Custom essays, dissertations, coursework & essay help from the UK's original custom essay writing services provider
Free Essays - Sociology Essays
Policy impact study - The impact of a range of policy initiatives on Rough Sleepers.
Introduction
Historically, when commentators spoke of the most deprived groups in society they spoke of poverty, more recently, some commentators speak of the most deprived groups as socially excluded. Social exclusion refers to more than the resources to obtain commodities, it is, rather, a process of being shut out, totally or in part, from the social, cultural, political and economic systems which contribute to a person's integration into society (Haralambos et al, 2000). Nolan and Whelan (1996) contend that,
Talking of social exclusion rather than poverty highlights the gap between those who are active members of society and those who are forced to the fringe, the increasing risks of social disintegration, and the fact that, for the persons concerned and for society, this is a process of change and not a fixed or static situation (Nolan and Whelan, 1996:190).
Those who are among the most socially excluded in British society are those who are homeless. In 1995 local authorities reported that there were 125,000 people who had registered themselves as homeless, among those who probably did not register were those living on the streets and sleeping rough. People sleep rough because of any number of things and governments introduce policy initiatives in an attempt to reduce the number of rough sleepers. Rough sleepers is used to refer to those people who are sleeping on the streets or other place outside e.g. car parks and who literally have nowhere else to go. This paper will describe what is believed about the nature and causes of rough sleeping. It will investigate the inadequacies in a current range of services and existing social security policies and finally it will evaluate the impact of current policies on the exclusion of rough sleepers.
Policy Context
Over the last thirty five years unemployment levels have risen dramatically and continue to do so. This has left large numbers of people dependent on benefits and a rise in the number of those who are long-term unemployed. During the same period social changes and successive government policies has widened the gap between rich and poor. Field (1996) is of the opinion that the Thatcher government, which came into power in the late 1970s consciously attempted to widen class differences during the 1980s. This widening of the gap between rich and poor has, Field maintains, led to the growth of an underclass who are denied the social and citizenship rights enjoyed by other members of society. He believes that there were fundamental contradictions in social security policy which continued up until 1997 when John Major was voted out of power. The Conservative Government targeted benefits which became means tested, this increased dependency and put people into a poverty trap from which it was difficult to escape. This Field (1996) contends is the major factor that led to the development of an underclass, however this theory of an underclass has been contested by Craine (1997) and Blackman (1997). In 1987 the welfare system was reformed to bring it in line with policies that were intended to discourage people from relying on state handouts. Changes in housing policy meant that the building of council houses came to a virtual standstill and rents went up by a third this affected the poorest in society and resulted in some people being made homeless. Alcock (1997) has suggested that the Conservative government actively pursued policies of inequality between 1979 and 1997 and that this increased the amount of poverty, social exclusion and people losing their homes and sleeping rough.
Rough Sleepers, the Nature and Causes
. People end up sleeping rough, or are at risk of becoming rough sleepers for a variety of reasons. These might be unemployment and low income, marital breakdown (particularly in cases where one partner has to leave the family home) running from the parental home, leaving care, mental health issues, drugs and drunkenness. Most of these are men in the 25-44 age group. In London there are a growing number of homeless women and they make up 15% of rough sleepers. There are an increasing number of young people sleeping rough some of them have left local authority care, most young rough sleepers are white and about 10% are black or Asian.
In 1990 the Government promised 250 million pounds to finance the Rough Sleeper Initiative, to help rough sleepers off of the streets and into accommodation and work, the initiative was funded through the Department of the Environment. The original initiative was targeted primarily at central London. The money was spent on outreach work and on resettlement projects for rough sleepers, on hostel places, day centres and on 3,500 purpose built housing units. The report Coming in From the Cold estimates that across the country there are around 1600 people sleeping rough on the streets every night and 635 of these were in London alone. Responsibility for rough sleepers was shared between different agencies, the police, social services, health professionals, local authorities and voluntary organizations. The report found however that this work was fragmented and there was little useful liason. As rough sleepers moved around responsibility shifted from one authority or agency to another and with little or no continuity it meant that the initiative did not adequately fill its primary objective of getting and keeping rough sleepers of the street and integrated back into society (Randall and Brown, 1996).
