Soup run debate is welcome

However, when they face their colleagues from other social housing providers, Westminster staff, no matter what their personal views on their employer’s clampdown on soup runs, can take some comfort from at least having started an important debate. Housing and homelessness officers may feel that the council’s decision to try to drastically cut back on soup runs in Westminster – which are especially high around the festive season – is counter-intuitive, but the argument of charities such as Thames Reach Bondway is persuasive (page 24).

The situation is similar to the furore kicked up two years ago when the founder of the Big Issue magazine, John Bird, said giving cash to street beggars did not help in the long run. He was derided as a hypocrite for his candour but anecdotal reports suggest many people now think think twice before deciding whether to deposit their change in a proffered hat or palm or in a homelessness charity’s collection tin.

If, as a result of Westminster’s stance, people sleeping rough are encouraged off the streets into a more stable existence, the sector will have progressed. But for this to happen, campaigners have stressed there must be some changes to the way the hostel system operates to ensure people are not left on the streets without food.

Ultimately, Westminster cannot make soup runs illegal and it will be up to the individual churches, charities and community groups to decide whether their energies are better channelled through activities other than soup runs. But if, as Jeremy Swain contends (page 27), soup runs really do cause more harm than good, their days as a mass means of allowing the general public to “do good” are numbered.

If this encourages rough sleepers into a more stable existence the sector will have progressed

How do you keep your staff safe?

Housing officers are used to being in the firing line. But the claim this week, from a training consultant at the Suzy Lamplugh Trust, that social housing providers need to do more to train their staff over personal safety is worrying. It comes in the wake of our story last week that London & Quadrant was offering its frontline staff bulletproof vests. The ultimate decision for councils and housing associations – especially in the light of the reinforced crackdown on antisocial behaviour outlined in Tuesday’s Queen’s Speech – has to be where to draw the line. Do you train the staff you feel are most at risk of violence for every eventuality? Or do you update guidelines that exist in most housing offices to say “this is where your job ends”? It is a tough call, but one that needs to be made.