Big Issue Incident number 2

This time I had the right change. This time the seller called out to me rather than me calling out to them. But this time it was not a positive experience.

I was coming back from doing some shopping again, when a Big Issue seller asked if I wanted to buy a magazine. I was happy to do so, but as I was getting the money, when I checked that it was £1.40, the seller said that he was trying to get £3 to get into a hostel that night. I handed over the £1.40 and said I was sorry I didn't have any more change (a lie, but I am on a budget and it's nicer than saying 'I'm not going to give you any more' even if you both know it's not true). Instead of handing over the magazine, he said that it was his last copy and repeated that he wanted to get £3. As I didn't say anything (like 'Oh well in that case, keep it and sell it again'), he asked if I minded him hanging onto the magazine.

Of course, I said I didn't (though not very graciously I admit). But actually it bothered me, because of the Big Issue's 'Working not Begging' campaign. I think the Big Issue scheme is doing a lot of good, but it can be harmed by a public perception that the sellers are begging. Which they are generally not, but it only takes one person going against the code of conduct like the one I met today for the whole thing to come into disrepute. Something like the Big Issue can only work if everybody co-operates- if a minority try to get more out of it at the expense of the majority abiding by the code that puts it in danger. And of course, I didn't get the magazine.

The point could be made that he probably needed that £3 more than I did, and that if 'selling' the Big Issue was the only way he could manage to sleep indoors tonight then he should go right ahead and sell it, and if I wouldn't give him the £3 then at least I could be happy to leave him my magazine. But there are two problems with this. First, if it was really his last copy, then he must already have sold a lot today. I confess that I don't know how much it costs to get into a shelter. But I'm sure the Big Issue have worked out the numbers they allocate to vendors so that they cover the cost of both accommodation and food. If that assumption is correct, then it begs the question of what he had done with the rest of the money, that he was £3 short*- if, for example, he had spent it on drugs- only a possibility- then if he was so addicted that he'd already been prepared to use his accommodation money on them once, there would be no reason why he would not use any money he was asking for for a shelter for the same purpose. Which would obviously do more harm than good.

Secondly, he might be £3 short today, but by taking money without giving the magazine in return he risks jeapardizing possibly the whole organisation but more realistically his own position, which is not going to help him in finding the money for future nights.

Still, I felt bad about condemning him (internally) for behaving as he did, and I had to convince myself as I walked away that I was justified...

*Of course, this assumes he was telling the truth about needing £3- like all human statements not dealing with shared information, this has the potential to be a lie. In which case, it would be even worse.