Rough Sleepers Initiative
An evaluation of the first RSI was commissioned in 1995 at the start of the second phase. Numbers sleeping rough in Central London had been reduced by half but it was found that 40% of rough sleepers had other needs that required specialist support e.g. mental health issues or drug and alcohol problems. It was found that these groups were particularly difficult to resettle. The first step in the process was hostel accommodation but many rough sleepers found this too restrictive they also wanted help with other issues that in many instances the hostels were unable to deal with. 1994/5 saw the introduction of the winter night shelters which helped some rough sleepers who refused to use hostel accommodation, members of this group often have associated mental health and/or drug/alcohol related problems. Under RSI 2 only 11% of rough sleepers complained of insufficient help in resettlement compared with 40% in RSI 1. Despite these improvements there were still major problems with some areas of inter-agency co-operation and decision making on the differing needs of the client group. There were difficulties between housing associations and referral agencies on agreeing the amount of support that was needed and on how the services were to be delivered (Randall and Brown, 1996).
The report on phase 2 suggests that there was an increase in inter-agency co-operation and consortia of agencies were set up in different geographical areas and that these were successful in working together, other agencies such as local authorities and the police were also brought on board at this time. Agencies were particularly concerned over clients with multiple needs such as mental health and drug/alcohol problems. Tbere was increased efficiency in working with mental health services and in trying to ensure that the needs of difficult client groups (who often fell through the net) were met. In many areas of the country rough sleeper counts were set up where agency members went out to count the number of people sleeping rough in any given area. There were injunctions on local authorities to reduce the number of rough sleepers in their areas (Randall and Brown, 1996).
Policy Making
Bramley et al (2005) contend that:
The Rough Sleepers programme initiated in 1990 has been a considerable success, with the Government's two-thirds reduction target met ahead of schedule and evaluations generally favourable housing has been increasingly drawn into issues of suitability and support for groups who have special needs or vulnerabilities. The scale and diversity of these groups has increased as a result of demographic changes (e.g. an ageing population) and policies of de-institutionalisation, care in the community, greater rights for certain groups to 'a normal life', and countering social exclusion (Bramley et al, 2005:5).
The Housing (Homeless Persons) Act of 1977 defined as homeless not only those who were sleeping rough, but also those people who were in emergency accommodation such as hostels, refuges, and bed and breakfast accommodation (Robson and Poustie, 1996). Those who were not seen to be in priority need, or who had made themselves intentionally homeless (battered women who did not go into refuges for example) were given emergency accommodation in some cases and were entitled to advice only in others. The Housing Act of 1996 reduced the responsibility of local authorities and homeless groups were removed from the list of those who were deemed priority allocation of local authority housing, the Act also introduced a Single Persons Homeless Register. Asylum seekers access to help was also reduced under this Act (Bramley et al, 2005). The effects of this Act were largely reduced by the introduction of the 2002 Homelessness Act. This meant that local authorities now (again) had an indefinite duty to secure accommodation for priority groups, it was also incumbent on them to produce strategies to reduce homelessness in their area. In July of 2002 the categories of priority need were expanded to include 16-17 year olds, 18-21 year olds who had left local authority care and those who were at risk of violence or abuse and who had been forced to leave home, the category also included all those who had an institutional background such as prison and mental hospitals need (The Allocation of Housing (Reasonable and Additional Preference) Regulations 1997. SI 1997 No. 1902).
The influence of the Conservative Government's Back to Basics moral campaign created the political environment for the 1996 Act and was also a response to a dramatic increase in the numbers of homeless as a result of government policy (Bramley et al, 2005). The incoming Labour Government was committed to reducing this Act which they did. On coming to power their first priority was that of rough sleepers and the introduction of a specialist unit.
