When people begin to introduce irrelevant points, non-sequiturs, and generalisations, you know you’re onto something. When people ask, “How can you defend literally convicted criminals?” it becomes clear that they are conflating criminal convictions with civil matters a matter in which they have no prior offence - there is no reason to suspect there might be any potential damages from their unauthorised occupation of inactive non-residential land. 

There is a constant drone from tax-paying, vote-casting people of good faith. The argument often goes: “I fully support the fight against homelessness. I would even vote to overturn the policy of 'no social housing for ex-prisoners.' I donate to the YMCA and The Salvation Army, and I support the cause. I even believe offering homeless people and rough sleepers wild camping spots is better than emergency shelters like the SA do -  because  I know that addicts cannot rehabilitate themselves in the company of other addicts. However, even though it’s a good scheme and I fully support it please don’t do it near me or my family.”

If you’re reading this because you’re concerned about a rough sleeper who has moved into an igloo we pitched on land near you, understand this: it is normal; and it is very much your own anxiety and your own insecurity that is causing you harm. At no point in history and nowhere in the world has everyone lived in postally indexed houses like we do in the UK. Nomads do not deserve the scorn they receive in the UK. In polite English society, we have been successful in our attempt and have indeed committed cultural genocide against Irish Traveller and Gypsy communities, and this is why the PINGU scheme seem unusual to you. This brief decimalization we have called "civilisation" is why you fear what they might do to you or might think of you. Should you be a Canadian living in Nunavut, you might view the Inuit with less suspicion. If you were in Russia, you might regard the Tuvans as innocent reindeer hearders. In Zimbabwe, the Hansa tribes might inspire a similar perspective. 

Between 1992 and 2022, rough sleeping increased by 2,000% (or twentyfold), while the population only increased by around 30%. Why? The eagle eyed might suspect that the answer lies in those dates. The 1992 Unauthorised Encampments Act criminalised Gypsies for parking on land they didn’t own. Then, the 2022 amendment introduced a significant caveat: the law now differentiates between unauthorised encampments and unauthorised occupation if the “encampment” wasn’t erected, hauled, or towed by a vehicle.

This amendment followed wild camping rights protests in Dartmoor. It refers to the "protection of travellers and nomadic cultures" and essentially states that if you build a temporary structure without causing damage (e.g., a tent) or use horse power to tow a traditional caravan onto an inactive plot of land, the law requires you to be treated with respect for your culture and human rights. However, if you arrive in a car and a caravan, society still views you as the usual "dirty, thieving gypsy scum*." 

The stars are for everyone. You may not like someone staying temporarily on land near you, but take solace in the fact that, should you ever become a victim of fraud, false conviction, or extreme weather events, you now have the right to pitch a tent for a few weeks on some hard-to-find scrub land that’s inactive and non-residential. For all of human history—apart from the last twenty years—you have had that right. It is, and should remain, a human and God-given right. Rights are hard to own and easy to lose.

All landowners either bought or inherited their land from someone who originally enclosed it, taking it from the commons shared by humans and animals alike. We allowed this enclosure so we could work the land, live, and eat. When land is inactive, unfarmed, or unused, it is not we who are stealing it from an individual landowner—it is the landowner who is withholding it from us. There are 250,000 long-term empty residential properties and 100,000 abandoned commercial and industrial properties in a country with 350,000 homeless people. In my opinion—and I might be wrong—it’s easy to see who is acting criminally, what damage is being caused, and what the simplest solution might be to this complex problem. Just image a city the size of Leeds. 

Project PINGU is my task and this is not about preventing homelessness but about treating the conditions of rough sleepers who do not want to use communal shelters like hostels because in the words of one man "you are cleaner on the streets" (Source)  With project PINGU, the rough sleepers get an address  that AI and the internet knows to be inactive and me a solicitor to represent their rights,  clean running drinking water and an address book of contacts local to them so they can find word, lodgings. To become a contact in the ESKIMO database use HUSKY ai to fill in an application for any of the GARDEN IGLOOs; oh and they get a STREET IGLOO as well of course. I forgot the mention that bit. 

*This text was corrected by GPT for spelling, grammar and English English. Please note that the famously "woke" ChatGPT didn't edit that "dirty, thieving gypsy scum" - showing how normalized we have made anti-nomad legalisation.