Council ‘spending £3,500 a week on accommodation for just one homeless person’

14 comments

1. Councillor McKenna, representing Mitchel Troy and Trellech, said: “I have been informed that in recent **years** the council have been hiring 10 rooms per week at a venue in Monmouthshire, at a cost of £3,500 per week, yet occupancy **within the past month** has been as low as 10 per cent, so effectively that’s £3,500 a week to house one person, which does raise serious questions about values for money.”

   Raises serious questions about Councillor McKenna’s common sense if you ask me.

2. The title isn’t true. It’s £3,500 for 10 people but they haven’t filled the other 9 rooms.

   > “I have been informed that in recent years the council have been hiring 10 rooms per week at a venue in Monmouthshire, at a cost of £3,500 per week, yet occupancy within the past month has been as low as 10 per cent, so effectively that’s £3,500 a week to house one person, which does raise serious questions about values for money.”

3. Now let’s see who gets the hate: the homeless guy, the council who took the decision, or whoever is is getting £3500/week

4. The ways that organisations somehow manage to waste money even within a climate of budget pressure is beyond me!

5. The real winners in this are definitely hotel owners, who get cushy contracts and consistent sales at a premium because they require profit margin.

   One of the biggest crimes ever committed by government was selling off of government assets thinking that it was more cost effective.

   And to be perfectly clear, local governments end up with shit deals like this because they lack the contractual knowledge and capability to get a better deal.

   They could simply agree contracts on a per usage basis instead of renting them out permanently. The UK isnt a big country and hotels are rarely 100% full in times when disasters occur. This is very feasible, as opposed to paying the full fee for something that doesnt get used.

6. I used to live in a homeless shelter supported accommodation thing a few years ago and it was insane that the council would pay the “charity” that ran it £450 a week housing benefit per person to house us there & residents had to pay additional rent money.

   When you see the conditions of the place & the support being pretty useless I couldn’t help but think it was all one big scam, it was very enraging.

7. First they said, “they should spend all this money on our homeless not immigrants”.

   Then, “why are they spending this much money on the homeless?”

   Make your mind up people.

8. So what the councillor is saying is that it would be much better value long term for some emergency accommodation to be purchased/built by the council which much lower running costs when not in use?

9. Ridiculous rage-bait headline. This headline should read ” rehousing project success: 9 of 10 rooms no longer needed”.

   > decline in homelessness since 2023, following the introduction of the council’s Rapid Rehousing Transition Plan

   Because their rehousing projects worked. That was a contract to rent 10 rooms but they aren’t needed anymore.

10. Wait til you find out how much they pay to place people in mental health residential care facilities.

11. “Council ‘spending £3,500 a week on accommodation for 10 homeless persons, that’s currently is being used by only one” would be proper headline IMO.

    How is such blatant lie they used to ragebait not illegal ?

12. used to work for a local authority the amount being spunked on temporary accommodation in this country makes me wince

13. Wait until you see how much councillors get for expenses. This isn’t even an issue

14. Imagine thinking this money was going to homeless people and not some scumbag slumlord or corporation.

Comments are closed.