As part of our homelessness campaign,we would like to raise awareness of the homeless and what the government are not doing to help. Hopefully this campaign will help people understand the issue of homelessness and see what the government can do to prevent it. The government classify that there're around 20 homeless people in Birmingham but in actual fact their are 892 people. Homelessness is not a small concern. One of the news headlines, back in 2010, had said that one-in-three Britons will have been touched by homelessness.This is shocking,in fact,this should've shocked us into action. If something is not done about this,more of us will be living on the streets. Without a shelter. Without our everyday necessities. The government is for the people, not just those who have made the best decisions and made no mistakes. Our country has enough resources that none of its citizens should be without a home.It's quite shameful, that in a country, as wealthy as ours, we have citizens living on the streets. The true measure of a society is how it treats it's most vulnerable members. Therefore, the government should be doing much more than it is for the homeless population.They need help and understanding, and they need it from their government. Homelessness is your problem whether you recognize it or not. Everyday more and more people lose a job, unable to pay bills, and eventually end up losing their home. I have seen families live in cars and work while trying to survive. This is the harsh reality.

Homelessness is not a crime and affects people from all walks of life and criminalising it is criminal in itself - targeting those with nothing to pay nonsensical fines. It is our duty to care for people who have fallen on harder times and affording Cheshire Police more powers to simply move the 'problem' on beggars belief. Simply having provisions for the homeless who fit the 'ideal' criteria of a privatised 'care' provider (Richmond Court) is not good enough and will disperse the rough sleepers leaving our most vulnerable even further out of reach of help and causing more issues with them, residents and businesses alike.

having been a victim of this type of breaking and entering, here in the manchester area, I find Irwell Valley refusing to accept responsibility for the weakness of protection to the property and refusing to change the locks https://youtu.be/FqhhXyROxQM

In order to balance out the loss of social and affordable housing the right to buy scheme will entail. Tenants of at least 4 years should have the right to buy their rented home at a discount the same as a council or housing association tenant. This will have the effect of preventing foreign specualtors buying up London housing and forcing both rental and property prices up.

These flats are two bedroom properties that were part of the conditions of planning, they have been empty for nearly ten years as it seems there was never a completion date built into the contract, I have been on BM radio with Adrian Goldberg, written to my MP Steve McCabe these are supposed to be affordable flats that 22 families are being denied. Housing homeless families at affordable rents is vital to our society

The government's proposals to force councils to sell of remaining social housing stock will, in combination with the lowering of the welfare cap to £23,000, make London an uninhabitable city for many. This will only get worse over the next five years and lead to unprecedented levels of social cleansing from the capital. The amendment would force the government to empower London's Mayor in seeking to redress this balance, and provide additional social homes for people in one of the world's greatest cities. The Thatcherite campaign of council stock depletion would, over time, be reversed. Though it focuses on London, social housing is an issue everywhere, and we believe this would be a start. Stop the social cleansing of London. Your signature can be a part of that.

There are many people forced into renting in the private sector by local councils because they don't have enough social housing to provide them with a secure, affordable home, now Mr Cameron wants to cut housing benefit which is sure to hit these people the hardest, force them back into the homeless system which then again puts pressure on local councils to provide social housing which there just simply isn't enough of! So what then? Local slums? Stuck in B & B's? Ot back into tge unaffordable private sector? Its a un thought through situation and utterly rediculous

Firstly to ensure that those thrown out on the scrap heap of unemployed because the MOD wish to reduce pension rights for veterans. Next to Keep them off the streets. Thirdly to reduce the chance of becoming a statistic and finally for helping veterans to have something else other than low paid security work. The disused barrack and homes and ex married quarters could be maintained and used for training or veterans to enable them to take up work and also then mean that providing a charity set up as Barrack homes for Ex Service Personnel could result in less veterans finishing up in prison or homeless on the streets. Why? because often, families have moved on and it is so difficult to adapt to civilian life. How do I know? I am a veteran and it took me over 5 years to come to terms with having nowhere and no one

Anti-homeless spikes, along with other defensive architecture, have been around for a while now, and we shouldn't stand for them anymore. They not only have a practical impact on homeless people's lives, disallowing them from sitting or sleeping in certain sheltered locations, but they also help to propagate the feeling of division in our communities, creating an 'us and them' mentality. This means there is less interaction, less communication and therefore ultimately less understanding of why people end up sleeping rough, and what we can do to help. Getting rid of these spikes is a small gesture, but a huge step in acceptance and care, which will help to break down barriers, allowing us to engage more fully with the poverty and need which lies on our very doorsteps.

Ex military like all other homeless are in many cases without family or friends. However because of the training and environments they have been exposed to they will seldom ask for help or try shelters as they see this as weak. Although I'm sure the government are aware of the problem they are clearly not doing enough about it, instead they just rely on charities to do this for them. Its not enough please help me let the government know we care about this.

Too many tenants are subjected to revenge evictions because of landlords not wanting to keep houses to a good standard. Tenants are forced to pay high fees to secure a new home because of this. People have the right to check out their landlord before signing a tenancy agreement to see if their landlord has been compliant in tenant requests.

When planning permission was agreed in 2006, the levels of affordable and social housing on the vast Kings Cross Central site in Camden and Islington were not high enough. The agreed numbers of social-rented and other “affordable” homes in the plan only added up to 40%, a great disappointment to local communities who had fought for at least the 50% target set by Camden’s own Plan and by the Mayor’s London Plan. Now the developers are forcing the councils to accept an even lower amount - just 33% - claiming they can't afford to subsidise housing associations to buy the homes after government grants for social housing were reduced. But as recently as autumn 2014, Argent’s Robert Evans introduced a report by the Centre for London saying proudly: “Argent makes places for people. … Our current largest project is the redevelopment of King’s Cross, where we are delivering 2,000 new homes; 40% of the residential is classed as affordable in tenure.…" We are calling on Argent to stick to their original promises and top up the subsidies for the missing social housing themselves, so that our communities get the homes they were promised. Kings Cross is surrounded by some of the most overcrowded families in London, and Camden Council has more than 25,000 households on its housing waiting list. Other community facilities including a nursing home have also been removed from the legal agreement governing the site, and the savings made, along with extra profits from the recently increased overall amount of housing, could easily pay for the homes we need. We can't afford to let big developers back out of their agreements and so we are asking Argent and their Kings Cross Central Partnership to keep to their word.