Becuse iv been were they are we are its 2017 and its time for change every one needs a roof over they head a bed some were warm not a shop door way

This is for grenfell. Who cares if the rich are unhappy with this. They only care about their house prices not human lives.

There Is Alot Of vulnerable people People Homeless On The Streets Of Wrexham & Enough isn't Being Done To Help Them, They Need A Safe Warm Place To Call Home No One In This Day & Age Should Have To Be Sleeping Rough,This Problem Has To Be Addressed Now

On the 6th April 2017 a petition with over 5000 signatures was presented to Brighton and Hove Council. Over 3000 signatures were signed on the streets of Brighton and 2200 online. The petition was against the implementation of PSPO’s. PSPO’s give Council workers and the Police the power to give Homeless people and Travellers an on the spot £100 fine for occupying a tent, vehicle or caravan in 12 locations across the city. Failure to pay the fine can lead to prosecution and a further £1000 fine. People breaching the order must provide a name address and date of birth. Failure to positively identify someone can lead to arrest. So effectively you can be fined, arrested and prosecuted for being homeless and having no money to pay for the ‘crime’ of being homeless. Brighton and Hove council voted for the petition to be noted but not to be forwarded to the Policy and Resources committee for further debate. Usually any petition with over 1250 signatures is debated at committee. Despite opposition to this legislation from Liberty, Equality and Human Rights Commission, local charities, specialist lawyers and the local community, Councillors blocked due democratic process by voting against the legislation being debated by the Committee that decided to implement it. It appears that Brighton and Hove Council want to sweep away homeless people and Travellers from our city through criminalisation and attempting to block any debate or opposition to the legislation. This will not work, it cannot work and we are standing against it. PSPO’s should only be used to target specific behaviours and not specific groups. This statement has been echoed by Sussex Police as well as human rights lawyers. This legislation is a direct assault on the homeless community and Gypsies and Travellers. PSPO’s have been misused in this context as living in a tent, caravan or vehicle are not anti-social activities in themselves. Article 8, of the Human rights act the right to a private and family life, is being infringed by this use of PSPO’s. Under the European convention on Human Rights, all public bodies owe a duty to facilitate the Gypsy way of life. This legislation is an attack on the Gypsy way of life and therefore in breach of Equality Duty and The European Framework Convention for the protection of Minorities. This policy is unlawful and need to be brought back to committee to be looked at again as it stands Brighton and Hove Council have blocked any further debate.

In the UK landlords have the ability to exploit tenants to the fullest extent without the tenant being able to do anything if they have to move out. 12 months is a long time and a lot can change in that period (e.g. loss of job, having to relocate, moving to look after sick relatives, breaking up or no longer able to afford rent for whatever reason.) without protection for tenants like this in place, landlords could continue to take rent right up until the end of the period if they are unwilling to negotiate terms, even if the tenant had a unforseen change of circumstance only a month into their contract.

Tenant's living in rented housing in the UK shouldn't need to set up protest sites to have their voice heard. This type of site is not effective and serious concerns can be missed, as often the message will never be seen by the intended recipient. Tragedies like Grenfell Tower might have been avoided had the residents had a direct line of communication, that delivered their concerns directly to the desk of the relevant housing team. The majority of housing staff are doing everything they can to make a difference, however, reduced budgets, staffing and available resources are having a significant impact. A system needs to be deployed immediately to provide 360 degree protection. The system needs to free up valuable staff time, whilst providing protection to all sides and a complete record of all communication between connected parties (provider and tenant). Every event and communication (on both sides) throughout the tenancy must be logged, date stamped and digitally signed. This will ensure, in the event of a dispute, or worse, ALL the facts and supporting information is available...signed, dated and in complete chronological order.

