There are realities that make us uncomfortable. Not because they are new, but because they remind us of what we prefer not to see. Homelessness is one of them. It is not an urban anecdote or an inevitable landscape; it is the symptom of a collective failure, of a society that has normalized that there are people who have nowhere to sleep. And, even more serious, that has begun to design spaces so that they cannot be there.
Hostile architecture, benches with metal dividers, inclined surfaces, corners full of obstacles, is the perfect metaphor for our time. It solves nothing, but it hides. It does not care, but it expels. It does not dignify, but it orders. It orders misery out of the field of vision. It makes it invisible. As if making it invisible were a social policy.
A few days ago I went to Barcelona-El Prat airport, which, let's remember, has public governance. An access control has been established there for areas open to the public. They ask you if you have a flight or if you are going to wait for someone. Formally it is an organizational measure. Materially, it is a filter to prevent homeless people from entering, among others. Far from putting all efforts into finding structural solutions, the option is to prevent the problem from being seen. We manage discomfort instead of governing complexity.
Administrations show their concern about homelessness. They collaborate with third sector entities, promote programs, develop plans. But, in parallel, in spaces under their responsibility, measures are applied that expel the most vulnerable. Could we call it cynicism? One cannot make a narrative of rights and, at the same time, erect physical or symbolic barriers so that certain people do not have a place.
In this context, a bill of temporary and urgent measures to address and eradicate homelessness, promoted by third sector entities, is being processed in the Parliament of Catalonia, with a politically relevant fact: all the groups in the chamber, with the exception of the far-right parties, registered it jointly. It is now about to complete one year of parliamentary progress.
Last December, the amendments arrived: 573. Making a good law requires debate, and amendments are an essential part of the legislative process. We must trust that this volume responds to the will to perfect the text and not to the temptation to make an ideological statement. Because, in this matter, what is needed is broad consensus and agility. It would be contradictory for those who have co-signed a joint proposal to end up blocking it due to dogmatism. Homelessness does not admit short-term calculations or symbolic battles; it demands negotiating generosity, solid agreements, and tangible results.
But beyond the law, there is the model. For years, international evidence has pointed towards strategies based on "housing first": guaranteeing stable and dignified housing first, and from there articulating social and health support. Glasgow, for example, is a successful model that has turned "housing first" into a centralized service with government support, which has been expanding its coverage for people with complex needs. It is not just about providing shelter, but about rebuilding life projects. Housing not as a reward after an itinerary, but as a starting point. Persisting in models focused exclusively on emergency resources or temporary shelters is to perpetuate provisionality.
In Barcelona, after many months of preparation, a pilot project called "housing first" began on June 1, 2015. That commitment has not gone much beyond the pilot format. Meanwhile, third-sector organizations, such as Fundació Arrels and others, have been expanding programs inspired by this model with their own, always limited, resources. In December 2025, in an extraordinary plenary session requested by the municipal groups Junts and Comuns on homelessness, a plan of measures presented by these two groups was approved, with a budget of 60 million euros. We hope that this proposal will not remain, as often happens, in a drawer. Declarations and agreements only have value if they are executed.
Dignity is not an administrative concession. It is inherent to the human condition, as is vulnerability. All of us, at some point in our lives, can go through situations of extreme fragility. Homelessness does not define people; it describes circumstances. And circumstances can be transformed with brave and coherent public policies, sustained over time, capable of offering real itineraries of stability and inclusion, shared with third-sector entities.
We must place homelessness at the top of the public agenda not as a slogan, but as a commitment. We cannot stop fighting for a society that guarantees fundamental rights and cares for vulnerable people. A society where everyone can develop a dignified and meaningful life.
Hunger is the most frequent illness and sometimes it seems to be bothersome, when what should worry us is our inability, or our lack of will, to eradicate it. And this, whether we like it or not, calls us all into question.
