Am I reading this right ,that before any proposed cuts there was NINETEEN seperate charities,all with paid workers and managers and premises,paid for by whom?

How does one define homeless? If it is by someone who does not have a private lockable place of their own ,then that will be a high number, However if the definition is someone sleeping rough outdoors there are very very few within the RMBC area. Many youngsters share houses/flats/sleep on sofa beds ,especially after a domestic bust up whether it be with partner or parents. Many of these are very short term and either resolve themselves or the person finds a more secure place of residence.

No way does it call for NINTEEN seperate groups to deal with a very small problem. I have challenged more than one councillor to show me where the so called homeless sleep rough,to no response. Same way as most big issue sellers are NOT homeless ,and guess what you do not even need to claim you are to be registered to sell the Big Issue. So other than beer and drug money for the sellers ,can anyone tell me exactly HOW does it help the homeless?

Having travelled up and down these Isles I have yet to see a sign saying this building was bought or built by the Big Issue. This whole alleged homeless issue in RMBC is a gravy train for paid workers/Big Issue sellers/ etc etc.

And the real shame is that the newly tendered services will cost more and provide accommodation and support for a significantly lower number of local people in need than at present, The tendering process will also result in closing down local charities and groups who have local roots and a long history in the borough. So much for the Big Society & Value for Money then!

Already Social Services are putting people in to B & B at a cost of £45 per night, not to mention the extra work that is being undertaken by the Police and Duty Social Workers. Has anyone seen the new Prevention & Independence strategy? or is this is another word for is there any more volunteers please?

And really, the town should be extremely relieved to see these organisations go. The fact of the matter is: RochdAle, by playing host to all these charitable organisations, invites and encourages the entire regions share of maladjusted children, alcoholics, drug addicts, immigrants, sex offenders and the socially inept.

All of whom are preyed upon by those who make a living by such activity and who are settled and established in the town.

Then they wonder why the town has the reputation that it does.

The ‘vast majority' of councils have seen a rise in the number of rough sleepers in their borough. Leicester found 50 street homeless people as part of its count - a 163 per cent increase on the 19 rough sleepers it counted in 2010. Hull saw a 114 per cent jump, from seven in 2010 to 15 in 2011 and Worcester saw a 142 per cent rise - from seven to 17. Leeds found 11 rough sleepers, compared with six in 2010, and Brighton will report a 164 per cent increase - from 14 to 37.

In total, the 22 councils for which Inside Housing obtained figures, saw the number of rough sleepers rise by 40 per cent between 2010 and 2011 - from 338 to 472.

Rochdale Council do not even no how many people we have sleeping on the night each night. Their usual Council Officer lead incompetence is responsible for this as our local councillors follow their lead like the ill informed sheep they are.

Some 3.5 million households need affordable homes; the planet could benefit from fuel-saving houses, and the building industry from employment and profit.

A report from the Pro-Housing Alliance suggests the Treasury should consider that future cost savings in the NHS, education and other sectors – because of the improved health of families no longer encumbered by bad housing – would exceed the cost of borrowing £50 billion a year to build 500,000 green homes. The capital cost would be recovered by the sale or rental of the houses.

Any time you want a guided tour of poverty & homelessness in Rochdale Lord Anthony just give me a bell. As for , "I have challenged more than one councillor to show me where the so called homeless sleep rough,to no response", I'm afraid that this indicates how little you do know about rough sleepers since a Rochdale Councillor is the LAST person to have any understanding of who,where and when our rough sleepers are, they'd be the last people I'd expect to know.Though I've challenged them all to spending a night on the streets and strangley haven't had a reply from a single one of our listening council.

And finally as for your comments:"if the definition is someone sleeping rough outdoors there are very very few within the RMBC area" , your well off the mark and totally unaware of the latest figures, In fact Rochdale has 15% of the 'rough sleepers' for Greater Manchester in December 2011, as reported in the Rochdale Observer, -although this Rough Sleeper figure will now be way out of date and higher- disproportionatley high for a town this size.These figures are published by the Governmnment online and although conservative figures they are generally accepted as providing a snap shot figure....I suggest you do some research for once my friend becuse anyone with a even only a rudimentary understanding of Hosing & homelessness can see that you clearly haven't an inkling of real knowledge of your subject area , though your clear lack of empathy & compassion for those less fortunate than yourself equally does you little or no credit at all.

