Squatting is Not the Answer

With the recent criminalisation of squatting in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, there are now
few legislatures in the Western world that are as lenient with regard to squatting as our own. There is an
unfortunate tendency to see squatting as a solution to homelessness, but such a view is a myth.
Furthermore it is an idea that is corrosive to one of the great sources of cohesion in countries such as
our own – people’s ownership of homes.

Home ownership is sacrosanct in this country, and a right to be enjoyed by “It’s a form of queue-
all citizens. As a result, any violation is an unacceptable desecration. jumping, flouting the Commented [MT1]: This is a logically and ethically
Squatting is just such a desecration, which is why it should be penalised current conventions of correct statement but it is not protected by law in this
country but to strengthen the argument it can be included
much further it is currently. Squatting is not fair to those who have waited home purchase and just
in the article.
to save up and buy a house – it’s a form of queue-jumping, flouting the occupying the place of your
current conventions of home purchase and just occupying the place of your choice.”
choice.

At present laws on squatting are far too lenient. They allow any vagrant to come in and take control of
property that isn’t theirs. Academics and leftists might think that’s a good idea but we as ordinary
citizens and homeowners realise that we must protect property. There are stories of those who have Commented [MT2]: The fact that the view of the issue of
gone on holiday and returned to find it very difficult to evict squatters. In other cases they have moved the academic community and the leftists that the author is
referring to is only presumptive or biased, without any
in after the death of the homeowner, causing yet more anguish for a family already grieving. They treat evidence to support this.
the property with utter disrespect. This is no better than theft.

I know that some will say – with housing costs so high, and with the Commented [MT3]: This is a counter-question and raises
“Squatting is .. not another practical issue, which may for some reason make
homeless struggling to find accommodation from day to day, what can squatting popular but they need to be addressed, not put to
conducted by the …
be wrong with squatting? The fact of the matter is that squatting is rest.
homeless but by middle
often not conducted by the genuinely homeless but by middle class Commented [MT4]: I see this as a logical fallacy with the
class beatniks and punks
beatniks and punks seeking to subvert the system. These hooligans only numerical evidence in the problem, but whether this
seeking to subvert the program will take place or not is still in the proposal period,
need be dealt with properly before we can provide better so this is still an inconclusive figure.
system.”
accommodation solutions to the truly homeless and destitute.
Commented [MT5]: This article is written in a counter-
argument style that makes readers see what the real
There are other, better ways to solve homelessness. The current Conservative administration’s policy of problem is, how people see and think about it, and offer a
accommodation vouchers seems a step in the right direction. Other proposed projects could also make a solution to it.
big difference. The tiny houses scheme pioneered in Barsfield is promising, and could easily be scaled Commented [MT6]: However, the author only gives
up. Moreover there is before the government a Homelessness No More program waiting for approval, arguments based on his own opinions and views without
providing digital data, sources of information or convincing
which would see thousands of extra beds combined with a scheme to get the homeless the assistance statements and evidence on this issue. The author merely
they need to permanently stay off the streets. writes according to subjective factors, so the article
becomes unreliable and lacks persuasion.
Commented [MT7]: I think the conclusion to the premise
is too general to be clear when it comes to the correctness
of the government's conservative policy but still argues for
other proposed projects but still doesn't get to the bottom
of how solve specific problems.