Blog entry – 24 September 2008
The devil is in the detail…
The term “may you live in interesting times” relates to an ancient Chinese curse. But these certainly are interesting times in Canterbury. The possibility that a major provider of accommodation for single homeless people will face closure, if not at least, a drastic reduction in its operations has been head line news. I know from conversations I have had with various people that every thing will be done to protect the homes of vulnerable service users. However, the charity’s staff are facing an uncertain and unsettling period. For me there are two questions that immediately jump out. Firstly, how did this situation arise in the first place and, secondly, what can be done to prevent this happening again.
The lack of suitable accommodation for vulnerable yet non priority homeless people drove this initiative, whereby homes where created through a partnership with the charity and private developers. As with most good ideas the devil is in the detail, the financial modelling that needed to go along with this scheme did not, or could not take into account the Local hosing allowance regulations, and consequently the Local Authority where forced to reduce housing benefit payments. It is arguable perhaps, that the government has created a policy paradox whereby the sector is almost totally reliant on the private rented sector to both move people on to and work with them to maintain support and thereby their tenancies, but can not adequately fund these activities. If the Supporting People “pot” is not sufficient which is clearly the case, organisations will turn to other means of providing shelter. The problem with this approach of course is that supported social and affordable housing has always needed some sort of helping hand in the form of subsides, either from central and or local government, along with robust revenue streams. Take one of these away and your left with an expensive and arguably unreasonable burden on other parts of the public purse.
This is why it is absolutely vital to work in close partnership with local authorities when addressing the need of vulnerable homeless people. Canterbury City Council as with other districts and boroughs in Kent are facing budget reductions and realignments, due to the credit crunch and current housing crisis. So why should homeless charities like Porchlight and others be immune, it is simply not realistic to think otherwise.
In terms of preventing a reoccurrence of this problem, the answer must be an agreement to stem the flow of people to east Kent and to Canterbury in particular. The services that the local authority supported in the first place have been close to bursting point for years. It surely cannot be a sensible solution to continue to develop services that are either unsustainable or problematic and are at the end of the day, a drain on the local community.
