Deborah at Microsyster Outreach wrote: “I've tried searching the web to see if there is any co-ordinated response to these by homelessness charities, but cant find any. …. Just seems odd there isn't more being said or done about it by existing charities .…”
How sad it is that people and the charities themselves sit back idly as an Ambitious Government slowly throttles the ability of good people to help those in need. As Ambitious Government eliminates charities through the officious application of laws, it then slowly moves in to fill the void with bureaucrats, agencies, and quangos. More’s the pity that research has not been compare the widespread generosity of the Victorians through charitable works and their slow demise by Ambitious Government to this day.
Having said this, it is difficult to defend those who infringe on the rights, peace or property of individuals. Public roadways, parks, and other property, however, are “owned” for the commonweal and therefore must be open for use by anyone, so long as they do not constitute a *legitimate* danger to health or safety or disrupt the peace of others. In all case, charities would do well to ensure that they gained the permission of owners to use privately owned property and take the greatest care to minimize and eliminate any problems that arise.
How sad it is that people and the charities themselves sit back idly as an Ambitious Government slowly throttles the ability of good people to help those in need. As Ambitious Government eliminates charities through the officious application of laws, it then slowly moves in to fill the void with bureaucrats, agencies, and quangos. More’s the pity that research has not been compare the widespread generosity of the Victorians through charitable works and their slow demise by Ambitious Government to this day.
Having said this, it is difficult to defend those who infringe on the rights, peace or property of individuals. Public roadways, parks, and other property, however, are “owned” for the commonweal and therefore must be open for use by anyone, so long as they do not constitute a *legitimate* danger to health or safety or disrupt the peace of others. In all case, charities would do well to ensure that they gained the permission of owners to use privately owned property and take the greatest care to minimize and eliminate any problems that arise.
Only by standing up to Ambitious Government can the people prevent the hydraheaded monster from stretching its tentacles into every walk of life. Where does the stand begin? By sending e-mail to the London Councils address above, or letters and e-mail to the addresses at the very end of this message.
Bob Evans
Bob Evans
---------------------------------------
The London Councils Proposal
Page 14
Distribution of free refreshments
Problem
Free refreshments and food are regularly distributed on public land, particularly by organisations wishing to assist the homeless. The unfettered distribution of free food and refreshments causes nuisance to occupiers of premises, often residential premises, in the vicinity of such land.
Solution
It is proposed to prohibit the distribution of free refreshments on land designated by a London borough council. It would also be an offence to cause another person to distribute such refreshments. To be designated, land would have to be in the open air, and open to public access.
Unlawful distribution of free food would be an offence, and would be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale.
Exemptions would be included, for example, the distribution of refreshments to people taking part in sporting events or giving out free samples outside retail premises.
Comments are welcome on the proposal to prohibit the distribution of free refreshments in designated areas. Consultees are particularly asked to comment on exemptions.
Comments should be sent to Oliver Hatch, Parliamentary and Public Affairs Officer, London Councils, 59 Southwark Street, London SE1 OAL or by email to oliver.hatch@...
Offline 
Send Email