Homelessness
Good morning. The first item of business this morning is a statement by Jackie Baillie on street homelessness in Glasgow. I am afraid that a copy of the speech has not yet reached my office so I have no idea how long it is. There will be no interventions during the statement, but there will be questions afterwards. I hope that questions will be concluded by 10 o'clock.
I am pleased to be able to bring before Parliament the report of the Glasgow street homelessness review team, which has been conducting a fundamental and strategic review of efforts to tackle the problems of street homelessness in Glasgow. Members will recall that last November my predecessor, Wendy Alexander, announced the establishment of the review team. The report sits very much in the context of the wider work that the Executive is carrying out—through the homelessness task force and the rough sleepers initiative—to tackle the scourge of homelessness, especially street homelessness in Scotland.
We recognise that the problem of rough sleeping is most acute in Glasgow. That is compounded by the continued existence of wholly inappropriate and unacceptable hostels in which many people who would otherwise be homeless are accommodated. Those hostels have been described by many as more frightening and dangerous than sleeping rough. It is clear that Glasgow's old and out-of-date hostels are part of the homelessness problem—they are not part of the solution.
I will give members an idea of the scale of the problem—the figures are truly stark. In Glasgow, an estimated 6,500 people experience street homelessness every year. Of those, 2,500 are homeless for the first time and the rest have continuing or repeat experience of street homelessness. About 1,000 of the total are women.
Many of those people have complex needs—the problem is not simply about bricks and mortar. In Glasgow, 41 per cent of young single homeless people have drug problems. Alcohol addiction is a serious problem that affects 61 per cent of homeless people in older age groups. About 50 per cent of the homeless people that were surveyed have physical health problems and there are high levels of neurotic disorders and other mental health problems. Almost all homeless people are unemployed.
Hostels were never designed to cope with the problem—they are too big and too basic and they are outdated. Despite the best efforts of staff, conditions are getting worse. About a third of those who sleep rough in Glasgow have been barred from hostels and many others would rather sleep rough than use them.
The report found that an exceptionally high proportion of Glasgow's young population is presenting as homeless during the course of a year. Of the 6,500 people who were identified as being street homeless, more than 2,000 are under 24 years of age. We tend to deal with that group—as we do with others—by accommodating them in large and understaffed hostels where they are prey to drug dealers and money lenders; where they feel less safe than they do on the streets; and where their temporary experience of homelessness can quickly become a lifestyle. We must put a stop to that.
Although there has been a considerable increase in investment in services in Glasgow through the rough sleepers initiative—more than £12 million through to March 2002—we recognised a year ago that a thorough and fundamental review of the current efforts to address street homelessness in the city was needed. The review needed to be focused on the particular issues that affected homeless people in Glasgow and it needed to involve all the organisations that contribute to overall homelessness provision.
We brought together health, housing and social work departments, Glasgow's voluntary organisations, Strathclyde police, Shelter Scotland, the Big Issue and academics who have specialised in researching and understanding homelessness, to consider service provision from the point of view of the needs of the individual and to make recommendations on that. The team, which was led by the Executive, set out to identify what needs to be done to improve the provision of accommodation, especially hostel accommodation, and to improve and increase the availability of social and other support for people who are homeless or who live in temporary hostel accommodation.
The review team reported on its work through the homelessness task force. I am pleased to present that report to Parliament today, with the Executive's endorsement of its conclusions and recommendations. The report contains many challenging recommendations on prevention of street homelessness and alleviation of it when it occurs.
The review team rightly highlights the need for more to be done to prevent people from arriving on the streets in the first place. However, the report underlines the need for an effective and multidisciplinary response once people are on the streets. It clearly sets out the inadequacy of current resettlement arrangements, under which people end up in inappropriate hostels with little or no prospect of being helped to move on to something more secure. The report recognises that present levels of personal support are inadequate, despite the considerable efforts of many people in the voluntary and statutory sectors.
