Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news" What’s going on? Half a story, with half the facts, for the purposes of stirring … as usual | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news What’s going on? Half a story, with half the facts, for the purposes of stirring … as usual "  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
LvM | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I'm just amazed that Tom still hasn't found the Politics forum room
LvM"Would be a lot more appropriate. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news What’s going on? Half a story, with half the facts, for the purposes of stirring … as usual " Give the meaningful details, rather than a slur, if it's important to you. Please keep the forum positive for everyone. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news" I expect for a few this is a bonifide option but for the majority certainly in the winter months not the ideal  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Is the story based on something written in the Daily Mail, the Express or the Telegraph? If it is, I generally ignore it for the racist, fascist, bear bating shite it undoubtedly is, and find a proper source of information. " . Well done, you Social Credit score has had 100 points added. Maintain the Echo Chamber comrade for more bonus points. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news" Just standard government demonising and shaming the least well off in society. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Is the story based on something written in the Daily Mail, the Express or the Telegraph? If it is, I generally ignore it for the racist, fascist, bear bating shite it undoubtedly is, and find a proper source of information. . Well done, you Social Credit score has had 100 points added. Maintain the Echo Chamber comrade for more bonus points." Credit gratefully received. Viva de revolution  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"To be fair on this one I’ve read the article and there are no redeeming qualities to the rest of it. It’s a hideous idea. Her ideology makes me sick." She is a foul specimen of a human being. Toxic, divisive, and just plain nasty. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"To be fair on this one I’ve read the article and there are no redeeming qualities to the rest of it. It’s a hideous idea. Her ideology makes me sick." Getting people off the streets is a hideous idea? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news Just standard government demonising and shaming the least well off in society. " She is actually saying she is trying to get them off the streets . I can’t see how that counts as demonising. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news Just standard government demonising and shaming the least well off in society. She is actually saying she is trying to get them off the streets . I can’t see how that counts as demonising. " How does she propose to do that? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"To be fair on this one I’ve read the article and there are no redeeming qualities to the rest of it. It’s a hideous idea. Her ideology makes me sick. Getting people off the streets is a hideous idea? " Banning tents in urban areas and fining charities for providing tents is hideous. She’s blaming immigrants that they have failed to protect for an increase in people living in the streets so now she wants to brush them out of sight instead of dealing with the issue they created. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news Just standard government demonising and shaming the least well off in society. She is actually saying she is trying to get them off the streets . I can’t see how that counts as demonising. " A quote from Braverman. "The British people are compassionate. We will always support those who are genuinely homeless. But we cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice." The people are very compassionate in general. The councils would love to be on a position to offer more support - they just don't have the funds, the facilities, the staff or the means to do so. The fact that many are 'from abroad' is more a reflection on the shit show of an immigration policy and process that isn't fit for purpose, than any genuine desire by people from abroad to live in a tent on the streets in the UK. Charities should be supported and encouraged, not demonised and fined for offering support and assistance. In fact they shouldn't be needed at all. There is no end of empty property in the UK that could be turned into affordable housing if councils were allowed to take it over. It would be self funding, not for profit and supply much needed rooves per people's heads. But ever since right to buy came in and the money wasn't reinvested in new housing stock there's been a shortage. The ever rising rents in the private sector have prevented people from finding accomodate outside of social/ councils housing where the average wait for a 1 bed flat is 1-2 years. The small print in the law means that even though councils have an obligation to 'help' homeless people find suitable accommodation within 56 days, they don't have to provide it. That 'help' in the main is informing them that they need to look in the private sector. Which is kind of hard when you have no address, often no job and no income bar benefits...... This isn't a homeless or charity issue. It's a government policy issue. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news Just standard government demonising and shaming the least well off in society. She is actually saying she is trying to get them off the streets . I can’t see how that counts as demonising. " Is she your mum..? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So what did she actually say …. She is trying to clamp down on people living on the streets in tents, so that it doesn’t end up like San Francisco. She has said there are other indoor options available, but some people don’t want to use those options, hence the comment that they are living in the tents by choice. " Quite, I was quite shocked at what I saw in both San Francisco and New York. San Francisco particularly just stank of urine, endless rows of homeless people and drug addicts. Just shows though what the caring Left can deliver when they are put in charge of big cities. See also London, Birmingham etc. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So what did she actually say …. She is trying to clamp down on people living on the streets in tents, so that it doesn’t end up like San Francisco. She has said there are other indoor options available, but some people don’t want to use those options, hence the comment that they are living in the tents by choice. Quite, I was quite shocked at what I saw in both San Francisco and New York. San Francisco particularly just stank of urine, endless rows of homeless people and drug addicts. Just shows though what the caring Left can deliver when they are put in charge of big cities. See also London, Birmingham etc." *Checks notes* we've had 13 years of Tory rule. Still, let's blame someone else. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So what did she actually say …. She is trying to clamp down on people living on the streets in tents, so that it doesn’t end up like San Francisco. She has said there are other indoor options available, but some people don’t want to use those options, hence the comment that they are living in the tents by choice. Quite, I was quite shocked at what I saw in both San Francisco and New York. San Francisco particularly just stank of urine, endless rows of homeless people and drug addicts. Just shows though what the caring Left can deliver when they are put in charge of big cities. See also London, Birmingham etc." irrc most US cities have lower rates of homeless than UK cities. Tho that may be a definition thing as we may include couch surfers. There may also be a difference in visibility. I guess the question here is if we want to reduce homeless. Or just reminders of it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news" Sounds like she does not remember the high ranking RAF officer who lived on the streets of Westminster, many MPs offered to help him. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Does she have a problem with homelessness itself or the optics of tents on the street?" I think part of her reasoning is of you can't see it, it doesn't exist A bit like when children cover their eyes they think you can't see them | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Does she have a problem with homelessness itself or the optics of tents on the street?" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news Just standard government demonising and shaming the least well off in society. She is actually saying she is trying to get them off the streets . I can’t see how that counts as demonising. How does she propose to do that?" She says there are empty beds in existing facilities | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news Just standard government demonising and shaming the least well off in society. She is actually saying she is trying to get them off the streets . I can’t see how that counts as demonising. Is she your mum..?" No. Are we in a school yard? Grow up | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters." Agreed. It's soundbites for certain folks to rile them up, get them frothing over their cornflakes, vent their rage at "those other people", and vote for more draconian measures. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Does she have a problem with homelessness itself or the optics of tents on the street?" Both. Have you been to San Francisco lately? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news Just standard government demonising and shaming the least well off in society. She is actually saying she is trying to get them off the streets . I can’t see how that counts as demonising. How does she propose to do that? She says there are empty beds in existing facilities " And that just goes to show the utter bullshit she's spouting. There aren't. She really has no clue. There aren't even adequate facilities, let alone empty beds in them. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Surely if they have a tent then they are not homeless " Tom,no  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Surely if they have a tent then they are not homeless Tom,no "A tent is a home surely ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Surely if they have a tent then they are not homeless Tom,no
A tent is a home surely ?"Live in one for a month in the winter come back and let me know if you think it's a home. Admittedly it's preferable to a cardboard box but it's not a home. We have a tent that cost us 2 grand but two weeks is the absolute most we'd be willing to stay in it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news Just standard government demonising and shaming the least well off in society. She is actually saying she is trying to get them off the streets . I can’t see how that counts as demonising. How does she propose to do that? She says there are empty beds in existing facilities " What facilities? Where? If there were facilities then they would of already been allocated no? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Suella Braverman and talk of fining charities thhat give camping equipment to the homeless. What's going on here guys? It's all over the news Just standard government demonising and shaming the least well off in society. She is actually saying she is trying to get them off the streets . I can’t see how that counts as demonising. How does she propose to do that? She says there are empty beds in existing facilities And that just goes to show the utter bullshit she's spouting. There aren't. She really has no clue. There aren't even adequate facilities, let alone empty beds in them. " Exactly, the woman is talking bull. And even if there were these places would need funding and where is she going to pull that from? Rishi and his gazillion billions?? I thought not | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We either have accommodation to house people or we don’t, either way we should not be allowing people to build tent communities, running water, sanitation and heat are a basic human right. If we can’t provide the basics, what is the answer?" What is the answer ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters. Agreed. It's soundbites for certain folks to rile them up, get them frothing over their cornflakes, vent their rage at "those other people", and vote for more draconian measures."
