Family of seven sleep in Garda station Mod note post one

c montgomery wrote: »

The truth hurts it seems!

What you can take from this thread is that the general public are sick of paying for other people's lifestyles and repeated mistakes.

I think you’re well overestimating the general publics capacity to give a shiny shìte about anyone but themselves and their own families. It’s in the media’s interest to wring as much as they can out of “the homeless crisis”, and it’s obviously in the housing services providers interests to generate as much positive publicity for their “cause” as they can. They’re wishing Ms. Cash would shut up as much as you are, because she’s bad for their PR. Just look at how other charities have been wound up and charity bosses toppled following investigations into their funding and expenditure.

mfceiling wrote: »

At what point does personal responsibility kick in and the feckless attitude of "not my problem" come to pass?

She might want to think about this the next time she jumps up on her soapbox to moan about the government not giving her a home.

That’s not personal responsibility, that’s expecting other people to take responsibility for things that aren’t their responsibility, because as far as she’s concerned, anyone else’s problems aren’t her responsibility, any more than anyone else is going to point out that she’s not their responsibility either. She and her family are however, the responsibility of the various stakeholders who were receiving funding for being responsible for her and her families welfare. You’re dreaming as much as Ms. Cash if you imagine at this stage that she’s going to back down any time soon. She has plenty of support both online and in the media now. She doesn’t need the PR spin of the housing organisations any more to lobby Government for what she wants.

AlekSmart wrote: »

Once the family managed to end up in Tallaght Garda Barracks,that was all the Media wished to cover.

The circumstances surrounding their arrival there,do not appear to be of any interest to the media.

It's possible there may be other elements at play here too ?

It’s not just possible, it’s an absolute certainty that there are other elements at play here. Mainstream media are under no obligation to report the facts of any particular case, and because Ms. Cash and her family are private citizens and not public figures, they aren’t under any obligation to be either accountable or answerable to the general public. The media use her case for their own ends to generate revenue for themselves, and the more outrage they can generate, the better for their bottom line.

john4321 wrote: »

I hear the word homeless used now on a daily basis and was looking at the definition which brought me to the legal definition in the constitution.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1988/act/28/enacted/en/print.html

The legal definition of homelessness
Section 2 of the Housing Act, 1988 states that a person should be considered to be homeless if:

(a) there is no accommodation available which, in the opinion of the authority, he, together with any other person who normally resides with him or who might reasonably be expected to reside with him, can reasonably occupy or remain in occupation of,

Or

(b) he is living a hospital, county home, night shelter or other such institution, and is so living because he has no accommodation of the kind referred to in paragraph (a), and

(c) he cannot provide accommodation from his own resources.


You can replace he for she in point a and c and in the case of the husband point b is covered by the fact he was in an institution "jail".

Was listening to someone from the Simon Community talking on the radio this morning about some new homelessness figures they have acquired from some study. What struck me was that she said the figures she was discussing didn't include people that were sleeping rough i.e. genuinely homeless people.

It made me wonder about Maggie and whether she is still considered "homeless" in her gaff up in Drumcondra because she doesn't have a gaff down in Tallaght. It would be quite perverse if the numbers contributing to this apparent homelessness crisis are being inflated by entitled layabouts - taking the focus away from people sleeping in doorways without a pot to piss in.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I think you’re well overestimating the general publics capacity to give a shiny shìte about anyone but themselves and their own families. It’s in the media’s interest to wring as much as they can out of “the homeless crisis”, and it’s obviously in the housing services providers interests to generate as much positive publicity for their “cause” as they can. They’re wishing Ms. Cash would shut up as much as you are, because she’s bad for their PR. Just look at how other charities have been wound up and charity bosses toppled following investigations into their funding and expenditure.





That’s not personal responsibility, that’s expecting other people to take responsibility for things that aren’t their responsibility, because as far as she’s concerned, anyone else’s problems aren’t her responsibility, any more than anyone else is going to point out that she’s not their responsibility either. She and her family are however, the responsibility of the various stakeholders who were receiving funding for being responsible for her and her families welfare. You’re dreaming as much as Ms. Cash if you imagine at this stage that she’s going to back down any time soon. She has plenty of support both online and in the media now. She doesn’t need the PR spin of the housing organisations any more to lobby Government for what she wants.





It’s not just possible, it’s an absolute certainty that there are other elements at play here. Mainstream media are under no obligation to report the facts of any particular case, and because Ms. Cash and her family are private citizens and not public figures, they aren’t under any obligation to be either accountable or answerable to the general public. The media use her case for their own ends to generate revenue for themselves, and the more outrage they can generate, the better for their bottom line.