In June this year, we informed Parliament of the emerging conclusions of the review—that there should be a rolling programme of hostel closures in Glasgow to rid the city of such outdated large institutions. We identified £2 million to be used to begin to implement that programme. The recommendation and the reasons why such action is necessary are set out clearly in the report. The large hostels, which are so much a part of the street homelessness problem, must be closed down. Long-term hostel residents should, where possible and appropriate, be moved into supported tenancies. I stress that that will be done where it is possible and appropriate—we recognise that it must be done with care and sensitivity.
Much smaller, highly supported units will be developed where there is a need for such accommodation. In addition, greater emphasis will be placed on providing people with the help and support that they need in mainstream tenancies. By developing small supported and responsive units, we can deal more effectively with individual needs and we can prevent institutionalisation of individuals—which is all too often a feature of the current provision and regimes.
We recognise that there will be a need for highly supported accommodation units for some people, particularly people who have acute and chronic needs. The report recommends that such units should be small and focused in their purpose. We must move away from the situation where vulnerable young people live in close proximity to people who have severe and chaotic behavioural problems.
There must be a new process of comprehensive assessment at an early stage and there must, where necessary, be linked provision for very short-term temporary accommodation. The key will be to ensure that the assessment is comprehensive and multi-disciplinary. It is not good enough that people are assessed four or five times by different agencies and for different purposes. The needs of the whole person should dictate the support and services that that person receives. Assessments should measure employability and basic skills so that people can be helped back into meaningful employment. However, even with such assessments, there is a risk that some people will need greater personal support to give them the confidence and knowledge that will enable them to identify the choices and opportunities that are available to them.
Many people will have become disconnected from the family and community support networks that we all rely on from time to time. The report has recommended that a pilot project should be set up, which will connect homeless people with a personal assistant or a befriender to provide that support. We will establish such a pilot project and we will assess its success before we consider how it might be applied more widely.
So much needs to be done to prevent people from ending up on the streets in the first place. A key recommendation of the report is that, as an immediate priority, all the relevant authorities should examine what more can be done to prevent people who leave care, prisons and other institutions from becoming homeless. The homelessness task force is taking forward that issue in the wider context of homelessness throughout Scotland, but there are clear actions that can be taken in Glasgow that will prevent homelessness and reduce the numbers of people who come on to the streets.
It is also essential that we address the need to improve the services that are available to homeless people and the accessibility of those services. Health services, including addiction services and other support services, need to be brought in and delivered effectively to street homeless people. In the short term, those services will be developed for and delivered to hostel residents. As the hostel closure programme proceeds, an essential element of the process will be to ensure that an individual's connections with support services are not disrupted. We have already approved the establishment of a hostels addictions team as part of the rough sleepers initiative. That team will ensure that the services that people need are available where they are needed.
Even if we develop and build on partnership working—which has evidently contributed to the production of the report—and the joint working that provides so many good examples of cross-sector projects in Glasgow, we need to make a step change in our efforts. That way, we will be able to make a significant impact on the problem of street homelessness. As the review team identified correctly, the problem of street homelessness in Glasgow will not be solved overnight, nor will it be solved if we continue with the current policies within the current framework at current funding levels. A major long-term programme is required, which will need to be funded.
The hostel reprovisioning programme in itself is ambitious, but it is an absolutely necessary element of the plan. I am therefore pleased to announce that—in addition to the £2 million that we have made available this year—the Executive will make available a further £12.5 million in the next three years to provide for that programme. In addition to the services that are funded under the RSI, Greater Glasgow Health Board is planning additional mental health, addiction and physical health services to benefit those who sleep rough or who are at risk of doing so.
We also announced the national health service funding for next year under the new Arbuthnott arrangements. Greater Glasgow Health Board received a 7.7 per cent increase—£60.5 million—which gives it a hospital, community health and prescribing budget of £846 million. The Executive continues to act to ensure that the health needs of rough sleepers are addressed effectively.
