Local authority homelessness prevention in England: Empowering consumers or denying rights?

Hal Pawson

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    41 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    High profile commitments to stemming homelessness have been integral to New Labour's emphasis on promoting social inclusion since 1997. During this period official policy has favoured an increasingly assertive approach in this area as exemplified by the successful post-1998 programmes to reduce street homelessness. The period since 2002 has seen a broader ministerial drive to reduce homelessness, mainly through encouraging local authorities (LAs) to adopt more pro-active, preventative approaches to the problem. Aided by substantial central funding LAs have responded by developing numerous initiatives to this end. Particularly where they involve assisting people at risk of homelessness to access private tenancies, such schemes are often justified by LAs as empowering consumers and promoting choice. With official homelessness figures in England having fallen dramatically since 2003/04, it would appear that the new 'homelessness prevention regime' has made a marked impact. However, what such figures do not reveal is the extent to which this results from the adoption of more restrictive interpretations of LA duties under the homelessness legislation. This could mean that the problem is being re-defined rather than resolved. Drawing on a recently completed study, this paper explores the tensions between helping resolve people's housing problems, on the one hand, and upholding legal rights to accommodation, on the other.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)867-883
    Number of pages17
    JournalHousing Studies
    Volume22
    Issue number6
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Nov 2007

    Keywords

    • Homelessness
    • Housing policy
    • New Labour

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Local authority homelessness prevention in England: Empowering consumers or denying rights?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this