of the metal studs or not. I can take a guess. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- On the basis that it is private property, and they dont appear to be causing a danger to anyone, I have no objection to them. Im pretty sure that 99% of people would object to a person sleeping in the doorway to their home - I know I would find it uncomfortable, particularly as I have small children. Why should I (or anyone else) object to other people trying to prevent someone from sleeping outside their front door? Last time I checked, we live in a democracy. The problem with these far-left fascist types is that they forget that fact. Anyone who doesnt conform to their idea of how people should think/act must immediately be corrected and if that fails, they are branded as racist or phobic or callous or something else that deflects from a grown up discussion about how to solve problems with ideas besides taxing workers and throwing money at the problem. Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment SocialHousingWorks | 09/06/2014 12:38 pm How many people have recently spoken to a homeless person, by the way? Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment bizarreloverectangle | 09/06/2014 1:14 pm Boris Johnson, as an opponent of the spikes are you a: champagne socialist, far-left fascist, or just easily confused (like me, apparently)? Answers to SocialHousingWorks, please, not me. Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment Peter Marcus | 09/06/2014 1:23 pm Am I really the only person to think that its absurd to defend the rights of people to sleep in the gutter. These studs alone dont offer a solution, of course - no-one says they do. But the knee-jerkers who have risen up in a state of indignation (and who in all likelihood neither sleep in doorways, nor live in tower blocks) should maybe think about how, constructively, to redirect rough-sleepers towards hostels and shelters. Anyone campaigning to keep people sleeping rough in tower block doorways has lost touch with reality and humanity. Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment Mr Webb | 09/06/2014 1:24 pm If socialhousingworks why are there so many homeless? Are yes, because social housing works but has been reduced in scale and increased in cost so that social housing is no longer an exercisable choice. Social housing is a potential reducer of the causes of homelessness. Socialhousingworks seems to be cheerleading its demise. Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment insidehousing.co.uk/care/controversy-over-metal-studs-in-ground-to-deter-rough-sleepers/7004074.article?PageNo=1&SortOrder=dateadded&PageSize=20#comments
Posted on: Mon, 09 Jun 2014 12:52:39 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015