There has been much activity during the past year, but we recognise that many fundamental problems have yet to be tackled. By taking forward the actions that are proposed by the review team, we can begin to tackle the fundamental structural problems that stand in the way of long-term success. The homeless people of Glasgow deserve nothing less.
I thank the minister for her statement, which I understand is an extension of the announcement that was made in Glasgow in June. On behalf of the Opposition, I welcome the statement and the action that the Government is taking on street homelessness. If Parliament is to do anything, we must address rough sleeping and street homelessness. That will be a measure of success—whether of Parliament, the Executive or the committees.
Everybody in the chamber will have been shocked by the statistics that the minister outlined. I welcome the initiative in the report. There is also much to be welcomed in the statement, but I have some detailed questions that I would like answers to.
Will the minister confirm the current number of hostel beds and the pace at which they will be phased out? Will she also confirm the number of supported tenancies that will replace those hostel places and the cost of that? What arrangements have been made with Glasgow City Council and other agencies and when will moneys be released to those organisations?
I welcome the move to common assessments in Glasgow. After lessons have been learned from that, I hope that such a move will be extended to other areas.
The minister announced a further £12.5 million for Glasgow. Will that money be spent over the three years, as outlined? Will the minister confirm the source of that money? In evidence to the Social Inclusion, Housing and Voluntary Sector Committee, the minister talked about £20 million being reallocated from the new housing partnership budget to other headline subjects. Is the £12.5 million part of that? If not, will the minister say where that money comes from?
I thank Fiona Hyslop for her initial comments. It is important that Parliament concentrates its efforts on tackling homelessness and rough sleeping, which is homelessness at its most acute. I will answer her questions and attempt to give her the detail that she seeks.
My understanding is that there are about 2,200 hostel beds in Glasgow city in a combination of council, voluntary sector and commercial provision. We make it clear that our strategy is intended to achieve replacement of all inappropriate hostel provision in Glasgow, not only council hostel facilities. However, the problem is acute in some council facilities.
The pace that we intend to set is that we should achieve reprovisioning over five years. We know that reprovisioning takes time. If we consider the experience of Loretto Housing Association in reprovisioning of the Great Eastern Hotel, we start to understand the complex arrangements that must be made to protect the needs of individuals who are involved in the process.
We have planned a time scale of five years and we will make £12.5 million available over three years, as Fiona Hyslop rightly said. We must examine the total cost over the five years and we are already modelling figures to ensure that there will be adequate financial cover. The money is new and was identified during the spending review. I confirm that it has not been taken from any other allocation.
The project is complex and we will sit down with all the partners to take it forward. We intend that the Glasgow review team will continue as a steering group, because we welcome the advice and assistance that we have received from the council, the voluntary sector, the Big Issue in Scotland and Shelter Scotland. Those organisations have experience of how such programmes play out on the ground.
In addition, we are moving to appoint a project manager to ensure that the work is taken forward cohesively.
The Conservatives offer a general welcome to the report and the proposals that it contains, as well as to the—if not glossy, very handsome—brochure that arrived posthaste this morning.
We agree with the minister that the Dickensian conditions that prevail at some of the city's hostels fall well below the level of accommodation that should be found in any civilised society. Anything that brings about an end to that must be welcomed. However, a number of issues arise.
Does the minister agree that the problem, as starkly as it is portrayed in the documentation, is a little more complex than even she realises, bearing in mind the chaotic lifestyles of so many of those who are affected? Does she agree that it might be unwise to close the hostels—desirable though that is—until we are entirely satisfied that alternatives are fully in place and working satisfactorily? Does she agree that those solutions should include some form of communal and closely supervised living that would, after a while, enable those who are the subject of the exercise to graduate to a more independent and stable lifestyle? That will be achieved only by much closer supervision and monitoring of the people who are affected, to ensure that they do not detract from the lifestyle and amenities of those who live in close proximity to them.
Bill Aitken is absolutely right to say that the Dickensian conditions that exist in Glasgow are no longer appropriate. We must do something about those conditions urgently.
