(en) Britain, AFED - SOLIDARITY AND THE MANCHESTER HOMELESS
CAMP
April 2015 saw the start of a self-organised homeless camp in the city of Manchester. A
march against austerity culminated in 30-40 people coming together. People who are
homeless often sleep separately or in small groups. This leaves individuals open to
assaults from others in the city, regular harassment from the police, and the danger of
violence. Those who are most vulnerable, young women, face a terrible time. Living in the
supportive atmosphere of the camp allowed many who had previously felt more isolated and
vulnerable to be able to tackle other issues. ---- Those in the group were varied. There
were ex-prisoners, young single women, many substance abusers, and older people who acted
in a parental role in the group. One man with cancer joined the camp, relaying that he was
unable to access treatment because he was living on the streets.
Local anarchists also joined the homeless to offer their solidarity, and at first acted as
advocates, dealing with the police and the council. While some have had to move on, others
have stayed.
There was a good ethos at the camp with sharing of resources. Someone from the Community
Bandstand group loaned a PA and music was played around the site of the first camp. This
had a very positive influence both on the camp members and on the other city users as it
served to break down barriers between the two groups and reduced the invisibility of the
homeless people. Food was donated by local people and already established street food
kitchens. Those in the camp were no longer always hungry and were able to begin to tackle
other issues around benefits and health.
Unsurprisingly, there has not been a wonderful response from the established charities,
the council, or the police.
Shelter, charity for the homeless, continued to fundraise near the camp but did not in any
way help those who were actually in need of it. The AF has always been critical of
charities, who often exist to provide for their own bosses (in the form of high salaries
and expense accounts) at the expense of those they supposedly want to help. Charities also
make it possible for the state to ignore problems that people would usually force them to
deal with otherwise.
The council offered housing to some people who were sleeping rough but not all, claiming
that there were people who were intentionally homeless. As one of the people from camp
said "Nobody wakes up and decides to sleep on the streets. Many of the group haven't even
been offered something temporary. We want permanent housing for all." Those who were
offered somewhere with a roof said the offers were patchy and did not account for their
needs. They were in hostels or group homes, lacking security and privacy. In an act of
almost unbelievable underhandedness some have been put in hotels several miles from the
camp area, places which do not accept couples and which deny people the right to take
their dogs who are, for many, their sole security and companionship. This tactic of divide
and rule almost beggars belief, forcing apart the community which has been built up.
Police harassment has been ever-present. The camp has been moved on twice by police and
now exists split between three separate sites. This makes supporting one another difficult
and any problems that arise have become harder to deal with.
One of the anarchists who has been closely involved from the early days commented that
this venture has faced many problems.
Firstly, as a result of people being used to told what to do all their lives, whether in
the prisons, mental hospitals, schools or army, it has been impossible for the campers to
establish a non-heirarchical, horizontal way of organising and making decisions. Also,
while some campers were able to introduce a safer spaces policy, there has not been enough
outreach to create a collective understanding of what such a policy means and how it
should be applied. Alcohol and drug use has led to argumentative behaviour and the need
for more confident peacekeepers is great. The people who become loud and aggressive can
and have been successfully asked to leave, but with only a few people there able to do
this it has not always happened, leading to some leaving the camp due to safety concerns.
When anarchists have been sleeping at the camp the police have usually stayed away, but as
soon as they took a break the cops came back, arresting and harassing in their old style.
The early days of the camp show that it is possible for this kind of venture to provide
safe place for homeless people to live and regroup, but, without solidarity in the
struggle, it can be difficult for those sleeping rough to break down the oppressive
structures they face. While there have been splits and setbacks it is felt that the camp
can rebuild and hopefully, together, we will see a new space grow.
You can read more about the camp on WTB Solicitors here.
http://www.wtbsolicitors.com/homeless-camp-in-manchester/
https://afed.org.uk/solidarity-and-the-homeless-camp/
