Skip to main content

Please, I beg of you, let me give you something for nothing

Most days we are rung at Thames Reach by somebody who wants to help the homeless; it is really rather gratifying. Media bods come with propositions intended to shed fresh light on ‘The Plight of the Homeless’. The Big Idea often involves them sleeping rough on the street to give a ‘down and dirty’ account of what it is like to be a rough sleeper. Quite often they are genuinely unaware that a proposal of this type is put to us at least once a month. Sometimes the call is from a designer with a new invention to pilot, such as a collapsible tent for rough sleepers or a particularly warm body bag to keep them snug during those winter nights. As the vast majority of rough sleepers aspire to a bricks and mortar solution rather than a life under canvas or in a sleeping bag, we tend to give them short shrift. Some approaches are from, to be frank, cranks.

On this particular morning I seem to have been reached by a Premier League crank. The conversation went as follows:

‘Mr Swain, my name is Mr Paley and I want to give my house to the homeless for five years’
That’s very kind of you Mr Paley, what will this cost us?
‘Nothing’.
‘I’m sorry Mr Paley, I’m not with you’.
‘Mr Swain, I want eight homeless people to live in my house free of charge’.
‘Mr Paley, I appreciate your interest but most homeless people would prefer not to share a bedroom; I can’t see this working’.
‘My house has eight bedrooms Mr Swain, please come and take a look, your ex-Treasurer Terry Hitchcock has told me about your organisation and I want to help you.’
‘OK Mr Paley, perhaps we could meet at your house next week….’

Dispiritingly, the Treasurer’s name was correct. To preserve good relations with a former Board member I now had to embark on something called a Wild Goose Chase.

The address was in an extremely posh part of South London. The house had wrought iron gates, a gravel drive and a blue plaque on the side bearing notice that a famous military figure had lived, and died, in the house. Mr Paley was diffidently polite and accompanied me on the journey around his house which, in my terms, was a mansion. He explained that his wife had spotted the house from the road and fallen in love with it. He had bought it and never lived in it. These things happen. Perhaps he would sell it one day, but in the meantime he wanted the homeless to benefit. There were chandeliers in most rooms, antique furniture scattered throughout, crisp bed linen and deep carpets. At various points Mr Paley had to attend to his mobile. Then his face became grimly serious and large sums were tersely bandied about before, with an apology, he returned his attention to me.

Of course, I knew it wouldn’t work. I pictured eight unsupervised homeless people in this most beautiful of houses. Swinging from the chandeliers was just one of many possible exploits that could be visualised with little difficulty.

Back at the office it occurred to us that there was a way through it. With Mr Paley’s permission, we could let the house commercially and use the income stream to fund one of our employment projects. Mr Paley expressed quiet approval and our legal representatives set about putting in place an appropriate agreement.

Some three weeks later Mr Paley rang again.

‘I’m sorry Mr Swain but my neighbour has unexpectedly made me an offer on the house which I have decided to accept.’

It was a blow, but these things happen and I had already told myself that it was always too good to be true. But Mr Paley had another surprise in store.

‘I don’t go back on my word Mr Swain, so I would therefore be most grateful if you could give me a figure commensurate to the amount of money you would have received should you have let my house commercially over a period of five years’.

The next conversation felt, by some way, the hardest. A colleague diligently contacted a number of estate agents and, as they say, did the math. The figure she arrived at was £163,000 – and that was at the bottom end. I’ve done the fund-raising course and know the theory around making the pitch: don’t prevaricate, boldly name your figure, first speaks loses. But I still can’t do it without a nervous stammer and a feeling that I am an impertinent charlatan. It went thus:

‘Mr Paley, we are entirely honourable at Thames Reach and this really is the figure though it seems very high to me and I quite understand if…..’

Mr Paley was quick to put me out of my misery.

‘Mr Swain, I have two things to say; firstly I know that everyone working with homeless people is honourable’ (Dear Reader: I can see the thought bubble above your head: it says, this man is clever, but he has led a sheltered life). Secondly, would you be prepared for me to pay you in two instalments?’

