Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Eldorado

123,630 homeless children in England

Recommended Posts

Eldorado

More than 120,000 children will be homeless this Christmas, official Government statistics have revealed. The new data shows the number of children living in temporary accommodation is at its highest point for 12 years.

When David Cameron took power in 2010, the number of homeless minors was at 71,460.

Now, that figure is at 123,630 – an increase of 73%.

It hasn’t been that high since Labour were in charge in June 2006 and 130,470 children were homeless. The shocking number continued to fall from 2006 until December 2011, when it started surging again.

Full shame: https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/13/child-homelessness-jumps-73-since-tories-took-power-8242314/?

:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
hetrodoxly
54 minutes ago, Eldorado said:

More than 120,000 children will be homeless this Christmas, official Government statistics have revealed. The new data shows the number of children living in temporary accommodation is at its highest point for 12 years.

When David Cameron took power in 2010, the number of homeless minors was at 71,460.

Now, that figure is at 123,630 – an increase of 73%.

It hasn’t been that high since Labour were in charge in June 2006 and 130,470 children were homeless. The shocking number continued to fall from 2006 until December 2011, when it started surging again.

Full shame: https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/13/child-homelessness-jumps-73-since-tories-took-power-8242314/?

:(

Too many people on this small Island.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevewinn
59 minutes ago, Eldorado said:

More than 120,000 children will be homeless this Christmas, official Government statistics have revealed. The new data shows the number of children living in temporary accommodation is at its highest point for 12 years.

When David Cameron took power in 2010, the number of homeless minors was at 71,460.

Now, that figure is at 123,630 – an increase of 73%.

It hasn’t been that high since Labour were in charge in June 2006 and 130,470 children were homeless. The shocking number continued to fall from 2006 until December 2011, when it started surging again.

Full shame: https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/13/child-homelessness-jumps-73-since-tories-took-power-8242314/?

:(

what's the definition of children living in temporary accommodation? is it children being placed with foster parents?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eldorado
34 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

what's the definition of children living in temporary accommodation? is it children being placed with foster parents?

Better asking these folks.

HOMELESSNESSSTATS@communities.gsi.gov.uk

https://gss.civilservice.gov.uk/guidances/mhclg-homelessness-statistics-user-forum/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevewinn
4 minutes ago, Eldorado said:

Better asking these folks.

HOMELESSNESSSTATS@communities.gsi.gov.uk

https://gss.civilservice.gov.uk/guidances/mhclg-homelessness-statistics-user-forum/

 

I cannot find the answer to my question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seanjo
1 hour ago, Eldorado said:

More than 120,000 children will be homeless this Christmas, official Government statistics have revealed. The new data shows the number of children living in temporary accommodation is at its highest point for 12 years.

When David Cameron took power in 2010, the number of homeless minors was at 71,460.

Now, that figure is at 123,630 – an increase of 73%.

It hasn’t been that high since Labour were in charge in June 2006 and 130,470 children were homeless. The shocking number continued to fall from 2006 until December 2011, when it started surging again.

Full shame: https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/13/child-homelessness-jumps-73-since-tories-took-power-8242314/?

:(

So not homeless, they're in temporary accommodation, bad decisions by parents are to blame, not the government.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Susanc241

To me homelessness is being on the street not by choice and with nowhere else to go.  I do wish the media wouldn’t twist information to give themselves 'shock' headlines.  I do agree temporary accommodation is often far from ideal but it usually means you have a roof over your head and protection from the elements.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevewinn
10 minutes ago, Susanc241 said:

To me homelessness is being on the street not by choice and with nowhere else to go.  I do wish the media wouldn’t twist information to give themselves 'shock' headlines.  I do agree temporary accommodation is often far from ideal but it usually means you have a roof over your head and protection from the elements.

especially when the journalist uses images in their piece which are not even pictures of homeless kids in this country. (but homeless children in foreign lands)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eldorado
51 minutes ago, Susanc241 said:

To me homelessness is being on the street not by choice and with nowhere else to go.  I do wish the media wouldn’t twist information to give themselves 'shock' headlines.  I do agree temporary accommodation is often far from ideal but it usually means you have a roof over your head and protection from the elements.

To you.

To the UK Gov, a family living temporarily in a hostel are classed as homeless.

"The Chartered Institute of Housing, which represents housing officials, said that it was “a national disgrace” that 123,630 children were living in bed and breakfasts, refuges or hostels while their families waited to be allocated a permanent home."  https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/more-children-living-in-b-bs-and-hostels-d7nbn8nmm

"In total, the latest ONS figures released by the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG) show that there were 123,630 children living in households in temporary accommodation (61,480).

“These figures reveal the stark reality of the homelessness crisis we are facing in this country – the fact that more than 120,000 children were living in temporary accommodation in June 2018 is quite simply a national disgrace,” said Terrie Alafat CBE, the CIH’s chief executive."

https://northernhousingmagazine.co.uk/2018/12/13/englands-shame-120000-children-stuck-in-temporary-accommodation-is-a-national-disgrace/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevewinn

You can't expect to take in 50,000 refugees and 20,000 child refugees. And house all those people who's homes are destroyed by fire such as the Grenfell tower residents and not expect problems somewhere along the line. They have a roof over their heads and food in their belly. All courtesy of the tax payer. Their situation is temporary not permanent. Good job they live in the UK. Most other places they'd be on the streets. 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grey Area
2 hours ago, stevewinn said:

what's the definition of children living in temporary accommodation? is it children being placed with foster parents?

