Young people leaving care are among the most vulnerable in society.
Walking from Westminster to Victoria station, a distance of barely a mile, it’s not uncommon to pass more than 40 people sleeping rough.
The tent cities springing up in parts of London and the desperation of those with nowhere to call home is heartbreaking.
There are a multitude of reasons why people lose their homes: a tenancy ending, relationship breakdown, mental health problems. But a disproportionate number of people sleeping on the streets are care leavers.
Young people leaving care are among the most vulnerable in society. They may have experienced terrible abuse or trauma growing up. They don’t have the support of their families, they certainly can’t rely on the bank of mum and dad nor move back home to save costs and without support, their lives can quickly spin out of control.
We’ve heard the government talk about its ‘moral obligation’ to keep on caring and supporting young people from care to independence. But the reality is that one in four care leavers experience homelessness, and 14 per cent have slept rough.
There is clearly something going wrong and one obvious failing is what happens on a care leaver’s 22nd birthday. In place of a gift, they are given a shock: a huge drop in their housing allowance, which can amount to several hundred pounds.
So even if a care leaver has managed to find themselves somewhere to live, and started to learn to manage their finances, they suddenly find a huge hole in their budget. Other support, like apprenticeship bursaries and a personal adviser, continues until they are 25. So why is it thought they don’t need enough money to provide a roof over their head? It doesn’t make sense.
In my hometown of Brighton, a young person who’s been in care loses more than £300 a month. The £360 they are left with is not enough for a room; it would barely cover the rent for a garage or parking space.
Brighton isn’t unique. The homeless charity Centrepoint has calculated that the new housing allowances for private sector rents wouldn’t cover the cost of a room in a shared house in 233 out of 234 local authorities they looked at.
So just at the point where a young person may be finding their feet, perhaps getting a job, making friends, putting down roots, they lose critical financial support. Is this what the government means by ‘moral obligation’ to support them?
The bleak situation for care leavers is part of a wider problem with housing allowance – which is that it unfairly discriminates against those under 25
In my local area, a young woman had been in care and was then fostered from the age of 14, built a good relationship with her foster family, left school, found a job and a bedsit to live in. Despite her learning difficulties, she was managing her finances with the help of her weekly wage and her housing benefit.
On her 22nd birthday, her income plummeted, putting her at risk of homelessness. The fact that she will be entitled to a higher rate at the age of 25 is little consolation when she doesn’t know how she is going to survive the next three years.
The bleak situation for care leavers is part of a wider problem with housing allowance – which is that it unfairly discriminates against those under 25, for whom the minimum wage is also lower.
The housing benefit available to young people who’ve spent at least three months in a homeless hostel is about half the amount that over-25s can claim. The last time I looked, landlords weren’t offering cheaper rents for those under 25, so why does the government think they need less support?
This isn’t only bad for their futures. It means they are having to stay in hostels even when they are ready to move on, because they cannot afford an alternative roof over their head. And that means fewer hostel beds for others who are also in need.
If they have become homeless at 18, it would be seven years before they could benefit from a rate that would actually help them find a home and move forward with their life.
Resolving these two injustices – the abandonment of care leavers on their 22nd birthday and the age discrimination against the under 25s – would make a huge difference to their lives, and for a comparatively small amount.
It would cost less than £10million to give young people, who may have had the worst start in life, a better chance of moving forward with their lives and reaching their potential rather than falling further into chaos and danger.
So, ahead of the Budget next month, I’m appealing to the Chancellor: please, make this difference. It would be money very well spent.
MORE: We may be out of the EU, but the Conservatives just can’t break their Brussels-blaming habit
MORE: HS2 is a vanity project that should be scrapped for good
