THE pun will have escaped correspondent John Greenway (Letters, October 31) but one of the reasons the Big Issue is so-called is that its subject matter, homelessness, is just that: a big issue.

And the fact that a council 40 miles away has, sadly, felt the need to take action to ban Big Issue sellers should not be a cause for Mr Greenway to feel "delighted".

Obviously he has no idea about what lies behind the Big Issue's mobilisation of efforts to get homeless people out of their sad plight. Nor can he know about the criteria individuals have to attain to get registered as a vendor, or about the rules of conduct they have to abide by.

Mr Greenway asserts boldly: "Now is the time for other responsible local authorities to remove these magazine vendors from their public highways". Yet he says nothing to justify such a sweeping statement. And why does he want authorities ("responsible" ones, mind) to remove people going about their lawful business?

His comment that "sellers seem to be little better that beggars" may in some way be true, but certainly not in the derogatory way he means. Mr Greenway seems to ignore the fundamental point that they are offering a commodity for sale. Does he level the same criticism at his local newsagent?

And finally, he thinks that "an alarming amount (of sellers) look young enough to get a proper job". Is this man for real? Selling the Big Issue is the first step to getting a proper job, which is the first step to having a real home rather than living a hand-to-mouth existence.

One final thing . People like me and Mr Greenway are lucky. We don't have to seem to be "little better that beggars" to get a home. He should try to remember this the next time he walks in through his front door with the price of the Big Issue still in his pocket.

DAVID HARGREAVES,

Market Street, Tottington.