Manchester Activist Network agree and campaign in line with the same principles as Housing First, who stand by the following philosophy: - Housing as a basic human right - Respect, warmth and compassion for all clients - No requirement regarding housing readiness - Consumer choice and self-determination - A recovery orientation - Harm reduction rather than abstinence with regards to substance misuse. Receiving an intensive case management team This approach is guided by the belief that people need basic necessities like food and a place to live before attending to do anything less critical, such as getting a job, budgeting properly or attending to substance use issues. The Housing First approach views housing as the foundation for life improvement and enables to permanent housing without prerequisites or conditions beyond those of a typical renter. The traditional supported accommodation, addressing addiction issues and subsequent move-on to long-term accommodation had failed repeatedly. (Laura's Story) http://icmblog.shelter.org.uk/a-housing-first-future/ Housing First, widely replicated in the US, Canada, Europe, has been actively growing interest in developing better housing responses for people with multiple and complex needs. - provides strong and consistent outcomes for tenancy sustainment of between 70% to 90% - Potential annual savings ranged between £4,794 and £3,048 per person in support costs - One study found an average cost savings on emergency services of $31,545 per person housed in a Housing First program over the course of two years. However, the future of the initiative is struggling due to: - Very little funding comes from other sectors including social services (4%) criminal justice (2%) and substance misuse (2%) - By far the biggest barrier to setting up a Housing First project was reported as access to suitable and affordable accommodation in both the social and private rented sectors. Inspiring Change Manchester ‘now know more than ever of the importance of a tailored support offer; which is the crucial element in supporting men and women who have led complex lives into stable accommodation. Not just ceasing at the point where a tenancy is signed, but continued and wrap-around support has brought the immeasurable benefit of people developing real relationships with peers who in turn link them into what is happening in their locality’ . Wayne's Story: http://icmblog.shelter.org.uk/wayne-talks-housing-first/ “I believe that when you build a life it’s like building a building. You start with the foundations; you don’t start with the roof. I was being offered jobs and training courses, but no housing.” - Wayne, Housing First resident. As one of the largest landowners in the country, Network Rail, has a portfolio that is shifting the landscape towards gentrification of our inner Cities. M.A.N. believe Network Rail have a corporate responsibility to minimise the negative social ramifications of this change, such as the rise in homelessness in Manchester. Manchester Activist Network

There is only fewer homes built for social housing when there are more befor development housing a lot of families with goodaminaties including health Center's schools ect

In the wake of the Grenfell Tower fire, people are rightly concerned about fire safety in their buildings. A 2013 coroners report into the 2009 fire at Lakanal House, Camberwell, recommended sprinklers in every tower block. But right now only two of the borough’s 181 social housing tower blocks have sprinklers installed. This accounts for 1.1 per cent of social housing tower blocks in the borough, and means 98.9 per cent of high rise blocks do not have sprinklers installed. Will you take a moment to sign the petition and ask the council to the right thing?

There is a major problem in the housing and property market whereby landlords whom want to make extra money renting individual rooms are providing no agreements and are taking sizable deposits from lodgers offering no protection as there is no policy or law that says they should do, 1.7 million homeowners rented rooms to lodgers in 2016 according to Santander Mortgages Survey. This matters because alot of professionals including our emergency services sector are renting in this way and by not regulating this area means hundreds of thousands of pounds are not returned with no consequences. I have a family member that decided to use a lodging platform for listings to find a room in London, she paid £1200 as a deposit, whilst living in the property the landlord began to infringe on her personal space and belongings and so she decided to give notice to leave, when she asked for the return of her deposit the landlord refused saying she missed payments and the room wasn't in the same condition he rented it to her in, she was devastated as there seemed to be nothing she could do but taking it to a claims court, she decided to walk away. I have heard thousands of stories just like this I want a Lodger Deposit Guard to be backed by the Department of communities and local government and rolled out as a mandatory action when renting a room going hand in hand with background checking to stop unregulated renting.

It is obscene that foreign investors can buy up and leave unoccupied these properties whilst in this country there is a dire affordable housing shortage. It is a sad indictment of our society, and in particular of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, that this state of affairs is allowed to exist.

It is important because no person or company should make money out of the death of all the people who died or have been displaced, and any housing that is build should be for the people who once lived in Grenfell.