And not to mention, those of the tiny elite amongst them, who will vote for their next party leader  
It's tragic that human lives count for nothing to her.. Unless it's her own. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We either have accommodation to house people or we don’t, either way we should not be allowing people to build tent communities, running water, sanitation and heat are a basic human right. If we can’t provide the basics, what is the answer? What is the answer ?" We have alot of people here living in caravans. They are smart they bank thier money and live off a system. Sleep in a van or rv. Go to 24 hour gyms pay 25 dollars a month to use thier facilities. Shit and shower anytime during the day. Even if you travel. It's brilliant in a way. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We either have accommodation to house people or we don’t, either way we should not be allowing people to build tent communities, running water, sanitation and heat are a basic human right. If we can’t provide the basics, what is the answer? What is the answer ?" Keep focusing the electorate's ire on foreigners, homeless people, and especially homeless foreign people. And vote Tory. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters. Agreed. It's soundbites for certain folks to rile them up, get them frothing over their cornflakes, vent their rage at "those other people", and vote for more draconian measures.
And not to mention, those of the tiny elite amongst them, who will vote for their next party leader
It's tragic that human lives count for nothing to her.. Unless it's her own. "Exact opposite. She is clearly trying to save lives by getting people off the streets | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters. Agreed. It's soundbites for certain folks to rile them up, get them frothing over their cornflakes, vent their rage at "those other people", and vote for more draconian measures.
And not to mention, those of the tiny elite amongst them, who will vote for their next party leader
It's tragic that human lives count for nothing to her.. Unless it's her own.
Exact opposite. She is clearly trying to save lives by getting people off the streets "How do you reach this conclusion? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct?" It's fashionable to hate Tories. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct?" What bit don't you agree with ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We either have accommodation to house people or we don’t, either way we should not be allowing people to build tent communities, running water, sanitation and heat are a basic human right. If we can’t provide the basics, what is the answer? What is the answer ? We have alot of people here living in caravans. They are smart they bank thier money and live off a system. Sleep in a van or rv. Go to 24 hour gyms pay 25 dollars a month to use thier facilities. Shit and shower anytime during the day. Even if you travel. It's brilliant in a way. " No disrespect to you but that is America-you cannot & the authorities will not let you do that here…. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters. Agreed. It's soundbites for certain folks to rile them up, get them frothing over their cornflakes, vent their rage at "those other people", and vote for more draconian measures.
And not to mention, those of the tiny elite amongst them, who will vote for their next party leader
It's tragic that human lives count for nothing to her.. Unless it's her own.
Exact opposite. She is clearly trying to save lives by getting people off the streets "Like all of the legal channels she closed that led to people risking their lives crossing the channel in boats AND having the Temerity to capitalise on it by calling it an invasion for all those red meat gorging Daily Hate & ToryGraph readers???? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct? It's fashionable to hate Tories. " Even by Tory supporters? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct? It's fashionable to hate Tories. Even by Tory supporters? "We have a friend,we have known him for over 30 year's he's been a die hard Tory and will defend their behaviour and policy regardless the arguments we have had to the point we agreed never to discuss politics his views are very right off centre
Well last night even he admitted that he's very unlikely to vote Tory at the next election, genuinely I nearly fell off my chair.
So if he's changed his mind there must be many more who feel the same.
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct? It's fashionable to hate Tories. Even by Tory supporters? "What is a Tory supporter? Check your social media and you'll see that it's fashionable to hate Tories. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct?" Because she says a lot of hateful things designed to distract people, and to redirect ire to the most vulnerable people in society. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We either have accommodation to house people or we don’t, either way we should not be allowing people to build tent communities, running water, sanitation and heat are a basic human right. If we can’t provide the basics, what is the answer? What is the answer ? Keep focusing the electorate's ire on foreigners, homeless people, and especially homeless foreign people. And vote Tory. "What are your thoughts on people living in tents and communities springing up built out of tents? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We either have accommodation to house people or we don’t, either way we should not be allowing people to build tent communities, running water, sanitation and heat are a basic human right. If we can’t provide the basics, what is the answer? What is the answer ? Keep focusing the electorate's ire on foreigners, homeless people, and especially homeless foreign people. And vote Tory.
What are your thoughts on people living in tents and communities springing up built out of tents?"I think we should blame them for causing lots of problems in society, especially if some of them are foreigners. Meanwhile we should also not be critical of the government in any way shape or form and accept unquestionably their integrity. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct? It's fashionable to hate Tories. Even by Tory supporters?
We have a friend,we have known him for over 30 year's he's been a die hard Tory and will defend their behaviour and policy regardless the arguments we have had to the point we agreed never to discuss politics his views are very right off centre
Well last night even he admitted that he's very unlikely to vote Tory at the next election, genuinely I nearly fell off my chair.
So if he's changed his mind there must be many more who feel the same.
"There's hope for the country yet | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We either have accommodation to house people or we don’t, either way we should not be allowing people to build tent communities, running water, sanitation and heat are a basic human right. If we can’t provide the basics, what is the answer? What is the answer ? Keep focusing the electorate's ire on foreigners, homeless people, and especially homeless foreign people. And vote Tory.
What are your thoughts on people living in tents and communities springing up built out of tents?
I think we should blame them for causing lots of problems in society, especially if some of them are foreigners. Meanwhile we should also not be critical of the government in any way shape or form and accept unquestionably their integrity. "You don't want to share your own thoughts then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct? It's fashionable to hate Tories. Even by Tory supporters?
What is a Tory supporter?
Check your social media and you'll see that it's fashionable to hate Tories. "What's social media? 
I occasionally visit Facebook. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are living in tents because there are few homes or flats or HMO's or any other kind of Shelther due to there being a housing crisis. Funding for homelessness has been cut, and if there wasn't charities the situation was be very visible and dire. I carry a tent in my car just in case, and I will continue to give to those in need, f3ck her and her sound bites. "  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We either have accommodation to house people or we don’t, either way we should not be allowing people to build tent communities, running water, sanitation and heat are a basic human right. If we can’t provide the basics, what is the answer? What is the answer ? Keep focusing the electorate's ire on foreigners, homeless people, and especially homeless foreign people. And vote Tory.
What are your thoughts on people living in tents and communities springing up built out of tents?
I think we should blame them for causing lots of problems in society, especially if some of them are foreigners. Meanwhile we should also not be critical of the government in any way shape or form and accept unquestionably their integrity. "Is it your turn to do a Pat? 
Integrity and Tory Ministers..... Ermmmm that's funnier than Micky Flanagan's at at (out out) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Guess that the homeless are an easy target,no voice as such and people generally stick their heads in the sand and pretend it's not a problem. My job used to involve me working in quite a few places where people who have been homeless are given accommodation,I'm not going to make a sweeping generalisation but from the people I saw and delt with many of them suffer from pretty severe mental health issues and illnesses we are seeing the failure of the care in the community program that has had its funding slashed so much it's ridiculous. Funny how these councils have enough money to refurbish their council offices and spend ridiculous amounts on stuff like plant's and so on.. Yet theirs no money for supporting people living on the streets other than employing people to shoo them away." I'm guessing that's because they have separate pots for maintenance/employment and so on. That's what happens in healthcare. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are living in tents because there are few homes or flats or HMO's or any other kind of Shelther due to there being a housing crisis. Funding for homelessness has been cut, and if there wasn't charities the situation was be very visible and dire. I carry a tent in my car just in case, and I will continue to give to those in need, f3ck her and her sound bites. " What did she actually say that you don't agree with? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct?" which bits are right ? There are probably a few bits that can be taken in isolation and argued. There are "options" for the homeless (ironically with a large part via charities) however I don not believe that these options can support every homelessness person. Indeed, I'd be cynical they have spare capacity today. After all, why earmark 1bn towards this if the system works today. Many are from abroad. Many is a loose term. Many of the ppl in the UK are from abroad, so are we talking a disproportionate amount? If it is, is it really because of choice or because they have smaller support networks or maybe they face greater issues accessing the "options" I'd like to agree with her that the British are compassionate. However if you see a tent in a street and consider it a nuisance and your first reaction is the person is choosing to live that way, then we have different views on what compassionate looks like. Making having a tent in a shop door illegal won't solve homelessness. Fining the charity that provides it won't solve homelessnes. Constructive government policy and spending will solve homelessnes. They should be focussing on that. Indeed, they may be. In which case it's doubley insulting to their view of the electorate they led with the tents angle. Indeed if they are doing a lot, why not see how that plays through and then determine if there are people making lifestyle choices. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct? It's fashionable to hate Tories. Even by Tory supporters?
What is a Tory supporter?
Check your social media and you'll see that it's fashionable to hate Tories.
What's social media?
I occasionally visit Facebook."It's crazy so many people have turned to this same tactic. It's almost as if you have no thoughts of your own so just start copying each other | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We either have accommodation to house people or we don’t, either way we should not be allowing people to build tent communities, running water, sanitation and heat are a basic human right. If we can’t provide the basics, what is the answer? What is the answer ? Keep focusing the electorate's ire on foreigners, homeless people, and especially homeless foreign people. And vote Tory.
What are your thoughts on people living in tents and communities springing up built out of tents?
I think we should blame them for causing lots of problems in society, especially if some of them are foreigners. Meanwhile we should also not be critical of the government in any way shape or form and accept unquestionably their integrity.
You don't want to share your own thoughts then?"These are. You guys have won me over. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The social housing waiting list has grown from 1.1 million in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2023 That excludes the 137,000 the tories removed from those local authority waiting lists in 2013 with sneaky use of the localism act. 3 million recorded foodbank meals in 2022; 51,000 in 2010 Obviously these are lifestyle choices. " Maybe you can answer this question.. What did she actually say that you don't agree with? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The social housing waiting list has grown from 1.1 million in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2023 That excludes the 137,000 the tories removed from those local authority waiting lists in 2013 with sneaky use of the localism act. 3 million recorded foodbank meals in 2022; 51,000 in 2010 Obviously these are lifestyle choices. Maybe you can answer this question.. What did she actually say that you don't agree with?" The home secretary wrote: “We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.” She seems cool with it in Gaza death camps though | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters. Agreed. It's soundbites for certain folks to rile them up, get them frothing over their cornflakes, vent their rage at "those other people", and vote for more draconian measures.
And not to mention, those of the tiny elite amongst them, who will vote for their next party leader
It's tragic that human lives count for nothing to her.. Unless it's her own.
Exact opposite. She is clearly trying to save lives by getting people off the streets
How do you reach this conclusion?"By reading what she has actually said. Clearly you want to think otherwise. I approach these things with an open mind instead of skewing what public figures have actually said | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct? It's fashionable to hate Tories. Even by Tory supporters?
What is a Tory supporter?
Check your social media and you'll see that it's fashionable to hate Tories.
What's social media?
I occasionally visit Facebook.
It's crazy so many people have turned to this same tactic. It's almost as if you have no thoughts of your own so just start copying each other "Same tactic? What tactic, visiting social media only occasionally that they don't know what the current trends are, and have no interest in the current trends, let alone copy them? You have a context in mind but you're not stipulating it. Unless you're just continuing from your previous post and mine was just in the way | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters. Agreed. It's soundbites for certain folks to rile them up, get them frothing over their cornflakes, vent their rage at "those other people", and vote for more draconian measures.
And not to mention, those of the tiny elite amongst them, who will vote for their next party leader
It's tragic that human lives count for nothing to her.. Unless it's her own.
Exact opposite. She is clearly trying to save lives by getting people off the streets
How do you reach this conclusion?
By reading what she has actually said.
Clearly you want to think otherwise. I approach these things with an open mind instead of skewing what public figures have actually said "how does criminilasing tents get people off the street ? It sounds like people think that,in order of most shit to least, we have: 1) living in a cardboard box on the streets, 2) the support provided by government, 3) living in a tent in a shop door. It's one helluva self burn. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct? It's fashionable to hate Tories. Even by Tory supporters?
What is a Tory supporter?
Check your social media and you'll see that it's fashionable to hate Tories.
What's social media?
I occasionally visit Facebook.
It's crazy so many people have turned to this same tactic. It's almost as if you have no thoughts of your own so just start copying each other
Same tactic? What tactic, visiting social media only occasionally that they don't know what the current trends are, and have no interest in the current trends, let alone copy them?
You have a context in mind but you're not stipulating it. Unless you're just continuing from your previous post and mine was just in the way "
Hilarious. I'll leave you to copy others postings styles without adding anything of your own thoughts on matters. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters. Agreed. It's soundbites for certain folks to rile them up, get them frothing over their cornflakes, vent their rage at "those other people", and vote for more draconian measures.
And not to mention, those of the tiny elite amongst them, who will vote for their next party leader
It's tragic that human lives count for nothing to her.. Unless it's her own.
Exact opposite. She is clearly trying to save lives by getting people off the streets
How do you reach this conclusion?
By reading what she has actually said.
Clearly you want to think otherwise. I approach these things with an open mind instead of skewing what public figures have actually said how does criminilasing tents get people off the street ?
It sounds like people think that,in order of most shit to least, we have: 1) living in a cardboard box on the streets, 2) the support provided by government, 3) living in a tent in a shop door.
It's one helluva self burn. "She has criminalised tents, has she? How many people have been imprisoned? How long are the sentences? Please forward details | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters. Agreed. It's soundbites for certain folks to rile them up, get them frothing over their cornflakes, vent their rage at "those other people", and vote for more draconian measures.
And not to mention, those of the tiny elite amongst them, who will vote for their next party leader
It's tragic that human lives count for nothing to her.. Unless it's her own.
Exact opposite. She is clearly trying to save lives by getting people off the streets
How do you reach this conclusion?
By reading what she has actually said.
Clearly you want to think otherwise. I approach these things with an open mind instead of skewing what public figures have actually said how does criminilasing tents get people off the street ?
It sounds like people think that,in order of most shit to least, we have: 1) living in a cardboard box on the streets, 2) the support provided by government, 3) living in a tent in a shop door.
It's one helluva self burn.
She has criminalised tents, has she? How many people have been imprisoned? How long are the sentences? Please forward details "is that the policy she is putting forward. Hence this news story ? It's not law, and I'm not sure why you think I have said it is. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The social housing waiting list has grown from 1.1 million in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2023 That excludes the 137,000 the tories removed from those local authority waiting lists in 2013 with sneaky use of the localism act. 3 million recorded foodbank meals in 2022; 51,000 in 2010 Obviously these are lifestyle choices. Maybe you can answer this question.. What did she actually say that you don't agree with? The home secretary wrote: “We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.” She seems cool with it in Gaza death camps though " you are taking one slice of the statement and doing so it is completely out of context. A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". In other words those people who have decided to live in a tent on the streets. What is wrong with that, are you happy that we have streets and areas of cities turn into no go areas, poor living conditions and everything we can see in places San Francisco and Chicago? What is wrong with getting people into better accommodation when it is offered? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters. Agreed. It's soundbites for certain folks to rile them up, get them frothing over their cornflakes, vent their rage at "those other people", and vote for more draconian measures.
And not to mention, those of the tiny elite amongst them, who will vote for their next party leader
It's tragic that human lives count for nothing to her.. Unless it's her own.
Exact opposite. She is clearly trying to save lives by getting people off the streets
How do you reach this conclusion?
By reading what she has actually said.
Clearly you want to think otherwise. I approach these things with an open mind instead of skewing what public figures have actually said how does criminilasing tents get people off the street ?
It sounds like people think that,in order of most shit to least, we have: 1) living in a cardboard box on the streets, 2) the support provided by government, 3) living in a tent in a shop door.
It's one helluva self burn.
She has criminalised tents, has she? How many people have been imprisoned? How long are the sentences? Please forward details is that the policy she is putting forward. Hence this news story ? It's not law, and I'm not sure why you think I have said it is. "I thought so because you very clearly said she was criminalising tents. I was not aware that she was making it a criminal offence. Did you make that up to make her sound worse? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I don't think she cares about any of those things. It's rhetoric to energise the supporters. Agreed. It's soundbites for certain folks to rile them up, get them frothing over their cornflakes, vent their rage at "those other people", and vote for more draconian measures.