My magnanimity knew no bounds and I graciously accepted the two payments arrangement.

There was one further meeting with Mr Paley to finalise the agreement. Earnestly I explained to him that we would give him regular updates on the service his money was supporting which we should be delighted to take him to visit. How about, I prattled, a formal report on progress every six months and perhaps some pictures of participants? It wasn’t working. He was showing signs of exasperation and suddenly expostulated:

‘Mr Swain, this morning I was meeting with young men and women in my company who think that being given a bonus of £30,000 on top of a very substantial salary is a derisory acknowledgement of their worth – please, I beg of you, let me give you something for nothing!’

We both felt shaken by his outburst and I left shortly after. We shook hands self-consciously and I have never met him again.

Over the last few years Mr Paley’s money has helped hundreds of homeless men and women increase their confidence and self-esteem, develop new skills and increase their employability. Many of them are now in work; some with Thames Reach. Mr Paley receives a yearly letter from Thames Reach but remains resolutely detached.

We can only hope that in these times when greed unencumbered by conscience seems in the ascendancy, leading to the subsidisation of duck houses, servants’ quarters and non-existent mortgages that there may be similar gestures from other enigmatic angels with a strange desire that flies defiantly in the face of the zeitgeist. Namely, without fuss or fanfare, to be able to give something for nothing.

Jeremy Swain June 2009

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Street homelessness: The dangerous appeal of the street magnets

Amongst the front-line staff at Thames Reach, those undertaking outreach work on the street or managing our hostels for rough sleepers, there is always a sense of relief when the Christmas period is behind them. 
Christmas is a time when we can expect a surge in support from the public and, concurrently, there is also an increased risk of people dying on the street. This is because so much of the public’s seasonal largesse is focused on giving to people who are visibly present on the street and, in order to be in the position to be a recipient, those who have moved away from rough sleeping will often return to the street at Christmas. 
In late November, a Big Issue seller I follow who is active on Twitter tweeted that he had been forced to move from his usual pitch outside a supermarket because an intimidating former rough sleeper, now housed, had requisitioned it for the lucrative Christmas period.  Outreach workers meanwhile pay special attention to the vulnerable, often drug depend…

We need evidence-based action to end rough sleeping, not post-truth emotional spasms

In my first year working with homeless people an older colleague, with foreboding, informed me that the homeless people we were supporting were more complex, challenging and needy than anybody had previously experienced.  I remember being shocked, considering it remarkable that I should be starting at the very time when the profile of the homeless population was changing so dramatically. It didn’t occur to me to ask ‘how do you know?’ 
Every year since, I have heard something like this same statement made. I was therefore not in a condition to be knocked down by a feather when, as a predictable pre-Christmas truism, it was stated that those working with the homeless were encountering an unprecedented increase in ‘the range of complex issues’. Wiser now, I understand that what I first heard those thirty years ago was hyperbole.      
A degree of embellishment in the context of such an emotive issue as homelessness is, perhaps, inevitable. However, when hyperbole descends into factual mis…

Outreach work - not taking no for an answer

There is a crepuscular light and a chilly autumn wind is sending leaves upwards into the evening sky.  Nonetheless, I maintain the ritual of stopping to watch the skateboarders at London’s South Bank.  They cavort and shimmy in the cavernous space under the Queen Elizabeth Hall, the harsh concrete backcloth these days covered with vivid graffiti.  So much life and energy where there was once misery and desperation. For this was the place where, thirty years ago, the greatest number of rough sleepers could be found.  By the late 1980s, following some misguided and deeply damaging welfare benefit changes introduced by Margaret Thatcher’s government and an absence of an effective strategy to address an inexorable rise in rough sleeping, over 120 people were sleeping around the brutalist architecture of the South Bank.  In the evening, huddles of rough sleepers would gather at tables within the Royal Festival Hall and wait for the arrival of the first soup run.
I was one of the outreach wo…