Until midnight today, those who choose to enter a residential building they neither own nor rent and have no right to be in can claim that they are 'Squatting'. This allows them to remain in possession of the property until they are evicted by the landlord in a civil court action, something that may cause the landlord considerable inconvenience and cost.
From tomorrow, 'Squatting' in a residential property will be a criminal offence, meaning that 'Squatters' will be liable to summary arrest and removal by the police, potential fines or imprisonment and may end up with a criminal record. Landlords obviously are in favour of this change in the law while 'Squatters' and others who support their activities are equally obviously opposed.
To me, the prospect of coming home one day to discover that my house has been occupied by 'Squatters' is horrific. The very term 'Squatters' seems to have been invented in order to downgrade the seriousness of the activities of these people, pretending that they are somehow just another group of fun-loving people who don'r mean any harm. While there may be elements of truth in this, I fail to see how 'Squatting' can ever be considered acceptable.
The 'today' programme this morning had a significant contribution from a very sweet and decent sounding supply teacher who also happens to be a 'Squatter'; she explained, very reasonably, that she didn't earn enough to buy or rent a place to live and had no choice but to 'Squat'. One would suspect that she was chosen by the BBC because she was young, female, obviously intelligent and sounded so appealing; sadly, none of these characteristics is relevant to the issue. As of midnight tonight, she will be a criminal and could lose her chosen career as criminal records are not favoured when appointing teachers.
Why it has taken so long for us to arrive at this point is a mystery to me. 'Sqautters' deprive property owners of their rights and belongings in the same way as do other thieves; 'Squatters' are, in truth, thieves. It matters not that some try to ameliorate the effects of their actions by paying what they see as 'rent'; the fact is that they have no right to be in the properties that they occupy. The various arguments that are advanced in favour of these people simply can't justify their actions any more than I could justify murdering my neighbour because I don't like his dog.
Life is a series of compromises and we simply can't have everything that we want. Sometimes we have to change career or location in order to meet some other need; we may have to put one ambition 'on hold' in order to pursue another or may have to accept a poorer standard of living in one part of our lives so that we may enjoy greater excess in another. What we cannot do is deprive others of their property in order to short-cut our own path to success.
No comments:
Post a Comment