And not to mention, those of the tiny elite amongst them, who will vote for their next party leader
It's tragic that human lives count for nothing to her.. Unless it's her own.
Exact opposite. She is clearly trying to save lives by getting people off the streets
How do you reach this conclusion?
By reading what she has actually said.
Clearly you want to think otherwise. I approach these things with an open mind instead of skewing what public figures have actually said how does criminilasing tents get people off the street ?
It sounds like people think that,in order of most shit to least, we have: 1) living in a cardboard box on the streets, 2) the support provided by government, 3) living in a tent in a shop door.
It's one helluva self burn.
She has criminalised tents, has she? How many people have been imprisoned? How long are the sentences? Please forward details is that the policy she is putting forward. Hence this news story ? It's not law, and I'm not sure why you think I have said it is.
I thought so because you very clearly said she was criminalising tents. I was not aware that she was making it a criminal offence. Did you make that up to make her sound worse? "I'm assuming the readers of this thread are aware with the gist of the proposals. "The paper reported that sources had said the plans being considered were for two clauses to be inserted in the new criminal justice bill, which applies to England and Wales. This would target tents that cause a nuisance - such as by obstructing shop doorways. According to the report, the proposals include creating a civil offence whereby charities could be fined for handing out tents if they were deemed to have caused a nuisance." Maybe there is nuance I have missed and that's what you are picking at. Please clarify if that is the case. I'd hope it was clear I wasn't implying all tents are to be criminalised. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The social housing waiting list has grown from 1.1 million in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2023 That excludes the 137,000 the tories removed from those local authority waiting lists in 2013 with sneaky use of the localism act. 3 million recorded foodbank meals in 2022; 51,000 in 2010 Obviously these are lifestyle choices. Maybe you can answer this question.. What did she actually say that you don't agree with? The home secretary wrote: “We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.” She seems cool with it in Gaza death camps though you are taking one slice of the statement and doing so it is completely out of context. A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". In other words those people who have decided to live in a tent on the streets. What is wrong with that, are you happy that we have streets and areas of cities turn into no go areas, poor living conditions and everything we can see in places San Francisco and Chicago? What is wrong with getting people into better accommodation when it is offered? " how many of these people are there? And do we really know why they reject help. What penalties can you give them ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The social housing waiting list has grown from 1.1 million in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2023 That excludes the 137,000 the tories removed from those local authority waiting lists in 2013 with sneaky use of the localism act. 3 million recorded foodbank meals in 2022; 51,000 in 2010 Obviously these are lifestyle choices. Maybe you can answer this question.. What did she actually say that you don't agree with? The home secretary wrote: “We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.” She seems cool with it in Gaza death camps though you are taking one slice of the statement and doing so it is completely out of context. A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". In other words those people who have decided to live in a tent on the streets. What is wrong with that, are you happy that we have streets and areas of cities turn into no go areas, poor living conditions and everything we can see in places San Francisco and Chicago? What is wrong with getting people into better accommodation when it is offered? how many of these people are there? And do we really know why they reject help. What penalties can you give them ? " Why do you believe it is okay for people to live in tents, anywhere they want to, if they have been given support and have turned it down? To ask me how many, is plainly ridiculous, how would I know and I'm not going to go looking for that number either, the statement below I can understand and get behind.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". She said the government would always support those who are genuinely homeless, but added: "We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice." She added: "What I want to stop, and what the law-abiding majority wants us to stop, is those who cause nuisance and distress to other people by pitching tents in public spaces, aggressively begging, stealing, taking drugs, littering and blighting our communities." Unless action is taken, she said, "British cities will go the way of places in the US like San Francisco and Los Angeles, where weak policies have led to an explosion of crime, drug taking and squalor." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The social housing waiting list has grown from 1.1 million in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2023 That excludes the 137,000 the tories removed from those local authority waiting lists in 2013 with sneaky use of the localism act. 3 million recorded foodbank meals in 2022; 51,000 in 2010 Obviously these are lifestyle choices. Maybe you can answer this question.. What did she actually say that you don't agree with? The home secretary wrote: “We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.” She seems cool with it in Gaza death camps though you are taking one slice of the statement and doing so it is completely out of context. A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". In other words those people who have decided to live in a tent on the streets. What is wrong with that, are you happy that we have streets and areas of cities turn into no go areas, poor living conditions and everything we can see in places San Francisco and Chicago? What is wrong with getting people into better accommodation when it is offered? how many of these people are there? And do we really know why they reject help. What penalties can you give them ? Why do you believe it is okay for people to live in tents, anywhere they want to, if they have been given support and have turned it down? To ask me how many, is plainly ridiculous, how would I know and I'm not going to go looking for that number either, the statement below I can understand and get behind.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". She said the government would always support those who are genuinely homeless, but added: "We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice." She added: "What I want to stop, and what the law-abiding majority wants us to stop, is those who cause nuisance and distress to other people by pitching tents in public spaces, aggressively begging, stealing, taking drugs, littering and blighting our communities." Unless action is taken, she said, "British cities will go the way of places in the US like San Francisco and Los Angeles, where weak policies have led to an explosion of crime, drug taking and squalor." " If only Braverman was in some kind of position of power, some kind of governing body that could do something to help homeless people. Alas, she has no choice but to just further demonise them through rhetoric, let's not forget that some of them are foriegners too. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". " If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The social housing waiting list has grown from 1.1 million in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2023 That excludes the 137,000 the tories removed from those local authority waiting lists in 2013 with sneaky use of the localism act. 3 million recorded foodbank meals in 2022; 51,000 in 2010 Obviously these are lifestyle choices. Maybe you can answer this question.. What did she actually say that you don't agree with? The home secretary wrote: “We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.” She seems cool with it in Gaza death camps though you are taking one slice of the statement and doing so it is completely out of context. A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". In other words those people who have decided to live in a tent on the streets. What is wrong with that, are you happy that we have streets and areas of cities turn into no go areas, poor living conditions and everything we can see in places San Francisco and Chicago? What is wrong with getting people into better accommodation when it is offered? how many of these people are there? And do we really know why they reject help. What penalties can you give them ? Why do you believe it is okay for people to live in tents, anywhere they want to, if they have been given support and have turned it down? To ask me how many, is plainly ridiculous, how would I know and I'm not going to go looking for that number either, the statement below I can understand and get behind.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". She said the government would always support those who are genuinely homeless, but added: "We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice." She added: "What I want to stop, and what the law-abiding majority wants us to stop, is those who cause nuisance and distress to other people by pitching tents in public spaces, aggressively begging, stealing, taking drugs, littering and blighting our communities." Unless action is taken, she said, "British cities will go the way of places in the US like San Francisco and Los Angeles, where weak policies have led to an explosion of crime, drug taking and squalor." If only Braverman was in some kind of position of power, some kind of governing body that could do something to help homeless people. Alas, she has no choice but to just further demonise them through rhetoric, let's not forget that some of them are foriegners too. " I hope you are being sarcastic? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The social housing waiting list has grown from 1.1 million in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2023 That excludes the 137,000 the tories removed from those local authority waiting lists in 2013 with sneaky use of the localism act. 3 million recorded foodbank meals in 2022; 51,000 in 2010 Obviously these are lifestyle choices. Maybe you can answer this question.. What did she actually say that you don't agree with? The home secretary wrote: “We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.” She seems cool with it in Gaza death camps though you are taking one slice of the statement and doing so it is completely out of context. A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". In other words those people who have decided to live in a tent on the streets. What is wrong with that, are you happy that we have streets and areas of cities turn into no go areas, poor living conditions and everything we can see in places San Francisco and Chicago? What is wrong with getting people into better accommodation when it is offered? how many of these people are there? And do we really know why they reject help. What penalties can you give them ? Why do you believe it is okay for people to live in tents, anywhere they want to, if they have been given support and have turned it down? To ask me how many, is plainly ridiculous, how would I know and I'm not going to go looking for that number either, the statement below I can understand and get behind.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". She said the government would always support those who are genuinely homeless, but added: "We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice." She added: "What I want to stop, and what the law-abiding majority wants us to stop, is those who cause nuisance and distress to other people by pitching tents in public spaces, aggressively begging, stealing, taking drugs, littering and blighting our communities." Unless action is taken, she said, "British cities will go the way of places in the US like San Francisco and Los Angeles, where weak policies have led to an explosion of crime, drug taking and squalor." " have I said that ? I want to understand how big the number is. If it's 5 out of 2,000 then it's an empty piece of legislation if the aim is to prevent "san Fransisco". And to knowingly make this a headline shows contempt to the voters. But let's beg the question there are a meaningful number of people who have been offered help and chosen to refuse it. I want to understand why they have chosen to refuse help. Imo, that helps give insight so we can eradicate homelessness. I can't imagine what must be happening in someone's live for them to 'choose' a tent in a shop over other options. I can only imagine they fear the world so much that the streets feel safer. Imo that's a lot more useful than seeking to introduce penalties. And as above, what penalty can you give that have meaningful effect to change behaviour? Id go one futher to seek to understand what causes homelessnes and try and prevent it rather than simply cure it. In my opinion that's more what compassion looks like than penalising people. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. " Agree The whole issue of what she said is another distraction from a party in it's last year or so, failure on umpteen promises can't be papered over by simplistic cliches designed solely to appeal to the core supporters who want something to pour scorn and bile upon.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. Agree The whole issue of what she said is another distraction from a party in it's last year or so, failure on umpteen promises can't be papered over by simplistic cliches designed solely to appeal to the core supporters who want something to pour scorn and bile upon.. " Social housing sold off Council building targets removed Levelling up funds redirected by Sunak from poorer constituencies Huge cuts in government grants to social landlords Interesting thesis on the many causes, many that the governments have failed to address https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/77861/1/2020CarmichaelCPhD.pdf | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct? It's fashionable to hate Tories. Even by Tory supporters?