Rough Sleepers Unit
In 1998, under the auspices of the ODPM the government introduced a Rough Sleepers Unit. The target was to achieve a two thirds reduction in rough sleepers by 2002. In 2002 the Unit was subsumed under the direction of the homelessness unit at the ODPM. The aim was to reduce the effects of rough sleeping not just on rough sleepers themselves but as part of a wider campaign to a) reduce the effects of rough sleepers on the streets on the general public and on businesses and b) as part of the Government's strategy to get more people functioning as a part of society and working to support themselves. There was a substantial allocation of extra resources, outreach workers, move on accommodation and specialist support services for those with mental health issues or alcohol/drug problems. The target was reached by 2002 although the ruling on rough sleeper counts has been decidedly controversial (Bramley et al, 2005). as local authority budget allocations for the homeless are in part dependent on authorities to reduce the number of rough sleepers in their area.
Conclusion
Clearly successive policy making has had both a deleterious and preventative effect on homelessness generallyh and on rough sleeping in particular. Although the rough sleeper count has been controversial it has also been effective. Randall and Brown (2002) while acknowledging the undoubtedly interventionist stance of the RSU nevertheless describe it as a successful venture. Concerns have been expressed by some agencies however on the methods that are sometimes used to remove the homeless from off the streets. This concern has increased with the anti-begging campaign spearheaded by the RSU. The prevention of rough sleeping and its associated problems are a continuing concern for Government and for the strategic partners involved. There are however signs of an increasing reduction in central control (Bramley et al, 2005) and more emphasis on local authorities and service delivery agents as partners in the continuing reduction of rough sleeping.
2000 words
Bibliography
Alcock, P. 1997 2nd ed. Understanding Poverty. London, Macmillan.
Blackman, S. 1997 Destructing a Giro: a critical and ethnographic study of the youth underclass in Macdonald R. ed. 1997 Youth, the Underclass, and Social Exclusion. London, Routledge
Bramley et al, 2005 Evaluation of English Housing Policy 1975-2002
Theme 1: Supply, Need and Access London ODPM
Craine, S. 1997 The Black Magic Roundabout: cyclical social exclusion and alternative careers in Macdonald R. ed. 1997 Youth, the Underclass, and Social Exclusion. London, Routledge
Field, F. 1996. Stakeholder Welfare. London, IEA
Haralambos et al 2000. 5th ed Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. London, Collins
Nolan, B. and Wheelan, C. 1996 Resources: Deprivation and Poverty. Oxford, Clarendon Press
Randall, G. and Brown, S. 1996 From Street to Home: An Evaluation of Phase 2 of the Rough Sleepers Initiative HM Stationery Office 1996
Randall, G. and Brown, S. (1999) Homes for Street Homeless People - An Evaluation of the Rough Sleepers Initiative. London: DETR.
Robson, P. and Poustie, M. (1996) Homelessness and The Law in Britain (3rd edition). London: Butterworths/Planning Exchange.
Rough Sleepers Unit (1999), Coming in from the Cold: The Government's Strategy on Rough Sleeping. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, London.
Rough Sleepers Unit (2000), Coming in from the Cold: Progress Report on the Government's Strategy on Rough Sleeping. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, London.
Rough Sleepers Unit (2001), Coming in from the Cold: Second Progress Report on theGovernment's Strategy on Rough Sleeping, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, London.
Social Exclusion Unit (1998) Rough Sleeping - Report by the Social Exclusion Unit. London: HMSO.
http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/rough_sleepers/index.jsp
Sociology Essays - Find your free sociology essays...
We have a large assortment of free essays available to use as research material. Visit our sociology essays from our free essays section.
All of the essays in the "Free Essays" section were written by students and then submitted to us to display and help others. Thanks to all the students who have submitted their essays to us. You should not hand in our essays as your own. We do not condone plagiarism!
UK Essays Sitemaps
UKEssays.com RSS Feed
