EU - Turkey deal

Antony I think I understood what you said but may have replied in my usual cack handed way !

We do of course live in a country with extremely large areas where building is possible. One thing that disgusts me is how we are already building in places where building would simply not been allowed not so long ago.

Here in rural Worcestershire houses are being thrown up in and around just about every village where there is even the smallest piece of land. Houses that are modern timber framed monstrosities that are far from in-keeping with what is there already.

But lets assume we find the land to build. I mean we can build anywhere now ?? Who is going to pay for the land the houses and the infrastructure that goes with it ? If we are talking about the supply of houses and so on for migrants I may be harsh but we must be talking social housing ? Councils and housing associations dont have the money thats for sure !

We live in an age where we do and consider the consequences After the event. Let hundreds of thousands of people to settle then worry about the obvious requirements !

The Police service is and has been cut to the bone. The NHS is ..................Well lets face it at the point of collapse . House supply in the social sector is under greater strain than ever before. Librarys Swimming pools and leisure centres are closing every day. This in an age where health and exercise absolutely needs supporting.

It is nothing more than economics . But all of these requirements should be set in place before we allow more and more people to settle here.

Whip round anybody ? Cos as a nation we are well and truly up the khyber ?

Whenever these discussions take place which is on just about every forum I visit there are always those in favour of bringing in hundreds of thousands more people. Not one has anyone answered the question...... Where does the money come from ?

 

Well said @wiseowl . (That's twice in a week I've had to use the 'good post' smilie! I save that special occasions!)

@Anthony Rogers, you don't need to apologise, we are all entitled to our own opinion

 

I agree completely with both of the above comments.

We should and absolutely must deal with the homeless and the people who are and have been waiting on the housing lists for years. Some of these people are still without any real hope of being given accommodation. No wonder they feel aggrieved when migrants are put up in front of them in the wait.

I must sound heartless but please trust me I am not ! I actually feel sick when I opine on this type of thread but we are after all just a small island and an island who fail to look after out own.

 

Well said @Charlie996

 

How sad that the European leaders are doing "deals" with Turkey while Turkey is openly brutalising the Turkish Kurds in the south east of the country.
There are accusations of war crimes being commited against the civil population in Cizre which no one seems to be bothered about. People get beheaded or are burned to death in basements and no ones bothered.Shameful.

 

Who are the homeless?
Also, it's worth noting:
~ not all people on the housing waiting lists are without a roof over their heads.
~ not all homeless people are on housing waiting lists.
~ taking that another step further, some of those people who are on the housing waiting lists (and may also have been on it for years) will be migrants too.

I can't help but feel that, as a blanket term being used here, the assumption is made that "the homeless" are comprised of indigenous people. Yet, around 35% of the people sleeping rough on the streets of London alone are migrants. The same people being seen at queue jumping the housing lists.

There is another aspect regarding housing and migrants which came up on a debate on the radio some months back. Some migrant cultures believe in keeping families together e.g. parents, children (adult/dependent) and grandparents all live in the same property. So, three generations in one household. In our culture, that rarely happens, so grandparents in one household, parents with dependent children in another ( 2 properties so far) and there is an expectation (and for some, they view it as their *right*) that adult "children" will leave the family home to live independently. That means that one family is now occupying 3 properties. That suggests (to me) that some migrant cultures are putting less of a strain on housing stock than indigenous people.

Of course tackling homelessness should be a priority but throughout history homelessness has existed and it is a very complex issue due to the many reasons people become homeless in the first instance. There is no one size fits all solution to it. You can build all the housing you like, if a person cannot/will not pay the rent/council tax they will simply become homeless once again. Which brings it full circle to why they cannot (or won't!) pay the rent

 

Saw that. Finally some common sense on that particular matter.

 

Who are the homeless?

Look in any city center you will find plenty of homeless. Feel free to ask them where they come from but its a fair guess many are those who are down on their luck for a multitude of reasons. Yes many are migrants which enforces my point.

Your right many cultures live several generations in one house . But we the indigenous population do not .

I realise not all on housing lists are homeless. But surely they are entitled to housing before people from overseas. I can fully understand why folk get irritated when they are passed by in favour of others.

Most people do actually pay their rent. Those who are adopted as asylum seekers get the rent paid for them .

I fully understand the is no "one size fits all solution"

Errr Sorry but no we cannot build as many houses as we like or are required without funding.. Which brings me to may main point and one no one yet has answered ! Who will pay for these houses to be built. Who will pay for the essential services and infrastructure required to go along with these houses ?

 

They are used to us paying them not them paying us....

 

@wiseowl - I totally agree.
My point was the term comes across in some posts as being used to represent only British people; which, of course, is not the case. Hence my point that migrants also form the growing number of people living on the streets.

Equally, I fully understand why people can find themselves in that position (I have been homeless myself) and was once employed by a charitable housing association who worked hard to find affordable, decent accommodation for a particular section of the community because, in terms of social housing allocation, came way down on the list of "priorities" (families taking greater priority); other reasons may also include addicts, ex-offenders, people who have had, or currently suffer with, mental health issues, teenagers/young adults who have been thrown out of their family home to fend for themselves and even youngsters who have left the "care" system ill equipped to begin independent living.

@Charlie996 - I agree that most people do pay their rent, but then those people won't be homeless.

An addict may not, and possibly cannot, prioritise rent over their addiction. Some people with mental health issues may equally find budgeting priorities difficult. Ex-offenders living on the streets have been known to commit further crime just so they can find warmth in a cell once again. Being homeless makes it quite difficult to access certain benefits for lack of an address and so, the cycle continues. Homelessness cannot be eradicated but that isn't the same as saying it shouldn't be addressed.

Do asylum seekers have all of their rent paid for them, or a percentage? Is that different or the same as people on benefits?

Who will pay? That's an interesting question. How willing would people be to have their council tax increased to fund it? How willing would be to have their rate of income tax increased to fund it? Should councils tap into the funds they raised through right-to-buy but were prohibited from building more stock with? Or, was that the money some councils "lost" during the credit crunch? I've no more answer to the who pays question than you do.

 

With respect, there is so much more to it than that.

When I first moved to Sheffield, I took pity on a homeless youth that begged some change from me. He looked genuine. He looked like he was about to faint with hunger at any moment. He was skinny and weak looking, pale in complexion, and visibly mucky. I encountered him several times and gave him a few quid each time. Then one night, wife and I went to an expensive nightclub. The kind of place that even 15 years ago cost 20 each to get in and a fiver a pint once in. Guess who else I saw in there, only this time clean and energetic looking and with expensive designer clothes on. So I put him in the category of 'professional begger'.

Another category. A young man I know just can't behave. He thinks everyone owes him. He is regularly in and out of jail. Each time he comes out, some individual or charitable organisation takes him in. They give him somewhere to settle while he gets back on his feet. Then he steals from them or smashes something up in a fit of temper, so they ask him to leave, and he becomes homeless again, until next time he gets locked up. I put him in the 'arrogant waste of space' category.

I have no doubt there are genuine ones. Possibly the majority are. But we can't just take the situation at face value.