Bruno De Oliveira
Jul 21, 2017 · 6 min read

Universal Basic Income: a policy to reduce homelessness in the UK?

The number of people homeless on London’s streets has more than doubled in five years, and there is a link between the, increase in the numbers of homeless people and punitive austerity measures. The Welfare Reform Act (2012) legislated for an intensification of welfare conditionality, including the eventual sanction of three years without benefits. The Welfare Reform Act cut the relevance of some benefits, reducing the amount of rent that is covered for housing benefit tenants.

The Coalition government (2010–2015) and the successive Conservative administration (2015–17) economic policies and related austerity measures have been termed “radical fiscal retrenchment”, whereby housing and welfare spending has fallen to its lowest level in over 60 years. These policies had a significant impact on vulnerable people that depend on them such as low-income families and young people under the age of 25. According to the Rough Sleeping Statistics England — Autumn (2015), in Autumn 2015 there was a total of 3,569 rough sleepers estimated in England. This is up 825 (30%) from the autumn 2014 total of 2,744. London had 940 rough sleepers in autumn 2015, which is 26% of the national figure. The number of rough sleepers has increased by 27% in London and 31% in the rest of England since autumn 2014. In 2016, the number of rough sleepers in England rises for a sixth successive year with official figures show an estimated 4,134 people sleeping rough, an increase of 16% from the previous year (The Rough Sleeping Statistics England — Autumn, 2016). In contrast, local agencies report 8,096 people slept rough in London alone throughout 2015/16 — A six per cent rise on the previous year, and more than double the figure of 3,673 in 2009/10 (CHAIN reports 2014–15).

The number of households placed in temporary accommodation by local authorities in England in September 2014 was the highest it had been in the last five years. It is estimated that 60,940 households had been placed in temporary accommodation by local authorities in England. The number of families with dependent children placed in bed and breakfast style accommodation increased from 630 at the end of March 2010 to 2,080 at the end of September 2014. It could also be argued that recent governmental UK welfare reforms, as currently conceptualised, fail to reflect lived reality, instead of serving to stigmatise and arguably (de)moralise vulnerable groups that depend on social welfare for survival, such as homeless people.

Recent evidence continues to indicate links between austerity policies and the nation’s worsening mental health and increasing mental health inequalities. It could also be argued that current governmental UK welfare reforms, as currently conceptualised, fail to reflect lived reality, instead of serving to stigmatise and arguably (de)moralise vulnerable groups that depend on social welfare, such as homeless people.

What needs to be done to reduce homelessness in the UK?
From middle to long term, to reduce homelessness significantly, there needs to be a robust discussion rethinking recent welfare reforms, and there needs a plan that includes a diverse range of stakeholders including people who experience homelessness themselves. The current high numbers of people in the UK experiencing homelessness is a political consequence of reducing welfare. Social housing is also evidence-based preventative measure to reduce homelessness. The Housing First model has shown a sound model for housing people experiencing homelessness. A report noted that 88% of Housing First users remained stably housed.

For example, Finland is the only European country where homelessness has decreased. At the end of the 1980’s, there were almost 20 000 homeless in Finland. By 2008, their numbers had fallen to about 8000 people. The number of homeless halved between 1987 and 1996 partly because of various measures that were taken to reduce homelessness. By 2008, the homeless who were easier to be housed would be housed. At the end of the 1980’s, there were almost 20 000 homeless in Finland. By 2008, their numbers had fallen to about 8000 people. The number of homeless halved between 1987 and 1996 partly because of various measures that were taken to reduce homelessness. After the mid-1990’s the reduction in homelessness was slow, and at the turn of the millennium and again in 2008 the number of homeless even increased. By 2008, the homeless who were easier to be housed would be housed.

Meanwhile, in England 114,790 households applied to their local authority for homelessness assistance in 2015/16, an 11% rise since 2010/11 and, 57,730 homes were accepted as homeless and in ‘priority need’ — a six per cent rise on 2014/15 (CHAIN reports 2014–15). Secondly, there needs to be a clear policy capping private renting based on RPI (Retail price index). Rents are estimated based on Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI has been lower than the RPI, which means that by changing it. The Retail Price Index, or the cost-of-living index, measures the change from month to month of the average level of prices of the commodities and services purchased by the vast majority of households in the UK.

The key point which ought to be in the discussion in the UK to reduce homelessness is the idea of introducing a Universal Basic Income (UBI). UBI is an income unconditionally granted to all on an individual basis, and the UBI would provide financial security. The relationship between inequality and poor health and social outcomes is long established. Beyond the argument of wealth redistribution, there is an income insecurity looming and preparation for the potential effects of automation and Artificial Intelligence (AI) on employment. The lack of growth and return to full employment rhetoric have lost all traction with our economic realities. Analysts are forecasting significant increases in unemployment, especially among highly educated segments of the population.

Also, driverless cars are a current progress in automation. It has been noted that approximately 1.5 million truck drivers and 200,000 taxi drivers will be out of work in a couple of decades. As IA do not make good consumers or pay income tax to keep a sustainable economy, countries such as Finland, the Netherlands, and Canada are piloting the UBI as a potential policy to these questions and concerns about automation and AI. A study that included just the poorest residents Dauphin indicated a link between the extra support and more vigorous health. The study noted the sum itself would have reduced economic inequality directly. The unconditional state of the payment reduced income insecurity. Finally, there was a positive communitarian aspect whereby positive behaviours associated with adequate financial security. It was noted that more young people remained on in school because they see their peers doing likewise.

In Alaska there is low but genuine unconditional basic income has been in place for more than three decades (Howard and Widerquist, 2012). It is a dividend paid annually by the Alaska Permanent Fund. The amount distributed in this way varies with the stock market but never raised much above USD$2000 per person and year. Although, the evidence is limited nevertheless the scope of such possibility is crucial to tackling some social inequalities such as homelessness and food poverty. Social welfare needs to be strengthened and simplified otherwise homelessness will not reduce but continue to increase, and the UBI is a way of achieving that.

To look beyond the impact of austerity led welfare reforms and poor housing policies, an effort to ensure that every person has a right to basic economic security is needed to everyone in the UK. A UBI would thus be part of a robust and simplified welfare state, linking economic equity to secure housing, and ensuring the people have their homes during a severe moment of their life such as relationship breakdown or loss of employment. It is not more cutting edge than the creating of the NHS in the late 40s. It is equally needed. It would be of historical significance that the UK led to the development of welfare reforms such as it did in the 40s and 50s after the Beveridge Report. Again, given the present level of homelessness in the UK, the UBI is a needed policy, and such implementation needs to be considered. As in regards to the current high level of homelessness, the UBI is no longer a faraway utopia but a close necessity.

)