I assure Bill Aitken that I am aware of the complexity of the needs of the rough sleeping population, both in Glasgow and throughout Scotland. However, I am also aware that hostels contribute to the problem of homelessness—about 60 per cent of the hostel population have been previously barred from hostels because of their behaviour.
I offer Bill Aitken the absolute assurance that we will not close down any hostels until appropriate accommodation is put in place. We do not wish to contribute to people ending up on the streets—we want to ensure that people make a smooth transition to more appropriate accommodation.
Last night, I visited supported accommodation in Moffat Street in the Gorbals, where I met some former residents of the Great Eastern Hotel. The services that are provided in that supported accommodation were very impressive, in that they are focused on the needs of individuals—whatever their problems—rather than on the needs of the service deliverers. That approach not only helps the residents to sustain tenancies, but addresses the underlying problems that contributed to the residents' sleeping rough in the first instance.
I assure Bill Aitken that our plan is to provide small-scale supported accommodation for people who have acute and chronic needs and to wrap services around them to prevent the recurrence of rough sleeping.
I thank the minister for her statement, which echoed much of the work on street homelessness that was undertaken by the previous ministerial team.
I wish to raise two specific constituency issues. Will the minister confirm the role of accommodation that is provided by councils and other providers in meeting the needs of hostel dwellers, particularly given the amount of time that was required for Loretto Housing Association to receive clearance for the Great Eastern Hotel project? Will the minister clarify the bidding process for the sum of money that is available?
Will the minister amplify her comments and advise members how the scandal of the Bellgrove Hotel—a misnomer if ever I heard one—should be tackled and how the needs of the hotel's residents should be addressed? The Bellgrove Hotel is privately run and the owners profit from the misery of the folk who occupy it. Will the minister agree to meet me and council colleagues from the area to address the question of how to deal with Bellgrove Hotel in the immediate future?
I would welcome a meeting with Frank McAveety. He does not need to ask me formally for a meeting—I would meet him if he were to ask me informally.
Frank McAveety is absolutely right to pinpoint the fact that the £12.5 million has the potential to be used in much wider circumstances—indeed, it is meant to be used for much more than simply the provision of council accommodation. We are acutely aware that accommodation in some voluntary sector hostels is not appropriate. Mr McAveety highlighted the Bellgrove Hotel as one of the most appalling examples of inappropriate provision. The Bellgrove Hotel is a commercial hostel in Glasgow where about 115 people live in what I consider to be dismal and totally unacceptable conditions.
In order to deal with inappropriate accommodation, our strategy must be to create alternative appropriate provision, so that people do not have to live in places such as the Bellgrove Hotel, where the provision that is available raises an issue of human dignity.
I apologise for arriving in the middle of the minister's statement—there were difficulties with my transport arrangements.
On behalf of the Liberal Democrats, I welcome the minister's statement. I will raise one or two points about the intractable problem of street homelessness.
Will the minister give some guidance on the number of people who are involved? She spoke about the number of hostel beds and about reprovisioning. Will she be able to link that to the numbers of people who are identified as sleeping rough during different seasons of the year? How adequate will the provisions for those needs be? Is the Executive still on schedule to meet the target date by which nobody will have to sleep rough? Does the minister anticipate a visible improvement in provision for people who live on the streets of Glasgow in the coming months and years, especially during the coming winter, which looks as if it could be particularly bad? That is something that worries a lot of people.
I will clarify the figures. Provision of hostel beds in Glasgow stands at about 2,200, with an average 90 per cent occupancy rate. The overall number of people who end up sleeping rough or in hostels on more than one occasion is counted as 6,500 in any given year. However, that figure represents a much smaller number of individuals who repeatedly end up on the streets.
Part of the current problem with hostels is that they are like a revolving door. People get a place in a hostel, they misbehave—their chaotic behaviour can have other underlying causes—and they get barred and end up back on the streets. We need to address the underlying problems, rather than simply creating more revolving doors.
