Skip to main content

We need evidence-based action to end rough sleeping, not post-truth emotional spasms



In my first year working with homeless people an older colleague, with foreboding, informed me that the homeless people we were supporting were more complex, challenging and needy than anybody had previously experienced.  I remember being shocked, considering it remarkable that I should be starting at the very time when the profile of the homeless population was changing so dramatically. It didn’t occur to me to ask ‘how do you know?’ 

Every year since, I have heard something like this same statement made. I was therefore not in a condition to be knocked down by a feather when, as a predictable pre-Christmas truism, it was stated that those working with the homeless were encountering an unprecedented increase in ‘the range of complex issues’. Wiser now, I understand that what I first heard those thirty years ago was hyperbole.      

A degree of embellishment in the context of such an emotive issue as homelessness is, perhaps, inevitable. However, when hyperbole descends into factual misinformation, we homelessness campaigners do ourselves no favours. When a high-profile Christmas campaign claimed 80% of London’s rough sleepers to be between 18 and 25, reliable data showing the real figure to be 10% the pointer on the bullshit detector dial really did begin oscillating crazily.

I’ve also noticed a perverse reaction when statistics on rough sleeping are published where, if numbers are increasing, there is sometimes an unfortunate impression given of collective satisfaction from homelessness organisations, a form of, ‘there - we told you so’.  Whereas, if numbers are stable or falling the response is more likely to be a questioning of the validity of the data and even a palpable, lip-chewing anxiety.    

I remember participating in an annual street count in a London borough a couple of years ago when this troubling inversion, through which good becomes bad, struck me particularly forcibly. That night, one of the teams taking part in the count returned to base following a lengthy search of streets and parks, tired and deflated. Apologising to their colleagues they bemoaned the fact that, despite a rigorous search, not a single person sleeping rough had been found. This, I should emphasise, delivered entirely without irony.
   
So, at times it feels as if an unspoken consensus prevails which requires the mood music to remain unremittingly bleak as if, instinctively, we are more at ease with the comforting familiarity of doom and gloom.

Moreover, I’ve heard it proposed that the numbers really don’t matter that much; even that a focus on figures is a fixation with a cultural dimension. Three years ago at an over-crowded homeless day centre in Paris I asked the beleaguered manager how many people slept rough in the city. ‘Between 5,000 and 7,000’ he answered. I persisted: ‘Is it 5,000 or 7,000?’ ‘Between 5,000 and 7,000 he unwaveringly repeated, adding, ‘What about in London?’  I gave him the precise, to a single digit, figure from the London annual statistics. ‘You are so Anglo-Saxon!’ he responded, breaking into a disarming smile.

But credible statistics must matter. To end rough sleeping we need know how many people are on the street, who they are and what approaches to tackling street homelessness, including preventative measures, work. We can then target resources to make the greatest impact. Yet, at times, there appears to be a curious indifference to investigating which interventions are succeeding, even unwillingness to acknowledge that we are making any headway at all.

For instance, statistics covering the last two quarters indicate that the number of people sleeping rough in the capital is reducing. We don’t yet know whether these figures are a blip or will constitute a trend.  Certainly Thames Reach’s teams continue to find demoralisingly high numbers of rough sleepers on London’s streets.  Nonetheless, should we not be analysing what went right for the 525 people who, the most recent quarterly figures show, were successfully helped off of the street? Whatever is working is worth exploring, with a view to doing more of it.

London is fortunate in having agreed protocols for recording rough sleepers on a cumulative, night-by-night basis, unlike most other cities. To establish a national rough sleeping figure we are still dependent on the street counts which take place every November. Unfortunately most local authorities provide estimates rather than undertake actual night-time counts. With respect to the last national count for which we have statistics (2016), just 14% of local authorities chose to count and the UK Statistics Authority has concluded that the rough sleeping figures in their current form do not meet the required standards of ‘trustworthiness, quality and value’ necessary to be designated as national statistics, something the Department for Communities and Local Government is actively seeking to rectify. 

Encouragingly, there are notable efforts underway elsewhere to produce better homelessness data and a credible evidence base. The European End Street Homelessness Campaign, a collaboration of organisations from different European cities, is actively seeking to improve ways of collecting detailed, relevant information on rough sleepers’ needs to achieve better outcomes and accurately track progress towards ending chronic street homelessness.   

Yet we do not convincingly show an unwavering determination to seek the hard data and evidence-based solutions to address the human catastrophe of rough sleeping. We can even give the impression that its continuation is rather convenient.  After all, we have long-fetishised street homelessness and the image of a rough sleeper in a doorway is virtually a brand. Of course we want to end rough sleeping – it is brutal and morally unacceptable in this second decade of the twenty-first century. But we must do far more to show that we are implacably in defiance of this post-truth era, with its corrupting appeals to emotion designed to make truth of secondary importance.      



A shorter version of this blog was published in Inside Housing magazine on-line on January 10th 2017. This blog was updated following the release of the 2016 rough sleeping statistics by the Department for Communities and Local Government on 25th January 2017       

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The quietly effective must trump shock and awfulness

Scott lives in an ordinary house in an unmemorable road in Catford, south London. He shares it with Suleiman and Seyi. The house is immaculately clean and Scott is proud of this as he has special responsibilities within the household. Over tea he explains to me and another visitor that as the ‘peer landlord’ he organises the house, making sure that it is kept tidy, bills are paid and good relations maintained with the neighbours. This is an active, purposeful household. Scott has been unemployed for a couple of weeks but is confident that he will soon find work in the motor industry where he has been employed for most of his life. Seyi works long hours in a West End hotel; Suleiman is a student. The house has been purchased by Commonweal, a groundbreaking charity supporting housing solutions that tackle social injustice. The house is leased to Thames Reach and the partnership scheme, Peer Landlord London, is targeted primarily at people in low income jobs. The peer landlord role i

Sleeping rough, working rough - with the Roma in London

5.00am. Dawn light is beginning to streak an indigo night sky. The battered caravan seems deserted. A brisk rap on its door by my colleague Ben breaks the silence. This is the early morning outreach shift in an outer London borough. In this road adjacent to a park there are a line of assorted vehicles, most of which appear to be derelict.  My two outreach colleagues, Ben and Helena, between them speak Czech, Romanian, Hungarian, Russian and English. Eventually there is a rustle from inside and the heads of a man and women emerge. There follows an amiable conversation with Ben who has met the couple before. They are Romanian and working to earn money for their extended family back home. Previously the caravan was located beside another park nearby, but they were required to move from there by the police. The couple paid a vehicle removal company to transport the caravan to this new site. Ben asks after the child who was previously living in the caravan with them and they expla

Killing with kindness

Much has been written about the psychology of giving, the reasons why we donate to charity and the different triggers that spark acts of generosity, some rational, others visceral. I am particularly fascinated by the impulses that lead us to give money to people begging on the street. In fact, to be candid, I am frequently left incredulous at the justification given for dropping money into that cap next to the sign that says ‘hungry and homeless’. Research indicates that for 90 per cent of people who give, compassion is the motivating factor. So I should not have been surprised that when speaking on BBC radio last week on the subject of begging, the first question was ‘isn’t it counter-intuitive that a homelessness charity is urging us not to give to beggars’? There he is, the homeless man cross-legged beside the cash point, beseeching, grimy, desperate. Do the right thing. A few years ago, one such man attracted the attention of Grant Shapps, then the shadow housing minister,