What is a Tory supporter?
Check your social media and you'll see that it's fashionable to hate Tories.
What's social media?
I occasionally visit Facebook.
It's crazy so many people have turned to this same tactic. It's almost as if you have no thoughts of your own so just start copying each other
Same tactic? What tactic, visiting social media only occasionally that they don't know what the current trends are, and have no interest in the current trends, let alone copy them?
You have a context in mind but you're not stipulating it. Unless you're just continuing from your previous post and mine was just in the way
Hilarious. I'll leave you to copy others postings styles without adding anything of your own thoughts on matters."Well that's utter bollocks. But that's fine I won't bother reading your empty posts in future. They're not worth my effort in trying to deduce them, especially when you cannot be arsed to respond to a question. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So why do people insist on attacking Suella when most of what she says is correct? It's fashionable to hate Tories. Even by Tory supporters?
What is a Tory supporter?
Check your social media and you'll see that it's fashionable to hate Tories.
What's social media?
I occasionally visit Facebook.
It's crazy so many people have turned to this same tactic. It's almost as if you have no thoughts of your own so just start copying each other
Same tactic? What tactic, visiting social media only occasionally that they don't know what the current trends are, and have no interest in the current trends, let alone copy them?
You have a context in mind but you're not stipulating it. Unless you're just continuing from your previous post and mine was just in the way
Hilarious. I'll leave you to copy others postings styles without adding anything of your own thoughts on matters.
Well that's utter bollocks.
But that's fine I won't bother reading your empty posts in future. They're not worth my effort in trying to deduce them, especially when you cannot be arsed to respond to a question."You'll note that you didn't answer the very first question I asked you. How ironic | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Unless action is taken, she said, "British cities will go the way of places in the US like San Francisco and Los Angeles, where weak policies have led to an explosion of crime, drug taking and squalor." " I didn't know any British politician could criticise policies if our American friends. I thought it was one of two countries, that no criticism is allowed off. Very brave of her, just like her name. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The social housing waiting list has grown from 1.1 million in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2023 That excludes the 137,000 the tories removed from those local authority waiting lists in 2013 with sneaky use of the localism act. 3 million recorded foodbank meals in 2022; 51,000 in 2010 Obviously these are lifestyle choices. Maybe you can answer this question.. What did she actually say that you don't agree with? The home secretary wrote: “We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.” She seems cool with it in Gaza death camps though you are taking one slice of the statement and doing so it is completely out of context. A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". In other words those people who have decided to live in a tent on the streets. What is wrong with that, are you happy that we have streets and areas of cities turn into no go areas, poor living conditions and everything we can see in places San Francisco and Chicago? What is wrong with getting people into better accommodation when it is offered? how many of these people are there? And do we really know why they reject help. What penalties can you give them ? Why do you believe it is okay for people to live in tents, anywhere they want to, if they have been given support and have turned it down? To ask me how many, is plainly ridiculous, how would I know and I'm not going to go looking for that number either, the statement below I can understand and get behind.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". She said the government would always support those who are genuinely homeless, but added: "We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice." She added: "What I want to stop, and what the law-abiding majority wants us to stop, is those who cause nuisance and distress to other people by pitching tents in public spaces, aggressively begging, stealing, taking drugs, littering and blighting our communities." Unless action is taken, she said, "British cities will go the way of places in the US like San Francisco and Los Angeles, where weak policies have led to an explosion of crime, drug taking and squalor." If only Braverman was in some kind of position of power, some kind of governing body that could do something to help homeless people. Alas, she has no choice but to just further demonise them through rhetoric, let's not forget that some of them are foriegners too. " This is a problem with so many people today, you look at the politician or party and that is all you see. Authorities are trying to get people out of tents, sleeping rough by offering them accommodation, those that refuse that support are doing so why? As Morley points out, usually because they can't take drugs and alcohol into places offered, or they have a curfew, either way these people are creating their own drug safe, crime ridden hovels. You may think that is okay, I don't. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The social housing waiting list has grown from 1.1 million in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2023 That excludes the 137,000 the tories removed from those local authority waiting lists in 2013 with sneaky use of the localism act. 3 million recorded foodbank meals in 2022; 51,000 in 2010 Obviously these are lifestyle choices. Maybe you can answer this question.. What did she actually say that you don't agree with? The home secretary wrote: “We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.” She seems cool with it in Gaza death camps though you are taking one slice of the statement and doing so it is completely out of context. A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". In other words those people who have decided to live in a tent on the streets. What is wrong with that, are you happy that we have streets and areas of cities turn into no go areas, poor living conditions and everything we can see in places San Francisco and Chicago? What is wrong with getting people into better accommodation when it is offered? how many of these people are there? And do we really know why they reject help. What penalties can you give them ? Why do you believe it is okay for people to live in tents, anywhere they want to, if they have been given support and have turned it down? To ask me how many, is plainly ridiculous, how would I know and I'm not going to go looking for that number either, the statement below I can understand and get behind.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". She said the government would always support those who are genuinely homeless, but added: "We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice." She added: "What I want to stop, and what the law-abiding majority wants us to stop, is those who cause nuisance and distress to other people by pitching tents in public spaces, aggressively begging, stealing, taking drugs, littering and blighting our communities." Unless action is taken, she said, "British cities will go the way of places in the US like San Francisco and Los Angeles, where weak policies have led to an explosion of crime, drug taking and squalor." If only Braverman was in some kind of position of power, some kind of governing body that could do something to help homeless people. Alas, she has no choice but to just further demonise them through rhetoric, let's not forget that some of them are foriegners too. This is a problem with so many people today, you look at the politician or party and that is all you see. Authorities are trying to get people out of tents, sleeping rough by offering them accommodation, those that refuse that support are doing so why? As Morley points out, usually because they can't take drugs and alcohol into places offered, or they have a curfew, either way these people are creating their own drug safe, crime ridden hovels. You may think that is okay, I don't. " but a policy of penalising ppl in these positions is not going to change any of that. If anything it's adding to the problem. Ppl are conflating the solution with the problem. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. " It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. " And yet the word penalise was used. What is the means of penalising? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. " you may be talking cross purposes. Providing additional funding, agreed. That's support. Adding new clauses to the criminal justice bill feels less like support. More like penalising. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. And yet the word penalise was used. What is the means of penalising? " By Braverman? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. you may be talking cross purposes. Providing additional funding, agreed. That's support. Adding new clauses to the criminal justice bill feels less like support. More like penalising. " Reading further it seems that charities will be fined for handing out tents, which will presumably just lead to more homeless without shelter (as support has been cut since 2010). It’ll lead to more deaths in winter, and less chance of homeless escaping their plight. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. you may be talking cross purposes. Providing additional funding, agreed. That's support. Adding new clauses to the criminal justice bill feels less like support. More like penalising. " The number of people who are not reading the proposal or have read it and are not actually thinking about it is astounding... A person who is homeless and offered support is not being penalised, a person who is homeless and has not been offered support is not being penalised. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. you may be talking cross purposes. Providing additional funding, agreed. That's support. Adding new clauses to the criminal justice bill feels less like support. More like penalising. The number of people who are not reading the proposal and actually thinking about it is astounding... A person who is homeless and offered support is not being penalised, a person who is homeless and has not been offered support is not being penalised. " the various news sites are saying changes to legislation. And making it a civil offence for charities to supply tents to such people. Now I haven't read the report (if you have please DM me a link). And it may be the news is wrong. Totally accept that. But I struggle to see what legislative changes can be made that help here. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. And yet the word penalise was used. What is the means of penalising? By Braverman?" No, by NotMe in this thread, stating “ A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help" before going on to say “ It is not penalising the homeless” | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. And yet the word penalise was used. What is the means of penalising? By Braverman? No, by NotMe in this thread, stating “ A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help" before going on to say “ It is not penalising the homeless”" I think you're deliberately trying to rewrite what he wrote there. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. And yet the word penalise was used. What is the means of penalising? By Braverman? No, by NotMe in this thread, stating “ A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help" before going on to say “ It is not penalising the homeless”" Read it again.... and come back to me on who this is aimed at, hint it is not the genuinely homeless people. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. And yet the word penalise was used. What is the means of penalising? By Braverman? No, by NotMe in this thread, stating “ A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help" before going on to say “ It is not penalising the homeless” I think you're deliberately trying to rewrite what he wrote there. " I mean, I used copy/paste. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. And yet the word penalise was used. What is the means of penalising? By Braverman? No, by NotMe in this thread, stating “ A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help" before going on to say “ It is not penalising the homeless” Read it again.... and come back to me on who this is aimed at, hint it is not the genuinely homeless people. " The penalty is aimed at charities who help the genuinely homeless is it not? I mean, I’m still not seeing where this so called benefit is (basically because anyone with an ounce of intellect can see that there is no benefit). If we want to help rough sleepers, we’d look back to 1997-2010 where it was actually impacted. It’s not a failure to borrow from successful schemes under a ‘rival’ Government. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The answer to solving rough sleeping is to provide shelter, rehabilitation and work-related-training in order to bring them back into society where they can contribute. If you’re going to look at is as ‘we need to get these junkies off of the street because people don’t like them’ then you’re looking at the wrong end of the telescope. " Your opening paragraph is what Braverman is saying.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The answer to solving rough sleeping is to provide shelter, rehabilitation and work-related-training in order to bring them back into society where they can contribute. If you’re going to look at is as ‘we need to get these junkies off of the street because people don’t like them’ then you’re looking at the wrong end of the telescope. Your opening paragraph is what Braverman is saying...." Except she isn’t. You think she is, but we have ample evidence that the tories don’t give a toss about rough sleeping, which is why it’s up well over 100% (over 200% in some locations) since they came to power. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. And yet the word penalise was used. What is the means of penalising? By Braverman? No, by NotMe in this thread, stating “ A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help" before going on to say “ It is not penalising the homeless” I think you're deliberately trying to rewrite what he wrote there. I mean, I used copy/paste. " This is pointless man. You're trying to now be literal, you still haven't answered the 900 police station question. And you take The Byline Times as gospel. There's plenty of you on here | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help". If anyone can point out how attempting to penalise the homeless will improve anything, i’m all ears. It is not penalising the homeless, it is support for authorities dealing with drug, alcohol and begging issues by people who are being offered support but refuse it to continue their ways, regardless of the mess they are building around them and the upset they cause to the local community. And yet the word penalise was used. What is the means of penalising? By Braverman? No, by NotMe in this thread, stating “ A shortened version.. "Suella Braverman's plan would introduce new penalties in England and Wales for homeless people who authorities believe have rejected offers of help" before going on to say “ It is not penalising the homeless” I think you're deliberately trying to rewrite what he wrote there. I mean, I used copy/paste. This is pointless man. You're trying to now be literal, you still haven't answered the 900 police station question. And you take The Byline Times as gospel. There's plenty of you on here "No, I used the byline times numbers, and said that other sources vary, but all agreed on 600 police stations being closed - Is that not a correct representation of what I said? And yeah when I’m quoting a poster I will copy/paste. Sorry if actually quoting someone’s words is ‘too literal’ for you. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The number of rough sleepers in London alone in 2023 is over 10k, compared to just under 4K in 2010. Forgive us for not believing that this conservative govt. is serious about helping rough sleepers. " So then how do you beleive they stop it? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How are they going to be penalised? Financially? Good luck. Put in prison? We don’t have the space. Prevented from having access to rehab schemes or training? Not sure that’s going to help. It’s more meaningless bait for the Tory base." So what's the answer? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The number of rough sleepers in London alone in 2023 is over 10k, compared to just under 4K in 2010. Forgive us for not believing that this conservative govt. is serious about helping rough sleepers. So then how do you beleive they stop it?" I’ve already said. Provide shelter. Provide rehab. Provide training for work. It needs money, support and willpower - but it can be done, as we saw between 1997-2010. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The answer to solving rough sleeping is to provide shelter, rehabilitation and work-related-training in order to bring them back into society where they can contribute. If you’re going to look at is as ‘we need to get these junkies off of the street because people don’t like them’ then you’re looking at the wrong end of the telescope. " Re read pal | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The answer to solving rough sleeping is to provide shelter, rehabilitation and work-related-training in order to bring them back into society where they can contribute. If you’re going to look at is as ‘we need to get these junkies off of the street because people don’t like them’ then you’re looking at the wrong end of the telescope. Re read pal" I’m not your pal | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The number of rough sleepers in London alone in 2023 is over 10k, compared to just under 4K in 2010. Forgive us for not believing that this conservative govt. is serious about helping rough sleepers. So then how do you beleive they stop it? I’ve already said. Provide shelter. Provide rehab. Provide training for work. It needs money, support and willpower - but it can be done, as we saw between 1997-2010." But read the thread. They have been offered shelter. They don't take it up. Because there are rules that come with shelter. Such as no drugs no alcohol. So how do you address it? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"She literally describes homelessness as ‘a lifestyle choice’ And folks defend her." It is.. as described above by me. They choose not to enter shelters because of the conditions surrounding use. Re. Drugs, alcohol, cigarettes. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The number of rough sleepers in London alone in 2023 is over 10k, compared to just under 4K in 2010. Forgive us for not believing that this conservative govt. is serious about helping rough sleepers. So then how do you beleive they stop it? I’ve already said. Provide shelter. Provide rehab. Provide training for work. It needs money, support and willpower - but it can be done, as we saw between 1997-2010. But read the thread. They have been offered shelter. They don't take it up. Because there are rules that come with shelter. Such as no drugs no alcohol. So how do you address it?" Rough sleeping is up well over 100% since 2010, and much worse in some locations. Are they all refusing shelter? How much shelter is provided? What other support is there? How does fining charities help? How does cutting support (as has happened since 2010) help? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The number of rough sleepers in London alone in 2023 is over 10k, compared to just under 4K in 2010. Forgive us for not believing that this conservative govt. is serious about helping rough sleepers. So then how do you beleive they stop it? I’ve already said. Provide shelter. Provide rehab. Provide training for work. It needs money, support and willpower - but it can be done, as we saw between 1997-2010. But read the thread. They have been offered shelter. They don't take it up. Because there are rules that come with shelter. Such as no drugs no alcohol. So how do you address it? Rough sleeping is up well over 100% since 2010, and much worse in some locations. Are they all refusing shelter? How much shelter is provided? What other support is there? How does fining charities help? How does cutting support (as has happened since 2010) help? " Yes. As shelter is available to them all. It happens here in Leeds I've spoken with them. They don't want it b3cause of the rules that come with it. How many times must you be told this Every year I work wi5h St georges crypt on this. A former boss Rob o dea( set up Expedia.Co.UK) literally offered to buy up a street of terraced houses to help with homlessness in Leeds. But was told point blank. Leeds has enough shelter for all homelessness Leeds. They choose not to go into it. Because of the rules. Leeds has many well known rough sleepers. I forget his name but there used to be a chap under the arches in Leeds rails station. He was well known and loved by many in the local community. But chose that life. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness”" Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. " You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo." You are confusing homeless with rough sleepers These are 2 different things. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. You are confusing homeless with rough sleepers These are 2 different things. " I’m only guilty of comparing 1997-2010 to 2010-2023. The difference between the two is stark. