Letter: Hostel cuts mean more sleeping rough
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: The Government's plans to cut by one-third the number of hostels for homeless people in London by March 1994 is a profound shock (report, 19 January). For people who are both old and homeless, the consequences are likely to be severe.
In 1991 our report Older Homeless People in London showed that 30 per cent of London's homeless people were aged more than 50. Many were very old and frail, and living permanently in hostels for lack of alternatives. There is no evidence to suggest that this situation has changed significantly, because housing without support cannot meet their needs.
The Sleeping Rough Initiative does not cater for these very vulnerable people. It has been left to hostels to cope as best they can, a task that they have performed with skill and commitment, but also with great regret at the substantial limitations on what they are able to provide.
We and others continue to work for changes in policy that will provide the permanent housing, care and support that homeless old people need. In the meantime, hostel closures will mean that many will lose the only 'home' they have, or are likely to have under present arrangements, and will be forced to live on the streets.
Yours faithfully,
PAULA JONES
Director
Age Concern Greater London
London, SE5
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments