It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Homeless people to be fined up to £1,000 for sleeping rough.

page: 2
30
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 05:51 AM
link   
a reply to: artistpoet

Looks like city council is behind it, even though a similar law was removed after receiving 72k complaints about it.




posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 05:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Flavian

originally posted by: stargatetravels
Is this more of your Conservative Government Policy?


No, as stated in the article (and others online) this is Hackney Borough Council. This has nothing to do with National government or political parties.


Since it's a Labour council, I'd say it does have something to do with political parties, well, one in particular.


Local authority councils never tow the Party line - they are like independent little fiefdoms for the power hungry councillors concerned. Believe me, if i could realistically pin something this disgusting on Labour i would happily do it (can't stand the current incarnation of that Party) but even as a current Labour hater i would have to say it would be pushing it to blame them. Unfortunately!



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 05:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Flavian
oh, I dunno, only the other day, Tony Blair was in the news for demanding a quarter of a million quid to speak at a fund raising event for child poverty.

Labour is full of millionaires totally divorced from the reality of working for a living.

I think Hackney is probably a pretty good reflection of the party leadership.



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 05:58 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

You're right, he was. But, to be fair, even that was spun by the media. He actually asked for the money to be paid to his wife's charity rather than to him or his family. It's easy to gloss over that aspect though as its Tony Blair and we all love to attack the money grabbing little treacherous tosspot (which he undoubtedly is).



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 06:00 AM
link   
Conservative Council or Labour Council, it's irrelevant as they are all idiotic and out of touch with reality, and not a single sound or helpful policy between them.

As has already been stated, this will result in the homeless simply moving on to another borough, which will probably then enact something similar, rather than try to tackle the homelessness and reasons for it and actually try to help people.

The homeless don't pay taxes and probably don't even vote, so obviously are not worth consideration.



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 06:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Flavian

And how much of that money goes to the people of the end of that charity line? There's another thread about the Red Cross eating up all the money donated in "admin."

I'd be amazed if more than 20% made it out of the charity's books.



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 06:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Thanks for pointing that out ... this would be a proposed bye law that would need central government approval to be passed.



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 06:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK
a reply to: Flavian

And how much of that money goes to the people of the end of that charity line? There's another thread about the Red Cross eating up all the money donated in "admin."

I'd be amazed if more than 20% made it out of the charity's books.



Ex PM's and Presidents having these charities is nothing more than influence peddling, money laundering and personal wealth creation. In that respect, the Blairs are just like the Clintons, money grubbing parasites and the world would be better off without them.



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Britguy

"Conservative Council or Labour Council, it's irrelevant"

I tend to agree with that statement. The fact that it will be happening is the relevant issue. All this type of scheme will achieve is the criminalization of vulnerable members of our society. The homeless will simply move to other areas most lightly forcing similar draconian laws to be implemented in other city's and towns throughout the United kingdom.

edit on 4-6-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 06:44 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

THIS IS A BLOODY OUTRAGE!

I have had to resort to sleeping in non-standard circumstances before, and I had to do that because I was without appropriate funds to secure alternative accomodation. If I had been fined an amount of money that I had no way of paying, just because I had found myself in an unfortunate situational by product of the way society operates, I think I would probably have lost my tenuous grasp on reason, and started bludgeoning officials right, left and center.

What an abominable thing to even CONSIDER, let alone actually enact! These officials who came up with this utter garbage should be fired and replaced with people who understand the sociological factors driving homelessness, enough to stop blaming the people who suffer most as a result of their circumstances.



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 06:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: TheMadTitan

"If this were true how will they track them?"

Quite a few Police forces have portable fingerprint scanners linked to our national database. All they would need to do is scan the poor souls to discover there identity and the fact they have an outstanding warrant for non payment of fines. A fixed abode is no longer a requirement.



www.bbc.co.uk...


I stand corrected. Thank you. Good god this is maddening. Fined for feeding the homeless, fined for being homeless. You couldn't make it up.



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 07:00 AM
link   
Is this designed to stop homeless people from sleeping on the streets or designed to stop people from sleeping in the street. I know with Oxford it was designed to detract drunk students from sleeping in the street.

I hear everyone saying this is vile but what else can the local council do ( not adopt or spend millions on a support network for homeless). For anyone wanting to stimulate the local economy through high street retail buying would be detracted from these homeless people. The smell, begging ( which is illegal) and general nuisance for local businesses is sufficient to address it with fines.

If you had a business, struggling for customers in a run down area, you would welcome this initiative.

