Homeless to have tents banned

Its a good policy, the house owner gets to keep their property, the loan is secured against an asset and of course far cheaper than re housing a family, often in hyper expensive B&B hostels.

Tories are always against anything that might save money AND help ordinary folk.

And the Welsh assembly are planning to implement a mortgage support scheme to struggling home owners. Why? In large part because it is more cost effective than having to rehouse families after a repossession. Guess what the Torries think of that.

Please I know the answer to this one.

The problem is there isn't a Cabinet Minister for Prisoners. If there were, then their views would be taken into account.

The point here is that there are in place already, laws to prevent disruption on flights, the Tories chose not to invoke them.... thats on them, nothing to do with Labour or anyone else.

Lip Service and doing nothing at all, are one in the same thing! hardly likely a former Lawyer and DPP will be soft on law breakers, unlike a guy who wanted to inject himself with Covid.

So we have a Tory party that says it wants longer sentences, yet has just told the courts to not jail people if the sentence would be less than a year! yet there isn't enough parole officers to support these people who would normally be jailed.... great if its you assaulted/burgled etc

Who do you think is responsible for the shortage of parole officers and not enough prison places, properly managed with decent rehab? ... i'll let you think about that!!!!

Basically- yes it is an amazing targeted universal service but it isn’t necessarily picking up the families where children are likely to go on to be street homeless- as those families tend to not engage, or are already with social services/ kids removed.

I know that report well (in fact I know Sure Start very well!). The health outcomes are in relation to hospital admissions. Nothing about long term mental health.
I do agree that Sure Start plays a part, but the referral criteria are fairly tight (lots of geographical areas not covered), and while the programmes for children are excellent, only a small number of families actually engage with the family support and parenting programme side. And as I and someone else said- those whose children are most at risk of adverse childhood experiences, are the least likely to engage.
Sure starts over arching aim is to close the educational attainment gap and it is relatively light touch on the social care side, and doesn’t even employ social workers.

My personal experience of SureStart was that when I desperately needed support, my children were too old for me to be able to access any services. The wider family services which were available tended to be used by those (like us) who probably didn’t need subsidised holiday activities, but were glad of the opportunities.

That would be a hugely useful and relevant study if there was shown to be a correlation between the age of those who are rough-sleeping who fall under the age group where access to SureStart would have been available, being fewer than those before or since. Otherwise, a statement that it has better health outcomes has no bearing on whether those having benefitted from its services were any less likely to become mentally unwell or suffer from addiction badly enough to become homeless. Any figures available?

Such a gimmick. They are just trying to claw votes however they can. This is an awful idea in practice. Criminalising and making it easier to persecute already extremely vulnerable people. It's in no way helpful and won't deal with the problem whatsoever. Will just cost a load of money and time. Ridiculous

That’s not what the IFS researchers concluded.

https://ifs.org.uk/publications/health-impacts-sure-start

I live and work in an area with Surestart. Yes it is a great programme- BUT it is targeted at the families below social work involvement. There are still many broken people who are beyond its reach. Basic inverse care principle- those that are most in need don’t access it.

At least the conservatives pay lip service to law and order.

They don’t though, do they? It’s a party full of sexual predators and liars. They couldn’t even manage to obey the laws they’d made themselves in 2020.

So by your standards, Islam is not the religion of peace, the police do not enforce law and order, doctors do not save lives, nurses do not care for patients, and the BBC aren't impartial.

I rather think the issue of the legality of mob rule is aside from the government - let's face it, when pretty much any of the other parties makes it in to government, mob rule will just be legalised, and encouraged. At least the conservatives pay lip service to law and order.

How many of ones senior members can break the law, and one still claim to be the party of law and order?

I must say I am impressed you have found a convicted rapist, they are few and far between with the current government because they know what a woman is.

@usernamealreadytaken

Your defence of the Tories is to be admired but you admit they have now allowed mob rule to interfere with the application of the law.

Funny if was to get pissed on a flight and abused an airline employee, i could end up in jail but block a deportation and thats all ok.

Thought they were the party of law n order?

Guess the government has nothing to do with the Courts backlog and full prisons either..

I'd wager it's probably not conservatives stopping the deportations.

Who else could it be? The backlog for processing asylum seekers is the biggest it’s ever been. The government could sort that out tomorrow but it would rather try to make political capital from it. They - and you - must think we’re all stupid.

Again, I'd wager it's probably not conservatives stopping the deportations. It's not like many MPs have their pilot licences to physically get people on a plane, and even when on a plane there are "do gooders" trying to keep criminals here :-(
https://socialistworker.co.uk/news/protests-help-stop-deportations-to-jamaica/

https://cartwrightking.co.uk/articles/immigration/deportation-stopped-after-protest/

https://www.bigissue.com/news/activism/rwanda-deportation-flights-protest-asylum-seekers/

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/13/uk-jamaica-deportation-flight-blocked-road-brook-house-gatwick-activists-acquitted

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-66756841

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/may/13/glasgow-residents-surround-and-block-immigration-van-from-leaving-street

...and who is to blame for this sorry state of affairs?

It always comes back to this - the Tories have been in Government for 13.5 years and they have failed on any measure, nothing has improved and every public service has got worse.

Believe me if we had Labour in for so long and the country was just as it is now, i'd be calling them out too.

We can't even deport fucking rapists and murderers; what chance do you think we have of putting nice Mrs Visa Overstayer who is lovely and always says "hello" on a plane home? 🙄

Oh so now the "opposition benches in the commons" encompasses Lawyers, Judges and bizarrely, the French... & there was me thinking you meant Labour MPs etc

Lawyers operate within the law set down by Parliament and we have signed up to the ECHR, entirely within the gift of the Govt to leave the ECHR or perhaps they might be better off making decisions and policies based on the law, rather than a back of a fag packet?

Its not France's job to police UK borders, we left the EU (a Tory decision to have a referendum and Tory Govt who negotiated our withdrawal) we now have almost zero influence on France or the EU..... ever wondered why numbers went from zero to 46k over the last 4 years?

That still leaves 10s of '000s of visa overstayers... who do you want to blame for not deporting them?