Suspending judgement on Suspended Coffee

Have you heard about ‘suspended coffee’, the new occurrence where a customer will go into a coffee shop, ask for a hot drink for themselves and another (or more) ‘suspended’?  They pay for the total number ordered.  Then, people who are homeless, out of work, or just short of money can walk into a coffee shop and ask if there are any ‘suspended’ coffees. If there are, they will be served a hot drink free of charge.

There is now a ‘Suspended Coffee’ Facebook page

I have misgivings about the whole thing, and that makes me feel quite guilty.  Of course I don’t want to deny anyone a hot drink, particularly when it is as cold as it has been. But I wonder whether it is the best way to help those who are homeless or destitute.

Over the years I have been asked whether you should give money to those begging on the streets.  It is an individual decision, and my personal choice is not to.

Of course it must be up to the individual to decide whether they wish to buy a ‘suspended coffee’ for someone.  They will need to have confidence that the retailer will, in fact, pass on the coffee to the intended beneficiary.

It is a shame that the tax affairs of one of the largest coffee chains seeks to minimise its tax liabilities, although it is unlikely that homeless people would benefit from normalising their tax affairs.

I am somewhat of a hypocrite.  At BHT we constantly ask for donations, in cash and in kind, to help those men and women who are in the greatest need.  We have an Amazon wish list (another company with its own tax controversy) where we ask people to buy essential items for clients including thermal underwear, socks, and coats.

During summer heat waves (for those who can’t remember that far back, a heat wave is “a prolonged period of excessively hot weather”!) we have been grateful to the wonderful people at Life Water who have donated thousands of bottles of water to help keep our clients hydrated.

So why is it ok for me to encourage gifts through BHT to our clients, rather than a more immediate act of giving? The only justification I can give is that we are an organisation that promotes change, and your gifts to us might help us engage and assist people off the streets.

But there again, I am not sure. My colleague Rob Robinson is a great fan of ‘Suspended Coffee’.  He says that those people who are on the streets are excluded on so many levels.  By experiencing the atmosphere of a coffee shop, they might just reassess their aspirations and seek help.

I’m confused.  I guess I will just have to suspend a final judgement.

Bullingdon Club Bullies dehumanise homeless man by burning £50 in front of him

This afternoon I was writing a no doubt worthy item for this blog on BHT’s preparation for the digital inclusion challenges relating to the introduction of Universal Credit when I saw the tweets by Aideen Jones, the Chief Executive of Southdown Housing Association, regarding members of the Bullingdon Club who allegedly burnt a £50 note in front of someone begging on the streets of Oxford. (26/02/13: Please note I have removed a link to the original article on another blog which has itself been removed).

Aideen is right to point out that £50 could have bought 40 pairs of thermal socks for homeless people.

Of course people will make a connection between this obscene flaunting of wealth by a group of rich boys. The Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Mayor of London, all were members of the Bullingdon Club during their misspent youth, but I imagine Messrs Cameron, Osborne and Johnson will today share the outrage felt by most reasonably minded individuals over this incident.

The thing that upsets me most about this incident is what it says about how homeless men and women are dehumanised by society. If the allegation is true, these Bullingdon Bullies are merely an extreme example, and are the rightful targets for the contempt of decent people. But this dehumanisation goes much wider, from the groups of lads who think it is funny to give someone sleeping rough a kicking on a Saturday night, or a drunken reveller relieving himself on someone sleeping in a doorway, or the security guard who pours a bucket of cold water over someone sleeping in a car park.

More extreme examples lead to the violent death of homeless people through assault or setting fire to a sleeping bag when the individual is asleep in it. Dropping a paving slab on the head of someone asleep on the beach or in a park is likely to do serious damage.

Yet this happens. What we need to do is to put an end to homelessness. A grand objective, but one that should be seen as historically important as the abolition of slavery or the ending of apartheid. This week, Homeless Link will be launching a manifesto aimed at seeing the end of homelessness in the UK by 2023. My colleague, Nikki Homewood, will be at the launch of this manifesto in the House of Commons on Tuesday.

But individually we can do something. In response to Aideen’s tweet, I will buy £50 of thermal underwear for homeless men and women who use First Base Day Centre. You, too, can help, either by buying something from Amazon using the First Base wish list on this link or for those of you who don’t wish to use Amazon, donations can be made direct to First Base through our Just Giving page.

But there is one other thing we can do. We can stop using the term ‘the homeless’, a phrase that dehumanises people. They are men and women, they are someone’s son or daughter, husband or wide, brother or sister, father or mother. They have names. They have hopes and aspirations, feelings and fears. I always try to refer to “homeless men and women”.

In South Africa, where I grew up under apartheid, the white rulers referred to “the blacks” who had second class status, and whose lives were valued less than those of white people. The murder of a black man and woman rarely attracted media attention, more rarely warranted a police enquiry. In the white community, black people had become dehumanised. Hopefully in Britain in 2013 we won’t allow the same to happen to homeless men and women.

Debate: should you give money to those begging on the street?

Last week Ross Singleton, a homeless man from Crawley who was described in court as schizophrenic and who “self-medicates” with alcohol and “more harmful drugs”, was convicted of begging and stealing a pair of trainers.

Police in Crawley are reported to be taking a harder line on begging following complaints from traders.

