The UK government plans to introduce "move-on orders" targeting rough sleepers in city centers, framing the policy as a public safety measure to reduce disorder and antisocial behavior. The orders would give authorities power to direct homeless individuals to leave designated areas.
Officials argue the approach addresses visible homelessness and its associated impacts on city spaces. The Home Office has positioned the policy within a broader strategy to restore order to urban centers.
Civil rights advocates and homelessness charities contest the proposal sharply. They argue move-on orders criminalize poverty rather than solving it. The policy risks reviving punitive Victorian-era approaches that treated homelessness as a moral failing rather than a housing crisis requiring systemic solutions.
Critics raise practical concerns. Moving rough sleepers from one location to another without providing housing, mental health services, or addiction support merely displaces the problem. Studies show such enforcement-only approaches fail to reduce homelessness rates. Individuals moved away from established support networks in city centers often face greater isolation and health risks.
The policy also raises implementation questions. Enforcement officers would need to identify individuals, issue orders, and potentially prosecute noncompliance. This diverts police resources from other duties while creating a legal liability for people with nowhere to go.
Housing advocates highlight the core issue. England faces a chronic shortage of affordable housing and inadequate funding for homelessness services. The number of rough sleepers in England increased significantly over the past decade despite previous interventions. Effective solutions require investment in permanent supportive housing, mental health treatment, and addiction services.
Homelessness charities argue the government should fund evidence-based programs like Housing First, which provides stable accommodation alongside wraparound support services. Data from pilot programs in Britain and internationally demonstrate this approach reduces rough sleeping while costing less than ongoing enforcement and emergency services.
The move-on orders proposal reveals a policy gap. The government pursues