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. You are confusing homeless with rough sleepers These are 2 different things. " Exactly this... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. You are confusing homeless with rough sleepers These are 2 different things. I’m only guilty of comparing 1997-2010 to 2010-2023. The difference between the two is stark." Where your 1997 stqts on rough sleepers please? Have you got alink | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. You are confusing homeless with rough sleepers These are 2 different things. I’m only guilty of comparing 1997-2010 to 2010-2023. The difference between the two is stark." You are talking about your own agenda, not the actual subject of the op. You have missed a lot of the message in the proposal | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. You are confusing homeless with rough sleepers These are 2 different things. I’m only guilty of comparing 1997-2010 to 2010-2023. The difference between the two is stark. You are talking about your own agenda, not the actual subject of the op. You have missed a lot of the message in the proposal" I don’t have an agenda beyond pointing out the abject and undeniable failure of the Tory government on homelessness, and also suggesting that fining charities isn’t going to do anything to alleviate the problem. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have a few days off, come back for a browse, nothing has changed. "What was you expecting? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. You are confusing homeless with rough sleepers These are 2 different things. I’m only guilty of comparing 1997-2010 to 2010-2023. The difference between the two is stark. You are talking about your own agenda, not the actual subject of the op. You have missed a lot of the message in the proposal I don’t have an agenda beyond pointing out the abject and undeniable failure of the Tory government on homelessness, and also suggesting that fining charities isn’t going to do anything to alleviate the problem. " How would you know that, it hasn't been rolled out yet. On the point of the charities, sometimes the most straight forward thing is the most damaging, so what seems like the right thing to do can cause more harm than good. Best leave it to the professionals, who will hopefully have another tool in their box to help those in need. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. You are confusing homeless with rough sleepers These are 2 different things. I’m only guilty of comparing 1997-2010 to 2010-2023. The difference between the two is stark. You are talking about your own agenda, not the actual subject of the op. You have missed a lot of the message in the proposal I don’t have an agenda beyond pointing out the abject and undeniable failure of the Tory government on homelessness, and also suggesting that fining charities isn’t going to do anything to alleviate the problem. How would you know that, it hasn't been rolled out yet. On the point of the charities, sometimes the most straight forward thing is the most damaging, so what seems like the right thing to do can cause more harm than good. Best leave it to the professionals, who will hopefully have another tool in their box to help those in need." The professionals who’ve had their funding cut since 2010? We have a successful blueprint for aiding homelessness, do we not? We literally saw it work. Why not repeat it? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The problem as we know is there are certain homeless thatbwont go into shelters. Because you have to give up belongings and paraphernalia when you do. ( for lack of better wording you can not do drugs) Many homeless of course, do not want this. The government is withing its right to ask charities not to donate tents for homeless ornsleeping bags if they are choosing to live on streets. We have St George's crypt in Leeds that look after them and many choose not to use it. They make money at night hanging around fast food outlets and begging. More than they would by staying indoors. This is the sad reality. Thr government could force them off the streets but into social housing and warmth but people would kick off about that. Fact is the government could enact any policy to stop homelessness and people would oppose it and the homeless would choose to street life. Because its what they know and it let's them live the life they wish to lead. " Some of them are foriegners too. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The problem as we know is there are certain homeless thatbwont go into shelters. Because you have to give up belongings and paraphernalia when you do. ( for lack of better wording you can not do drugs) Many homeless of course, do not want this. The government is withing its right to ask charities not to donate tents for homeless ornsleeping bags if they are choosing to live on streets. We have St George's crypt in Leeds that look after them and many choose not to use it. They make money at night hanging around fast food outlets and begging. More than they would by staying indoors. This is the sad reality. Thr government could force them off the streets but into social housing and warmth but people would kick off about that. Fact is the government could enact any policy to stop homelessness and people would oppose it and the homeless would choose to street life. Because its what they know and it let's them live the life they wish to lead. Some of them are foriegners too. " You need to help me out, what does your post mean in the context of the subject? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. You are confusing homeless with rough sleepers These are 2 different things. I’m only guilty of comparing 1997-2010 to 2010-2023. The difference between the two is stark. Where your 1997 stqts on rough sleepers please? Have you got alink" All freely available on the internet. I’d recommend looking at rough sleeping once labour had been in a few years, rather than when they’d just taken over from the tories, to see the impact their policies had. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. You are confusing homeless with rough sleepers These are 2 different things. I’m only guilty of comparing 1997-2010 to 2010-2023. The difference between the two is stark. Where your 1997 stqts on rough sleepers please? Have you got alink All freely available on the internet. I’d recommend looking at rough sleeping once labour had been in a few years, rather than when they’d just taken over from the tories, to see the impact their policies had." Please link. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The problem as we know is there are certain homeless thatbwont go into shelters. Because you have to give up belongings and paraphernalia when you do. ( for lack of better wording you can not do drugs) Many homeless of course, do not want this. The government is withing its right to ask charities not to donate tents for homeless ornsleeping bags if they are choosing to live on streets. We have St George's crypt in Leeds that look after them and many choose not to use it. They make money at night hanging around fast food outlets and begging. More than they would by staying indoors. This is the sad reality. Thr government could force them off the streets but into social housing and warmth but people would kick off about that. Fact is the government could enact any policy to stop homelessness and people would oppose it and the homeless would choose to street life. Because its what they know and it let's them live the life they wish to lead. Some of them are foriegners too. You need to help me out, what does your post mean in the context of the subject?" "many of them from abroad" - Braverman What did she actually say that you don't agree with? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. You are confusing homeless with rough sleepers These are 2 different things. I’m only guilty of comparing 1997-2010 to 2010-2023. The difference between the two is stark. Where your 1997 stqts on rough sleepers please? Have you got alink All freely available on the internet. I’d recommend looking at rough sleeping once labour had been in a few years, rather than when they’d just taken over from the tories, to see the impact their policies had. Please link." I’m fairly sure you know how Google works. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thats a no then Thank you" New labours performance on rough sleeping is well documented. I could post a link but you’d just say it’s irrelevant as you did on stats earlier. You know 1997-2010 was better for homelessness than 2010-2023, I know it, everyone here knows it. The data is readily available for all to see. Forgive me for not jumping through a hoop at your behest. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo." I've just realised who you are and now it all makes sense | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. I've just realised who you are and now it all makes sense "I’ve learned my lesson. Even if a poster is something, don’t write it in the forum. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So what did she actually say …. She is trying to clamp down on people living on the streets in tents, so that it doesn’t end up like San Francisco. She has said there are other indoor options available, but some people don’t want to use those options, hence the comment that they are living in the tents by choice. " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thats a no then Thank you New labours performance on rough sleeping is well documented. I could post a link but you’d just say it’s irrelevant as you did on stats earlier. You know 1997-2010 was better for homelessness than 2010-2023, I know it, everyone here knows it. The data is readily available for all to see. Forgive me for not jumping through a hoop at your behest. " Forgive me for not just believing anything written without evidence. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" These crooks have been in power for 13 years " 100% it's someone else's fault, Labour, The EU, the "woke", foreigners, etc Some of these homeless are from abroad . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thats a no then Thank you New labours performance on rough sleeping is well documented. I could post a link but you’d just say it’s irrelevant as you did on stats earlier. You know 1997-2010 was better for homelessness than 2010-2023, I know it, everyone here knows it. The data is readily available for all to see. Forgive me for not jumping through a hoop at your behest. Forgive me for not just believing anything written without evidence." That’s absolutely fine enjoy your research. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. I've just realised who you are and now it all makes sense "The Pile On (un)Official Monitor, or POOM for short, is watching. We don’t want any hypocrisy now do we  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. I've just realised who you are and now it all makes sense
