The news last week contained stories of a couple of different outdoor spots in London being rendered even less hospitable with the introduction of pieces of metal protruding from the ground. The thought behind the action, in case you hadn’t read the stories or inferred the obvious from the above sentences and this post’s headline, is that with these pieces of metal poking through un-utilised sections of outdoor space, there is less chance of the less fortunate members of our society selfishly occupying that space with their smelly, living, breathing, shitting, coughing bodies.

It is evident from reading a number of the articles on this issue that there is some confusion across the press as to whether to call the unwelcoming metal installations anti-homeless spikes or anti-homeless studs. The former conjures up slightly horrifying images of an extreme initiative that didn’t quite make it off the Conservative Party’s drawing board; the latter sounds like an incredibly niche calendar.

Whatever they’re called, making pieces of un-utilised, flat, sheltered ground inhospitable is nothing new.  In fact, although it was their appearance in a doorway outside a central London block of flats and a Tesco in Regent Street that prompted public outcry, homeless charities were quick to point out that the measures had been employed for more than a decade to ensure that human beings can’t enjoy all the warmth and comfort of bare concrete and stone unbidden.

Mercifully, some members of the public were unhappy with the measures and following some outcry, Tesco removed their spikes which, they said, had been installed to combat antisocial behaviour but not apparently, homeless people; any interpretation along these lines being apparently the result of ‘confusion’ according to their press release. Indeed, I too was confused: the majority of antisocial people I socialise with are relatively uninterested in lying horizontally outside shop doorways – preferring to choose from a vast litany of many other antisocial acts to pass the time. That is, of course, unless said antisocial person is without a home to sleep in – which understandably, often leads to them being mistaken for homeless persons. You can see where the public went wrong there.

Public ignorance of semantics aside, it should make any reasonable person sad to hear that more than 6,400 people slept rough last year in London alone – a rise of 75% over three years. To be fair, the statistics are no doubt muddied by some returning homeless who were shooed off to to Brighton in 2012 to help lower the numbers before the Olympic Games. However even if that were true, the number is staggering – particularly since it had at one time been a goal to end rough sleeping in the Capital by the time the 2012 games started. For those of you that struggle to connect the factual elements of separate sentences, that goal was (emphatically) not reached.

The increase of anti-homeless measures such as these might be part of that particular Olympic legacy though. Indeed, what are the chances of sleeping – rough or otherwise – if most of the spots available to you are covered in metal protrusions? Perhaps the end goal is 6,400 ‘rough insomniacs’, conditioned by their environment to tread zombie-like through the streets of one of the world’s wealthiest cities from dusk until dawn. Much better from a citizen’s point of view – moving objects are much trickier for London residents to accidentally acknowledge the existence of, as we all know.

At this rate, those of London’s homeless that still cling to the hope of a miserable night’s sleep on a freezing, flat surface with a bit of shelter from the rain will have pay for the privilege. Corporate chains are no doubt all ready to open up special homeless-friendly, ‘un-studded’ pieces of concrete, with a special premium rate payable for a spot where flustered members of the public occasionally throw ten pence pieces into open hats.

With a little more public education and understanding however, it might all of a sudden become the case that homeless people are seen less as imposing threats and more as fellow human beings that have fallen a little further in life than the rest of us have yet had the misfortune to. In which case such measures can slowly but surely eradicated from the doorways of commerce and entitlement, and anti-homeless studs will really only be an (increasingly) niche calendar. We can only hope.

—

There are many organisations which support the needs and rights of Britain’s homeless population, two wider-known ones being Crisis and Shelter – either of which you would do well to visit online and think about next time you feel like making a charitable donation. But do your own research about the issue in and around your area – there’s always more to learn and do.