An MP has complained that Brighton and Hove City Council is “dumping” homeless people in Eastbourne without the support that they need.
Josh Babarinde, the Liberal Democrat MP for Eastbourne, raised the issue during housing, communities and local government questions in the House of Commons yesterday (Monday 7 September).
Mr Babarinde said: “I recently met a homeless man at the homelessness charity, the Matthew 25 Mission, who said that he had been ‘dumped’ in temporary accommodation in Eastbourne by Brighton and Hove City Council without the support that he needed.
“The previous minister promised that she would review the out-of-area placement guidance for local authorities on this matter so will this minister meet me to discuss the progress of that review?”
Homelessness Minister Florence Eshalomi said: “I thank the honourable gentleman for raising that point.
“(He) should not have had to go through that. I am happy to meet with the honourable gentleman to discuss the case.”
The Matthew 25 Mission is based in Seaside, Eastbourne, and takes its names from a bible verse, Matthew 25:40 which says: “Whatever you did for the least of these, you did for me.”
At the same question time, Chris Ward, the Labour MP for Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven, said: “Rough sleeping is a huge challenge in Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven so I am delighted that the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State are making it such a big priority.
“But will any of the very welcome additional funding go to existing schemes such as the ending homelessness in communities fund – a brilliant scheme, but heavily oversubscribed – or charities in my constituency?”
Mrs Eshalomi said: “It is important to look at local initiatives … The government’s new £442 million rough sleeping programme and the ending homelessness fund will look at that.
“Brighton and Hove has received £1.35 million through the rough sleeping programme allocation while Brighton Women’s Centre has been allocated £371,380 through the ending homelessness in communities fund, subject to grant agreement completion.”
“Without Support” seems to be a very important thing missing from the headline, because without it changes the meaning of the MPs words.
Brighton and Hove is only “City of Sanctuary” for some. Some human beings just have more rights than others.
‘Mrs Eshalomi said: “It is important to look at local initiatives … The government’s new £442 million rough sleeping programme and the ending homelessness fund will look at that.’ Why does she have to mention the figure of £442 million? Utterly meaningless as we have no idea what they’re going to do with it. Why not tell us what the ‘local initiative’ actually is?
Completely agree.
Perhaps rather than complaining, it might be in Mr Babarinde’s favour to discuss with Mr Ward how collectively they can look to tackle the lack of support through a pan Sussex lens. People who are homeless with a local connection to Eastbourne do end up rough sleeping in Brighton as there are more front line services available, so it can work both ways.
Getting ahead of the game would be beneficial to the planned regionalisation of Sussex, regardless of the political colours of an elected mayor.
Is there housing available in Brighton to house those who choose not to stay in Eastbourne ?? or anywhere else they they get housing offered ?? Surely being indoors during the winter period is ok ?? Could always argue later for something else.
Are the people being ‘dumped’ in Eastbourne actually from Brighton? Or have they either been ‘dumped’ in Brighton already or chosen to travel to Brighton in the expectation of a ready supply of drugs and companionship?
Unfortunately, its been happening for years. It happened to me 25 years ago. I was “placed” in a hotel in Eastbourne with no support and away from family connections I had in Brighton. due to this I had to change my GP to Eastbourne which meant I became Eastbourne’s problem and was written off by Brighton. I was born in Brighton, my family were born in Brighton.
The changes to city are aimed at students and those who can afford to be landlords. most of the student accommodation is often empty most of the year. why cant this be used for housing some of the homeless people in Brighton. I have and still do work within the supported accommodation sector. There is no where to move people on to that is affordable therefore bed blocking is an issue for those who need support and cannot access it as the other end of the system is blocked. I know of people who have waited 5 to 7 years to be rehoused in projects expected to move people on after 2 years. whilst I appreciate not everyone is ready to move on in 2 years these clients were and have successfully moved on.
We need to look at our priorities as a city. We are failing our vulnerable residents. Placing people out of area or in run down “hotels” both in and out of area. I personally was placed in the Heatherdean “Hotel” in Eastbourne, the Jevington “Hotel” and then moved to a place that offered support before being evicted because I didn’t have money for private rent and no social housing became available. I was told if I wanted to move back to Brighton i would have to private rent which I then did.
The issue is a lot of property was brought by people who don’t even live in the area, then the land was brought and built to have student accommodation on with high rent. Affordable rent is a joke when I was looking at affordable rent properties and to rent a property that was suitable for my family on my wages would have left me at a deficit each month with all the other bills. Brighton is no longer a family friendly affordable city and hasn’t been for years.
Quite right, we should return all homeless/srreet beggars/addicts to the place they were born. It’ll be like when Jesus was born. We could do a burnt offering and stuff. Get real if your homeless then you get what your given not what you choose.
I think there’s a pragmatic element there, beggars can’t be choosers. There’s many of people who don’t have the security of a home at all and would jump at the chance of a place, regardless of location. I wonder how important is the geographical link, or is that being conflated with being linked in with local services?
It’s a genuine question.
THE COUNCIL IS ONLY SENDING THE RUBBISH TO EASTBOURNE , THE ONES THEY CAN NO LONGER COPE WITH FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER