Anger as Nottingham City Council refuses to reveal how it is spending £5 million homelessness funding

A rough sleeper in Long Row, Nottingham city centre.

Nottingham City Council’s decision to keep details of its spending on homeless services under wraps has added to the debate over the council’s transparency. The council has cited “commercial sensitivity” and “tendering process” as the reasons why they are unable to disclose this information, which has been met with scepticism and concern from various quarters.

Nottingham City Council has rejected a call to detail how it is spending money to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping worth over £5 million. Concerns were raised in a recent report about the council’s use of grant money given to it by the Government after it was said to be “unclear” where another £5 million ended up.

From cries of mismanagement to blaming the current Conservative government as well as the Labour-run council – our readers have had their say.

Read our content ad-free by downloading the new-look Nottinghamshire Live app

Reader baf60 expressed discomfort with the council’s reasoning, stating: “‘commercially sensitive’, ‘tendering process’, means companies and organisations keen to make a profit from vulnerable homeless people. This is wrong on so many levels.”

Another commentator Image echoes this by saying: “Certain services create their own problem then feed off the blood from the victims of its culture. It was once a loving group with a simple goal, now it’s a heartless machine feeding off misery. There is no real reward here. Homeless people stay in the system and just get moved about. The people with addictions get help finding money for more drugs. I was disgusted with the quality of care they were giving for the money they were milking from our councils, government and charitable people.”

The visibility of homelessness in Nottingham was highlighted by Dp11, who noted: “Take a walk on Clumber St Long Row and Pelham St. There are at least 20 homeless people in those areas every day.”

Gaspode said: “This is what happens when public services are farmed out and allocated via competitive processes, the applicants expect confidentiality. If you believed the Tory lie that competition makes everything cheaper and more open, leading to sunlit uplands I’ve got a bridge you can buy.”

Nigel22 suggested “Maybe applicants need to be told that information will be released after 6 months. I suspect that this would not stop applicants from tendering. Commercial confidentiality in many cases is nothing more than a smokescreen.”

Chestnutmare said: “Once again the Tory Government has given the Labour Council money to resolve a social issue and the said Labour Council will not be transparent in how they have spent that money, again. Funny enough though, yet those who are anti-Tories/government are blaming the Tories for a Labour council not being truthful/covering up where the money went? Typical of these people, blame the wrong people for the issue at hand.”

Harrystotle said: “Serving the needs of the “homeless” is a business. Those defined benefit pension schemes run by the Labour City Council’s “partners” don’t pay for themselves you know. The last thing these businesses want is to actually solve the problem and reduce rough sleeping.”

Pete7384884844 said: “They spend the money on themselves obviously haha you lot thinking they have the slightest bit of interest in stopping? They’re laughing, as I would be if I were a millionaire loving life on free grants and don’t need to explain that you just booked a holiday. Happy days, can’t fault ’em.”

Tbicklasked said: “Is this all another case of ‘ring-fenced’ money that has been misappropriated, similar to the money that the government gave the council for the loss of car parking revenue?”

GaryBaldi questioned: “The implication is the council have lost, misspent or squandered this money. They appear to have used it on homeless services. What they haven’t done is give a breakdown of how it was spent as that information is commercially sensitive. A good journalist would have found out whether it was commercially sensitive and whether it needed to be. Can the council give out this info even if they want to or would they be breaking the law to give it out? Come on NP give us all the facts. I know they are complicated but better the full picture than this story. Yes, it works as it gets lots of anti-council comments but all you’re doing is creating gossip and giving people the idea that funds are being stolen.”

Psephotus said: “So the council has been given money to take the rough sleepers off the streets but will not tell us how they have used the funds. Is this another case of misappropriation of funds to pay for other services and works and they dare not tell us again?”

What are your thoughts on this emotive subject, we would love to hear what you think in the comments below?