Panorama Britains Homeles

I hope your hard hat is to hand Paula.

I know j I am waiting!! but I am not trying to be horrid just asking thats all..

I would love to hear how others see it, it might help me to make sense of it.

Well I agree with you Paula.

I agree with you to some extent, but I think families should be housed decently, just for the sake of the children. I guess, once the children are here, it's pointless saying the parents should not have had them. Society as a whole, has to be responsible for its children. In the future we all will use the services those children will go on to provide.

My doctor, the woman on the supermarket checkout, the young chap who delivered my parcel today. They were all someone's child, and now I need to have them around.

Well, in theory, yes jingl - if the children manage to make decent lives for themselves...

Well, they are more likely to do that if society sees to it that they get a decent start in life.

Paula - might it be that the BBC select hardship cases to suit their agenda? I am very sorry for those who find themselves in real distress but these days one never knows. However, I still like to think that a helping hand will be offered to those in genuine need, but I don't know enough these cases to be able to judge.

Yes I agree*j*that once children are here there is a responsibilty towards them of course..but I question the actions of their irresponsible parents that do put themselves in this situation.

I have had bad times and knew that it was totaly my fault, no one elses and did all I could to get out of it, is it too comfortable to be on Benefits now a days, is it a chosen way of life?? I think so.

I do of course appreciate and understand that there are genuine people in need of benefits, the sick for example.

I was interested in the man living in his caravan with wife and children. For some reason they had 'lost' their 5 bedroomed house and had been offered two different places to live but as far as I could understand they didn't like the drug dealers in the area of the housing. It seems to me that having been offered somewhere they should have taken up the offer. I'm sure I would prefer to live somewhere rather than nowhere. I say this having been homeless on one occasion when the local authority offered me a high rise. My circumstances changed (I found a job) and therefore could afford to rent a flat. I was however very grateful for the offer.

I know everyone's circumstances can change! We were flooded out a couple of years ago and spent 7 months in rented accommodation. The house stank; it was filthy; the fridge and heating didn't work and the landlady resisted making any repairs. The area wasn't particularly nice but it was better than nothing but was I glad to get home!

I feel that as the QC said, there should be a minimum standard for rented accommodation especially as council tax payers foot the bill for some of this accommodation. I can't imagine how a family would get on having to move every 6 months because of short term contracts. No wonder there are so many other problems in our society when it is so difficult to find affordable housing (even in the NE of England) and of course the bedroom tax doesn't help.

For many people, to have a child isn't "a conscious decision that you make", that's the weakness in your argument Paula.
I'm quite old and my first 2 weren't by choice. Though I'm so glad I have them now.

There will always be those who are 'genuine' cases of need, and these we have found from past experience are the ones who are slow to come forward, and do not 'know the ropes'. Equally, there will always be those who will never learn, and will expect other people to take responsibility for their lives, and know the rules and their 'entitlements'. Some of course are just inadequate, that is not meant as a slight to those people, but it is never the less a fact, and will need all the help which is available. It is the sorting the wheat from the chaff that is the problem, and the media will only ever give us their side of the story.

I dont agreeTricia you say your children were not planned, you are not going to like me for saying this but, you know what causes babbies right? of course you do, then you know that pregnancy is Always a possibilty.

When I went through my bad times I only had one child at the time, I really wanted another but knew I could not afford to have another and if I had things would have been really bad and put pressure on ALL of us, my sister in law had recently fallen pregnant even though she was taking the contraceptive Pill, I could not afford for that to happen to me so for six months till I got myslef back on my feet, baby making activites were banned for us, yes its true, I took my responsibilty of being a parent that serios its true and I am not scared to say so.

This was how I chose to do things, everyone has a choice

There are some horrible situations that can occur in life but I can't think of anything much worse than not having a decent roof over your head or being in the hands of a merciless landlord.

These things don't just happen to single mums or couples on benefits who haven't planned their families responsibly. There should be a way to stop landlords ditching the agency once a tenant is in their property. This happens a lot and means the tenant has no protection, the property falls into disrepair even if they always pay their rent on time and the landlord can throw them out whenever he/she wants to.

The children don't have a choice Paula. What would you want to happen to them?

No point in playing the blame game.

I agree that many people become homeless through no fault of their own and it must be horrendous.We had to leave our home once for two months and live in rented accommodation and I hated it. On a slightly different note, I've just been watching Benefits Britain. (I really shouldn't because it sends my blood pressure up). There was a man on there who has 26 children from 15 different women. He has 14 of them and himself and his latest partner living in a 3 bedroomed house. He was complaining that the council ought to give him a bigger property. The house is a tip. Some of the children are old enough to work, but don't. They have a large plasma TV in the house. He hired a hall and bouncy castle etc for his daughter's birthday and he was taking pictures with some sort of tablet (which are not cheap). I don't begrudge the child a party but how much must that have cost? They also had tw large dogs. Why? There were several other families with 8 or 11 children complaining that there council houses weren't big enough. The cry from all of them was 'why shouldn't we have as many children as we want'?' In one case the council were knocking through to the house next door to give them a 7 bedroomed house (and they were complaining about the noise!). they then planned to have a games room and the council were providing a wet room as one of the kids has learning difficulties and 2 further bathrooms. Somebody stop me from watching these programmes.

two large dogs

I agree with you KatyK I no longer watch those type of programmes as they can make my blood boil!

Like you KatyK I'm fascinated by 'how the other half lives' and can't stop watching these programmes.

Another thing is when I joined GN my socialist credentials were beyond reproach but now I've had exposure to the 'looney left' (while trying to keep in mind there are more moderate left-wingers on these forums) I'm finding myself starting to develop more right-wing tendencies.

I fight against this by digging my allotment and growing cabbages.

So between these programmes and GN I'm finding myself leaning more to the right. Of course it could simply be one too many G&Ts

Truly 'there s nothing so conservative as an ageing socialist' as the graffiti said.

Yes, GN can have that effect, Aka!

Aka

Loved that post Aka I supposed I get mad because I have never asked anyone for anything, like most of us on here I'm sure. When I retired 5 years ago I had worked for 44 years with just a 2 year break when I had my DD. My DH was made redundant 3 times over the years and was told that because I was working he was only due the minimum jobseeker's allowance, about £43 a week I think it was then. Even small niggly things get my goat. We needed a new dustbin (before I retired). I was told that if I was on benefits I could have one free but as I wasn't I would have to pay £13. Also when we had a wasp's nest they would have removed it for nothing if we had been on benefits but we had to pay £25 as we were working. I am now going for a lie down. Sorry I have hijacked this thread

article by Malcolm Gladwell arguing that the costs to society of doing nothing about homelessness are greater than providing people with somewhere decent to live.

Although he is writing about America, I think the same principles apply here, quite apart from the compassion aspect of looking after vuolnerable people in our society.