Excellent post start to finish, reasoned , measured practical logical and real. It doesn t surprise me that nobody has challenged you on it but rather the posts that followed it were more of the same emotional, this is so unfair, safe space seeking , rigid arguments that have dominated the thread. fair play to you one eyed jack whoever you are.

Council houses come equipped with TVs? I honestly did not know that. Madness.

All Seeing Eye wrote: »

Not from the Council. Most would plead their case at the local social welfare office for a discretionary hand out to get furniture and appliances for their free house. They plead poverty based on the fact that they are on welfare it’s easy to do.

So a tv is seen as an essential now!
Fair enough with basic furniture or kettle or fridge, things you need to survive...but a tv...

The blood is starting to boil!!

zeebre12 wrote:

I was talking to a builder the other day who does up council houses. He said it's absolutely sickening what goes on. Each time someone moves out of a council house all the tiles, carpets, kitchen units etc are ripped up and all new stuff is put in ready for the next family. He said most are perfect when families move out but they are still torn a sunder. New home appliances each time. He said even his boss would take a flat-screen TV that would be thrown out. Sure I saw it on the news a few weeks ago, a woman moved into a new house brand new kitchen units, American style fridge etc.

This is the biggest load of rubbish I've ever heard.

Every post that comes up from Ms.Cash makes her look more and more like someone who has a load of money but is just looking for a free house anyway. To go to the extent of putting yourself and your children out on the streets / presenting to the Gardai just so you don't have to spend any of the money you obviously have on accomodation is disgraceful

One eyed Jack wrote: »

She doesn’t need the PR spin of the housing organisations any more to lobby Government for what she wants.

What she wants or what she needs?

She needs a home for herself and her 6 kids. She wants it to be a certain size and in a certain area.
Maybe just maybe this home might be outside the area "she wants".
Maybe just maybe she might want to consider this moving forward.

mfceiling wrote: »

What she wants or what she needs?

She needs a home for herself and her 6 kids. She wants it to be a certain size and in a certain area.
Maybe just maybe this home might be outside the area "she wants".
Maybe just maybe she might want to consider this moving forward.

Unfortunately this is the current state of affairs for thousands Claiming homeless ,
Even when offered their "forever home" they are still turning homes down ,
Meanwhile they stay in hotels and b&b free from any financial contribution or untilities for several years.


Desperate and homeless sorry I'm not buying it

Could Maragret become the next Vogue Williams?
She posts lots of rubbish on social media and if RTE gave her a TV program to show the reality of being a homeless traveller in Ireland. She'd be a reality star.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

You should tell him to chuck the building, he clearly has a big future in story telling.

Does anybody actually know what standard social/council housing is finished at?
I know years ago from seeing council houses.
Your kitchen had a sink(press around the sink.
Hall, Kitchen, Living room, bathroom had sticky down tiles and a standard bathroom.
No walls painted, no bedroom floors, presses,etc.
I ask this because a few weeks ago I saw Eoghan Murphy with somebody in there new house and the kitchen looked to be finished to a good standard.

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Does anybody actually know what standard social/council housing is finished at?
I know years ago from seeing council houses.
Your kitchen had a sink(press around the sink.
Hall, Kitchen, Living room, bathroom had sticky down tiles and a standard bathroom.
No walls painted, no bedroom floors, presses,etc.
I ask this because a few weeks ago I saw Eoghan Murphy with somebody in there new house and the kitchen looked to be finished to a good standard.

I know with HAP one of the common complaints from landlords is that the council does an inspection and some times they demand more be done to a property than is actually required by the local council's rental standards..

In terms of social housing provided by councils/associations some housing standards do not apply including that they do not have to (but can) provide any white goods (dishwasher, washing machine, microwave etc.) and I believe they can even not include an oven / hobs.

mfceiling wrote: »

What she wants or what she needs?

She needs a home for herself and her 6 kids. She wants it to be a certain size and in a certain area.
Maybe just maybe this home might be outside the area "she wants".
Maybe just maybe she might want to consider this moving forward.

I was very specific - she is now in a position where she can lobby Government for what she wants, and she’s no longer dependent upon the homeless services providers and housing organisations to make her case for her. She has the backing of a number of members of both her community, and the public, and a number of other organisations who are rallying behind her to put pressure on Government to meet their demands.

What she needs (and God forgive me for thinking she needs a good kick up the hole!), is something else entirely, and that’s something which housing organisations and local authorities were, and still are, responsible for, as they are the bodies which are receiving funding from Government to address the multitude of issues they may have identified in her case.