Yes it's counterproductive, morally sick. and the costs will far outweigh the fines received, or not received in this case, but if you don't detract them from doing so, they will keep coming to your location. Most of you would not be saying the same if he used your doorway as shelter. Open minds .welcome



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 07:09 AM
link   
I had to do a double take...I thought someone had put a £ sign instead of a $ sign.
This is like those stories you see in the US - people fined for feeding the homeless or handing out blankets or something.

They're honestly going to fine people who are destitute???

Insanity.


Welcome to Modern Britain.



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: rossacus

What else can they do you ask?

Open a hostel,send teams of people to tell the homeless there is a hostel where they can get a meal,shower and a bed.
Provide counciling for those with problems.

The cost of this would benefit the homeless,and would reduce crimes associated with homelessness in the area.

Its win win IMO,and would save money in the long term-never mind the fact its the right thing to do.

No one should be homeless in the UK in 2015.



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Thats pretty retarded.........................

If they had £1000 they wouldn't be sleeping rough...........



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 07:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Silcone Synapse


No one should be homeless in the UK in 2015.




Absolutely right.
It would be interesting to see the figures for how much homelessness has increased since the financial crash here.
Or even just in the last 5 years



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 07:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK
Isn't Hackney a Labour run council?

Yes link to council representatives


More proof if it was needed that Labour are only in it for themselves, not the people anymore.


Thats what I thought too.

Just goes to show Labour are no better and dont give a # about the poor too.



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 07:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK
a reply to: Flavian
oh, I dunno, only the other day, Tony Blair was in the news for demanding a quarter of a million quid to speak at a fund raising event for child poverty.

Labour is full of millionaires totally divorced from the reality of working for a living.

I think Hackney is probably a pretty good reflection of the party leadership.



Here the thing:

Conservative: a bunch of elite rich gits who make it clear they dont give a rats arse about the poor while making money of there backs.


Labour :a bunch of elite rich gits who PRETEND to give a rats arse about the poor but still don't care and make mony off there backs.
edit on 4-6-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 07:22 AM
link   
a reply to: rossacus

I am part of a family business in an end of the line town. We have costs that are going up, and customer numbers which need to be boosted in order to function the business in an effective and productive manner.

However, one must never put ones ability to do business, or do much of anything else for that matter, before ones responsibility to behave with compassion toward ones fellow human beings. The simple fact of the matter is that our society is constructed in a manner which renders a certain portion of the population less likely to make enough to live on in a manner concurrent with the rest of society. Destitution is an unfortunate by product of the ability of everyone else in the system to make some kind of life for themselves. Those who wind up broken and homeless by some means, are just as much a part of society as you or I, despite their circumstances. The poor and needy are necessary according to the mathematics involved with sociological constructs like capitalism.

Since homelessness is unavoidable without major investment, the only legitimate and morally acceptable options are, to spend the money despite the protestations of the heartless among us, and bring these people some succour, or leave them to their own devices despite the problems it can cause for businesses. Harassing them with fines is repugnant, and NOT NECESSARY! Treating people who are at the thin end of the wedge, a station in society without which those at the top simply could not be as "successful" as they are at absorbing vast wealth, in such poor spirited a fashion is a total bloody abomination.

There is no compromise to make here, no trade off. The people living hard lives in this country, occupy their position in the strata of society here, at great cost to themselves, and to the BENEFIT of the most staggeringly wealthy in our country, and numerous economic studies (go and have a look for yourself) support this veiw. It is utterly impossible to see treating them like criminals as a legitimate stand point. Success without compassion is failure and nothing more.
edit on 4-6-2015 by TrueBrit because: Grammatical improvements



posted on Jun, 4 2015 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

What I can't understand is why the council wishes to create a new bye-law when it has been illegal to sleep rough or beg since the Vagrancy Act 1824 anyway.
People are still convicted under this old legislation so I don't see why the council wish to create new byelaws.

Wiki link


In May 1990, the National Association of Probation Officers carried out a survey of the prosecutions under the 1824 Act. That survey revealed that 1,250 prosecutions had been dealt with in 14 central London magistrates courts in that year, which represented an enormous leap in the number of prosecutions under the 1824 Act, especially in London.
The only thing I can think of is that perhaps the police are not keen on enforcing the old law these days, but if the council introduce a civil penalty, then they can send their nazi style 'civil enforcement officers' to tackle the rough sleeper and a quick call from them will force the police to attend.

That, and by charging the £100 fixed penalty, they will be able to get an attachment of benefit order with the DWP for say £5 per week off their benefits. Remember folks, being homeless does not stop you getting benefits, that is a myth.

Yep, I think it is a cold-hearted way to force the police to move the homeless, and an easy way to raise money as the homeless person will not be able to stop the 'penalty' charge being deducted from their fortnightly benefits.
That council sounds like a bunch of #s to me.
edit on 4.6.2015 by grainofsand because: typo




top topics



 
30
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join