The issue of begging comes up from time to time and this morning I was asked to comment on BBC Sussex on this case and the issue of begging as a whole.

Why do people beg? Usually it is to fund an addiction although there are a few who are genuinely destitute with no recourse to public funds (such as failed asylum seekers who are in a state of limbo having had their application for asylum rejected but are not being deported because their lives would be at risk if returned to their country of origin). They depend for survival from handouts from individuals or churches/charities.

Should you give to people who are begging? It is a personal choice. I personally don’t. Between 1996 and 2000 I undertook research into drug-related deaths in Brighton and Hove. I was struck by the number of times the deceased had accumulated through begging the required funds to buy the drugs that subsequently killed them. I also never assume that someone begging is actually homeless.

Should those begging be prosecuted? In a civilised society there should be no need for anyone to beg. Other than failed asylum seekers, there are welfare benefits to support individuals. If people are begging to feed an addiction, then questions must be asked about the availability of treatment services. If treatment services are there, then questions must be asked about what is being done to help individuals move from addiction to recovery AND the willingness of the individual to access those services. For those with a co-existing mental illness and addiction, the challenges are greater and criminalising the individual does not seem to me to be appropriate.

I have no doubt that some begging can be intimidatory, but I would see that more as demanding money with menace, even though it has the appearance of begging. A woman and child being approached in an isolated car park can never be acceptable. Someone sitting passively with a ‘homeless and hungry’ sign another matter.

Yesterday I did a straw poll of colleagues at work about attitudes to begging. All the women I spoke to said they never gave to people asking for money on the streets and the two most common reasons given was that they felt unsafe opening their purse in the street and concern that the person would use any money to buy drugs.

I don’t know Mr Singleton but reports from the Court suggest he is a man who is mentally unwell and addicted to alcohol and other drugs. I have to ask what has or will be achieved by the prosecution of people like Mr Singleton. He received a 12 month conditional discharge and told not to commit another offence.

Call me a cynic but has Mr Singleton’s circumstances changed so that he will not beg again? I wish him well but without help to address his mental health issues and his addiction he is almost certain to reoffend. I wish him well and hope that Crawley Open Door, an organisation I respect, will be able to support him to find recovery.

Saying no to beggars and saying no to sleep-outs

The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, has provoked a debate after he was photographed giving money to a beggar in Leicester Square. The chief executive of the London homelessness charity, Thames Reach, Jeremy Swain, someone who I admire greatly, commented: “I would advise Boris to give money straight to his local drug dealer and cut out the middle wo/man”. Jeremy also Tweeted: “People will never understand homelessness if every campaign is based on rough sleeping image. Please no more sponsored sleep outs”.

I agree with Jeremy on both counts. In the late 1990s I did research into drug-related deaths in Brighton and Hove and, all too often, the homeless people who had died (and they accounted for a disproportionate one third of all such deaths) had generated enough cash for their final and fatal fix through begging. Of course the causes of begging can be more complex, but as a rule I don’t give to those begging.

I also agree that homelessness is far more complex than rough sleeping. Some tremendous work has been carried out in Brighton and Hove by the City Council and by the third sector organisations such as CRI, Central Sussex YMCA and BHT. Sleep-outs tend to provide too narrow a focus. It is unfortunate when high profile people like Prince William do sleep-out’s as he did last December because the issue and solutions are not simple. We need to have proper discussions about them rather than see more sleep-outs which I regard as an outdated and inappropriate gesture.

Beggars earn £20,000 each year, according to the Mail. I beg to differ.

There has been a lot of media attention today following a report in the Daily Mail that suggested that there are “beggars on £20,000 a year” and that “many have a home and a job”.  Closer reading of the article, based on a report by Leicestershire Police, suggests something different.  But, hey, why stand in the way of a sensational headline.

I was asked to comment on BBC radio during the afternoon.  Here are a few points I made:

In this day and age we shouldn’t be seeing people begging on the street. Begging should have become a thing of the past with the arrival of the Welfare State in 1948.  Unfortunately, some (a small minority of those who beg) have been left destitute by a measure introduced by the last government that denies any state support to failed asylum seekers (or the right to work) who are not deported because their country of origin is too dangerous.  They have to beg or rely on handouts from churches or charities.

Begging is not about homelessness.  The Leicestershire report says that 60% of those begging are in accommodation.  Yes, there may be some people who are homeless, but (again according to the Leicestershire research), 70% of beggars in that area tested positive for Class A drugs.  Begging is the symptom, addiction the cause.  If we really want to deal with begging, we must address addiction.  That is why I welcome the direction given by the coalition government to the National Treatment Agency that it should ‘champion’ abstinence.  This is a U-turn from the policy of the previous government.

Should you give money to beggars?  That must be a personal decision.  I, personally, don’t.  In the late 1990’s I did research into drug-related deaths in Brighton and Hove.  It was not uncommon for the deceased to have bought their last ‘hit’ from money begged.  As a result I don’t give to those who beg.  

However, I regard most of those who beg as more honest that Chuggers – those young people who accost you in London Road or Western Road.  At least with those who beg you have a clear idea of where your money is going.  With Chuggers, there is no transparency about how much they will receive, or the company who employs them.  It can be just 5% that ends up with the good cause.  Give me an honest beggar any day!