We are convinced that the extra resources that we have put into the rough sleepers initiative—£40 million—will help us to improve provision. We are convinced that the co-operation that exists between local authorities, health boards, the voluntary sector and others who work in homelessness provides a well-resourced framework that can meet our commitment that no one in Scotland should have to sleep rough by 2003.
It is incumbent on the Executive and Parliament to do their utmost to ensure that that commitment is met. Like Robert Brown, I am aware that Christmas is coming up. It is a cold time of year, when it is a tragedy to be homeless. We are working with the relevant agencies on the ground. We are conscious that Edinburgh needs to reprovision its hostels quickly and that it needs to make interim accommodation available. We are also aware that, in Glasgow, the Big Issue in Scotland works well for people over the Christmas period. We are interested in the plans that are in place, but we remain absolutely committed to ensuring that nobody in Scotland has to suffer the indignity of sleeping rough.
I also welcome the minister's statement. I particularly welcome her determination to tackle the fundamental structural problems that stand in the path of long-term success. Does the minister accept that one of the major structural problems is the high level of unemployment in Glasgow? Although the claimant count might be only 9 per cent, some 21 per cent of Glaswegians are on incapacity benefit or other benefits. The percentage of Glaswegians in employment is the lowest of any conurbation in the United Kingdom. Does the minister accept that, unless there is a comprehensive regeneration strategy for Glasgow and a reversal of the disinvestment in housing in the city, she will be left simply to manage the problem rather than being able to solve it?
We acknowledge the acute problems that exist in Glasgow. However, I stress that overall unemployment levels have dropped substantially. Since 1997, when the Labour Government was elected, youth unemployment has come down by 70 per cent and long-term adult unemployment has come down by 50 per cent. Those are significant figures, but I recognise that we must connect the most disadvantaged areas to that economic growth. Some areas of Glasgow have significant problems and the role of the Glasgow Alliance—which works in partnership with all the key agencies in the city—is to ensure that people are connected to opportunities and that new opportunities are created for the city. I know that the new Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning takes a specific interest in Glasgow and I shall be working closely with her to ensure that the future of the city is bright.
I, too, apologise to the minister for being late and for missing a large part of her statement. Unfortunately—or otherwise—I shared a carriage with Mr Brown.
The minister referred to the fall in unemployment, but I hope that she is aware of the most recent poverty audit by the Department of Social Security. That audit indicates that, although 250,000 children now live in households in which the head of the household has a job, the number of children who live in poverty has increased by 100,000. That shows clearly that jobs in themselves are not good enough; only well-paid jobs can take people out of poverty.
Will the minister address the problem of the revolving-door syndrome, which is part and parcel of the chaotic lifestyle of many rough sleepers in Glasgow? That problem is the result mainly of the lack of supported programmes that are aimed at finding people gainful employment and encouraging training and access to opportunities. The aims of the programme that the minister has outlined are laudable, but we should remind ourselves of the community care package, which was based on the idea of decarcerating people from institutions—especially psychiatric institutions. Many of us applauded that initiative, but because it was not supported properly it led to more problems. I am worried that the programme to provide accommodation for rough sleepers will not be supported properly. Can the minister give a commitment today that social work resources will be available to ensure that there are properly supported packages for rough sleepers that will enable them to avoid the revolving-door syndrome?
I should point out that, since Labour came to power, the number of children in poverty in Scotland has dropped by 70,000, which is welcome.
I accept that the essence of the problem is the revolving-door syndrome and I accept that homeless people slip through the net and end up sleeping rough. To stop that happening, we have aligned programmes such as the new futures fund with people in hostels. We are ensuring that the new comprehensive assessment package includes an assessment of skills, ability to work and training needs. We want to work with people to secure and sustain gainful employment for them. We are mindful of the fact that, for many homeless people, securing and sustaining employment is critical to their future progress. That is very much part of the current assessment package.
I apologise to the members whom I have not called to speak. I gave priority to Glasgow members.