Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Something Evil]

Never, ever undrerestimate the stupidity of officials.
On the other hand, the writer of the article providing a link to the actual law would've made more sense, and also head off any allegations of the author just bullshitting.
Laws need to be published, and only come into effect a certain ammount of time after their publishing. (At least that's how the system woks in my country.)

[Vattic]

Another article on the subject. Arguably more balanced.

[Durin Stronginthearm]

Admittedly I haven't read the entire thread, but has it been pointed out yet that this is a policy limited to certain areas of London, not the whole UK, and is designed to encourage the homeless to get back on their feet rather than rely on handouts and shitting in public parks for the rest of their lives?

I'm a sucker as much as anyone for sensationalist headlines, but I occasionally prefer to be a little more informed than what the papers would like my knee-jerk reaction to be.

Just one area of London at that, Westminster. Still a shitty law, but I don't think it'll be enforced beyond moving people out of the borough - you can't fine people that have no money, and imprisoning them would cost £thousands. I doubt very much anyone will even suggest such a thing in Parliament, it'd be political suicide.

[Something Evil]

The council's efforts to stop soup runs in Westminster date back to 2001.

So not only is this thing not in act yet but similar projects did not manage to pass for something like a decade now, and there is constant negative reaction to them.
I guess it's pretty much safe to say that one needn't worry. Though the assholeness of officials does give pause, the chance of something like this actually getting approved is somewhere between zero and none.

[Leafsnail]

I'm not at all surprised that the party of Margaret Thatcher would want to do this.  I'm just surprised that they actually did, considering that it's not exactly gonna win them votes.  At least they're showing their true colours, I guess.

It may only be one council, but the "It only encourages them" rhetoric is pretty shocking.

That is messed up.  I don't know much about UK politics but couldn't someone challenge that in court as a constitutional violation?  We did that in Canada with Vancouver's free injection site when the government tried to shut it down.

...What constitution?  You have to understand that the UK as we know it wasn't built in a day.

You could definitely say it violates the European Convention on Human Rights, but our government hates and usually ignores it for some reason (we were told point blank that we have to let prisoners vote and we aren't).

[Ochita]

Oh... This is interesting to see.

[Keita]

When I first read this, I thought it was just the Daily Mail being, well, the Daily Mail.

But I check a little into it and the last shreds of optimisms has now left me :/

[Fayrik]

I'm ashamed to be partially related to England. *Sigh* I just can't explain this level of stupidity.

What you're seeing is the effects of a Conservative government... Just, so you can explain, next time around.

Oh my homeland... What has become of you? Quick question, is it illegal to be homeless in other EU countries like South Ireland and France?

It's just Ireland. Or, if you're planning on living there, The Real Ireland. Hehe!

On a more serious note now, I'd just like to quote something from this article that Vattic pointed out.

Housing Justice said the council's move was "over the top", would create further difficulties for the homeless and spread the problem elsewhere.

If that's not the sum of the matter, I don't know what is.

Also, just to clear up this whole constitution thing up a bit:
Here is the Wiki article to the law that I felt may have been breached by this. I couldn't find anything explicit about being allowed to live somewhere, be it outside or in. But I also couldn't find anything about the right to vote, so I may have the wrong article. If anyone finds something more specific, then please correct me!

When I first read this, I thought it was just the Daily Mail being, well, the Daily Mail.

But I check a little into it and the last shreds of optimisms has now left me :/

If this was the Daily Mail it'd run with a headline along the lines of "ABOUT TIME, YOU SCUMBAGS".

[Keita]

The thing is, I saw it in the Daily Mail as I was in a shop buying some hand rolling tabaco.

So, what's their excuse for bringing this in?

[Leafsnail]

They're the local council of an extremely rich, conservative area.  Their residents don't like looking at poor people.

[Keita]

I should of stated this before hand but I can't view the artical.

So it's only in a localized place? Where are the affected areas?

[Durin Stronginthearm]

So it's only in a localized place? Where are the affected areas?

Westminster.

[Keita]

So it's only in a localized place? Where are the affected areas?

Westminster.

...

No words.

Just an overwhelming disgrace to be british.

[Leafsnail]

It's actually only the area in front of Westminster cathedral, I think.

[Durin Stronginthearm]

So it's only in a localized place? Where are the affected areas?

Westminster.

...

No words.

Just an overwhelming disgrace to be british.

Only if you voted Tory