A child wouldn’t be considered homeless in a foster placement.

These figures are hard to quantify as the ‘homeless’ tag covers quite a large spectrum.

The article refers to families placed in temporary accommodation, this is likely families that have been emergency housed having presented to their local housing office. Overwhelmingly due to landlord eviction.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eldorado

"Child homelessness has increased by 80 per cent since 2010, according to new government figures."

"A new household is also found to be homeless every five minutes, with 124,490 children being housed in temporary accommodation in England at the end of 2018".

Report at the UK Metro: https://metro.co.uk/2019/05/24/child-homelessness-increases-shameful-80-within-decade-9681898/

At the Independent: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/homeless-children-temporary-accommodation-conservative-theresa-may-a8928291.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
itsnotoutthere

The UK population in 2010 was 62.7million. The UK population population is now approaching 67million (boosted largely by immigration legal & illegal) so with 5million more people stuffed into the country an increase of 52,000 seems unremarkable. I doubt 5million more houses have been built in that period.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ethereal_scout
Quote

what's the definition of children living in temporary accommodation? is it children being placed with foster parents?

Bed and Breakfast or Hotel accommodation. I'm assuming they're NOT separated from their parents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Posted (edited)

here in nyc city pays hotels 160 per day to house a homeless, needless to say those hotels turn into something other than a hotel anyone wants to stay in.  now think about  it 160 a day, that is 4800 a month, for each homeless, that is a rent you'd pay for 3 bdrm luxury apartment.  most people here do not make that much a month.  

Edited by aztek
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eldorado
15 hours ago, aztek said:

here in nyc city pays hotels 160 per day to house a homeless, needless to say those hotels turn into something other than a hotel anyone wants to stay in.  now think about  it 160 a day, that is 4800 a month, for each homeless, that is a rent you'd pay for 3 bdrm luxury apartment.  most people here do not make that much a month.  

The same charade goes on here...

"London councils have been paying more than £14m a year simply to persuade private landlords to house homeless people. This has been caused in part by the right-to-buy scheme introduced during the Thatcher government, which gave tenants the right to buy their council houses.

"By 2017, four in 10 of these homes were owned by private landlords, who charged more than twice the rent of local authorities. According to today’s report, Barking and Dagenham council has “lost 48,500 council homes under right-to-buy policies and now spends more than £800,000 a year renting back sold-off properties”."

(emphasis mine) Full monty: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/25/landlords-rich-homelessness-compulsory-purchase-london-councils

There's money to be made from the poor and feckless.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ethereal_scout

Right to Buy is a disaster. I'm still convinced Thatcher will go down as the worst Prime Minister of all time considering the damage she did to the flora and fauna. Right to Buy (to the best of my knowledge) legislation is still in force in England therefore the situation will just be getting worse. I'm still trying to work out what her motivations were for it. It can't have been for people, that goes without saying. She was determined to destroy everything that the opposition was. If she was one house (her's) and the opposition the other house - all she wanted to do is bulldoze it. The only theory Ive got is that they were having problems with the legalities of the newly formed Council Tax. The form of tax that pre-dated council tax was known as Rates - it was based on what was the market rate for letting out a property. I'm assuming market rates for council houses (buying and selling) weren't available due to council houses been never for sale. The buying price for council houses were originally set at the estimated cost of a replacement - approx. £30,000 - the new home owner then selling it on at a profit. There's a one bedroomed ex-council flat on the market for £120,000 just up the road from where I am. Anyway - I'm assuming 'right to buy' was born when they had to work out a legal get around to no buy/sell data for council houses being available.

If the ex-council properties kept a low market rate in terms of buy and sell then I may be inclined to agree with Thatchers outlook that it'll bring home ownership to the masses. However they haven't - they go up in price till they get to a market price for buy/sell - thus defeating the properties value to society as a low priced property. The number of properties available to those out with work or in low paid work drops and before you know it there are no properties available.

The original enabling legislation for 'right to buy' stipulated that for every council property sold off - a new property needed to be built. However I'm assuming most (if not all ) district councils have failed to do so.

What needs to happen is the abolition of right to buy - and a massive council house building programme to start and keep going till everyone is housed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
On 12/17/2018 at 1:05 PM, seanjo said:

So not homeless, they're in temporary accommodation, bad decisions by parents are to blame, not the government.

That's how homelessness is classed in the UK. The government is required, by law, to ensure anyone who is homeless has a bed. Only those who have went through this process, and messed it up somehow, end up on the street. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
5 hours ago, ethereal_scout said:

Right to Buy is a disaster

I think a lot of it may have been about avoiding the deterioration of housing estates. When people in council houses work hard, better themselves and eventually can afford to be considered moving up in class (something that happened more and more often as the UK shifted from an industrial society to a consumer society), they inevitably seek to buy a house. So they would move out of the area and someone on the waiting list would be moved into the council house.

So instead of communities growing wealthier together you'd get everyone who could afford it moving, leaving only the poorest living in council housing estates. You can see the results of this in housing estates all over the UK.

I'm sure there were other factors but this has been a recognised problem in the UK for many decades. It's the reason you see entire council estates demolished. The communities become so poor and crime riddled that it's safer just to move them out, demolish and rebuild. If you've lived anywhere near bad areas then you've probably seen this process in action.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.