The Pile On (un)Official Monitor, or POOM for short, is watching. We don’t want any hypocrisy now do we "You crack on | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. I've just realised who you are and now it all makes sense
The Pile On (un)Official Monitor, or POOM for short, is watching. We don’t want any hypocrisy now do we "Not sure where the pile on is again.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A quote: “Homeless Link’s 2021 Annual Review of Single Homelessness Support in England has revealed that there are 39% fewer accommodation providers and 26% fewer bed spaces for people experiencing homelessness than in 2010. Other key findings include that: There are 7% fewer day centre services than in 2010 43% of accommodation projects supported an increasing number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in 2021 Lack of available social housing was the main barrier to people moving on from homelessness” Again. If they choose to live that life. What can you do. Throwing stats out doesn't change anything. What we should be grateful for is now we can monitor these changes. Something not previously done much. You don’t think 26% fewer bed spaces is an important stat to throw out? Ok, you do you, boo. I've just realised who you are and now it all makes sense
The Pile On (un)Official Monitor, or POOM for short, is watching. We don’t want any hypocrisy now do we
Not sure where the pile on is again...."It is wherever the POOM says it is | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The problem as we know is there are certain homeless thatbwont go into shelters. Because you have to give up belongings and paraphernalia when you do. ( for lack of better wording you can not do drugs) Many homeless of course, do not want this. The government is withing its right to ask charities not to donate tents for homeless ornsleeping bags if they are choosing to live on streets. We have St George's crypt in Leeds that look after them and many choose not to use it. They make money at night hanging around fast food outlets and begging. More than they would by staying indoors. This is the sad reality. Thr government could force them off the streets but into social housing and warmth but people would kick off about that. Fact is the government could enact any policy to stop homelessness and people would oppose it and the homeless would choose to street life. Because its what they know and it let's them live the life they wish to lead. Some of them are foriegners too. You need to help me out, what does your post mean in the context of the subject? "many of them from abroad" - Braverman What did she actually say that you don't agree with?" Is that correct or not, and what is it that makes you go so defensive when foreign nationals are mentioned as a problem? They either are or are not, surely that is given, the truth. If you think Braverman is not correct you will have the evidence to share? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The problem as we know is there are certain homeless thatbwont go into shelters. Because you have to give up belongings and paraphernalia when you do. ( for lack of better wording you can not do drugs) Many homeless of course, do not want this. The government is withing its right to ask charities not to donate tents for homeless ornsleeping bags if they are choosing to live on streets. We have St George's crypt in Leeds that look after them and many choose not to use it. They make money at night hanging around fast food outlets and begging. More than they would by staying indoors. This is the sad reality. Thr government could force them off the streets but into social housing and warmth but people would kick off about that. Fact is the government could enact any policy to stop homelessness and people would oppose it and the homeless would choose to street life. Because its what they know and it let's them live the life they wish to lead. Some of them are foriegners too. You need to help me out, what does your post mean in the context of the subject? "many of them from abroad" - Braverman What did she actually say that you don't agree with? Is that correct or not, and what is it that makes you go so defensive when foreign nationals are mentioned as a problem? They either are or are not, surely that is given, the truth. If you think Braverman is not correct you will have the evidence to share?" Did Braverman point out how many/what percentage of homeless are foreign? Most homeless in London, for example are British, and that’s the most multicultural city in the U.K. I must admit, I don’t think a rough sleeping foreigner is any greater/lesser problem than a rough sleeping Brit. Both are a tragedy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We either have accommodation to house people or we don’t, either way we should not be allowing people to build tent communities, running water, sanitation and heat are a basic human right. If we can’t provide the basics, what is the answer? What is the answer ? We have alot of people here living in caravans. They are smart they bank thier money and live off a system. Sleep in a van or rv. Go to 24 hour gyms pay 25 dollars a month to use thier facilities. Shit and shower anytime during the day. Even if you travel. It's brilliant in a way. No disrespect to you but that is America-you cannot & the authorities will not let you do that here…." I beg to differ....... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The problem as we know is there are certain homeless thatbwont go into shelters. Because you have to give up belongings and paraphernalia when you do. ( for lack of better wording you can not do drugs) Many homeless of course, do not want this. The government is withing its right to ask charities not to donate tents for homeless ornsleeping bags if they are choosing to live on streets. We have St George's crypt in Leeds that look after them and many choose not to use it. They make money at night hanging around fast food outlets and begging. More than they would by staying indoors. This is the sad reality. Thr government could force them off the streets but into social housing and warmth but people would kick off about that. Fact is the government could enact any policy to stop homelessness and people would oppose it and the homeless would choose to street life. Because its what they know and it let's them live the life they wish to lead. Some of them are foriegners too. You need to help me out, what does your post mean in the context of the subject? "many of them from abroad" - Braverman What did she actually say that you don't agree with? Is that correct or not, and what is it that makes you go so defensive when foreign nationals are mentioned as a problem? They either are or are not, surely that is given, the truth. If you think Braverman is not correct you will have the evidence to share?" I'm 100% on board with Braverman. As mentioned. Just a shame she's not in any kind of position of power or a part of some kind of authority that could help homeless people. She has no other option but to try to demonise the homeless. After all, some of them are from abroad. Meanwhile we should all focus on the problems that foreign homeless people cause and just continue to vote Tory relentlessly. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Meanwhile we should all focus on the problems that foreign homeless people cause and just continue to vote Tory relentlessly. " Quite strange that Cruella is not happy with people in tents, and your comment re foreigners and tents is at odds with the Govt, since at the end of July the Times reported that the Home Office had bought tents to house up to 2,000 people. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The problem as we know is there are certain homeless thatbwont go into shelters. Because you have to give up belongings and paraphernalia when you do. ( for lack of better wording you can not do drugs) Many homeless of course, do not want this. The government is withing its right to ask charities not to donate tents for homeless ornsleeping bags if they are choosing to live on streets. We have St George's crypt in Leeds that look after them and many choose not to use it. They make money at night hanging around fast food outlets and begging. More than they would by staying indoors. This is the sad reality. Thr government could force them off the streets but into social housing and warmth but people would kick off about that. Fact is the government could enact any policy to stop homelessness and people would oppose it and the homeless would choose to street life. Because its what they know and it let's them live the life they wish to lead. Some of them are foriegners too. You need to help me out, what does your post mean in the context of the subject? "many of them from abroad" - Braverman What did she actually say that you don't agree with? Is that correct or not, and what is it that makes you go so defensive when foreign nationals are mentioned as a problem? They either are or are not, surely that is given, the truth. If you think Braverman is not correct you will have the evidence to share? I'm 100% on board with Braverman. As mentioned. Just a shame she's not in any kind of position of power or a part of some kind of authority that could help homeless people. She has no other option but to try to demonise the homeless. After all, some of them are from abroad. Meanwhile we should all focus on the problems that foreign homeless people cause and just continue to vote Tory relentlessly. " In 30 years of working experience in Social Housing and Homelessness I only came across two people who 'chose' to live on the streets. One did so as a result of a personal tragedy, he is now in sheltered housing after many years on the street. The other suffered a very difficult autistic disorder, he was eventually housed after finally engaging with support. Perhaps Braverman could look at what another country has done. It has ended the sale of Council Housing at discount and it has abolished the Priority Need Test which denies help and support to single homeless people. That country is Scotland where housing law is devolved. The choice is open to England to ask to do the same | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Meanwhile we should all focus on the problems that foreign homeless people cause and just continue to vote Tory relentlessly. Quite strange that Cruella is not happy with people in tents, and your comment re foreigners and tents is at odds with the Govt, since at the end of July the Times reported that the Home Office had bought tents to house up to 2,000 people." I have at least three large tents which I could have sold to the govt, and made a huge profit (a bit like their mates did with PPE during the covid crisis - or the ferry company that had no boats). | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tom - how often do your threads get to 175? cos this one has just about made it." Rarely | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
