Housing the homeless in the sunshine

It’s a thought experiment to consider whether UK homeless and destitute people could be sent, voluntarily, to a Caribbean island to live in purpose-built accommodation with medical facilities on hand.

Of course, it raises big practical, legal, ethical, and historical questions.

In a purely logistical sense it could technically be done. A wealthy government could build housing and facilities abroad and relocate people there voluntarily.

Forcibly relocating people would violate UK and international law. It could only work if fully voluntary and informed consent was obtained. The advantage would be that Caribbean construction, the employment of staff and supply chains would cost less than homelessness services in the UK. Furthermore, the weather would be less challenging that that in the UK.

There would need to be medical and social support because many homeless people require ongoing mental health and addiction services. Relocation by itself would not fix underlying causes, but it would provide a pleasant environment that could provide support more easily than attempting to help people sleeping in shop doorways. 

People with existing ties in the UK, such as family, services and heritage, mightsuffer isolation. But this would be less of a problem than their current isolation. Long range video communication has never been easier of cheaper to provide. If framed positively, a humane version would be like a well-resourced therapeutic retreat. The focus would be on recovery, skills, community, and future reintegration to the UK. It would be run with oversight, dignity, and choice.

Even with this, many would argue resources should go into UK-based solutions instead. The thought experiment doesn’t really test geography; it tests how societies value vulnerable populations. A pilot scheme would test whether it would be effective in practice at achieving the desired goals.

The Caribbean islands that signed up to this would benefit from the resources put into it, the jobs involved in the construction, the staffing and maintenance. The destitute people would have better chances of being rehabilitated and having their problems dealt with. 

The reason it won’t happen is that the shrieking chorus of objections would compare it to the deportation of convicts to Australia (which was not voluntary), and would describe it as ‘social cleansing,’ preferring shop doorways with visible deprivation to comfortable rehabilitation overseas. It’s only a thought experiment, but it might just work.

Madsen Pirie