If you think homelessness is bad now just wait untill Homeless families from south London , some of the 80,000 plus expected to lose their homes under the new Housing Benefit cap legislation refered to in Eric Pickles leaked email come a knocking . Some have already be asked to move hundreds of miles north, following a surge in demand for temporary accommodation.

Croydon Council is considering sending some of the families it houses in emergency bed and breakfast accommodation to live in Hull and other Yorkshire towns, and Lancahire where rent is cheaper and more homes are thought to be available.

The decision comes as the number of families in such accommodation has risen from 61 in 2008 to 300 today - costing the council £300,000 a month.

The increase in the number of homeless families entitled to council support is thought to be due to reductions in local housing allowance (introduced for new tenants last year and for existing tenants from January), combined with job losses from the financial crisis. Add to that the three Rochdale families a day facing eviction and you have a toxic critical mass for a failed housing and homelessness strategy that Rochdale Council have created through lack of vision and now made worse by slashing funding to an already second rate service of homeless provision.

What are these ‘homeless’ doing throughout the day, and where do they get the money to buy their drugs, booze and cigs?
My property has been the target of daytime thieves and burglars 7 times in just over 2 ½ years.
Is it a coincidence I wonder?

Well Well Eugene,welcome to the show.......you quite obviously have lots of time at diverse times and dates,I trust that you are not sending all these messages from a computer ,perhaps in public sector paid time? The only thing I even half agree with you on is the Big issue,but even then you are selective in what you choose to mention.

I am aware of the Big Issue ,and can go back to when the North had a large office on Oldham street in Manchester is that still there? I can also go back to when Anita Roddick R.I.P. ,quickly distanced herself and the Body shop away from it. It is a FACT ,that someone does not have to be homeles to sell and profit from the sales of the Big Issue ,by registering as a vendor. A fact that is immediately obvious to anyone who walks around Manchester and the other major cities,and has a look at the vendors. Most are too clean and well dressed wearing,designer clothes and with their well fed dogs,they could not even act the part.I know of NO buildings built by the Big Issue. However I concede that if you name some I will look into it.Brentwood Day Centre in Middleton was origonally titled Brentwood Day Centre for the homeless as was built with a variety of funding. Trouble is after a short while it had no "customers " as there are no homeless by my definition in Middleton. So it changed its name to a centre for the homeless and socially excluded. Note Eugene ,no Big Issue funding here either.

The welfare/homeless /charity paid workers obviously have a vested interest in playing up and
exagerating the numbers,otherwise they would be out of a job,and so it becomes a Self Fulfiling Prophesy. I still say before the cuts why were there NINTEEN seperately funded groups,all with some full time paid staff and a management structure? I quite look forward to your reply ,cos feeling a bit bored and fed up this week ,careful not to get into trouble at work replying to this, yawn yawn.

Yes and today in the M.E.N a homeless man who gives his address as high street , rochdale a unamed charity hostel. gets sent down for scaling a 200 ft pylon stealing cable that cost the elec board 100k to fix !
These feral leaches steal and rob all day long and still get benefits and a roof over there head...close them all let him be really "homeless"

I work in Manchester City Centre, and it’s not uncommon in the summer to see Big Issue sellers with a cig in one hand and a can of larger in the other whilst offering the publication for sale. Not to mention those that offer ‘It’s the last one I have, so can I have the money and keep it to re sell?’.
Needless to say, my money stay in my pocket.

Then there is always the question ‘Got any spare change mate?
To which my reply is always ‘Yeah mate loads of it thanks’.

the domestic violence forum and womans refuge will be missed im sure i think it is the most vulnerable groups that are being hit the hardest. no woman asked to be abused and no innocent child should be exposed to violence these places are needed and should stay..