Posts by Lucy Telfar Barnard
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
With housing and health research – and a bit of respiratory health and infectious disease on the side – being my day job, I’m pretty well-acquainted with the condition of the national housing stock. So when I say “it’s not much, but it’s home”, I’m well aware that in some cases it really isn’t much. Still: Yes, there are certainly risks in our poor housing and in the struggles refugees and migrants can face trying to get any work, let alone meaningful work, here; but those risks are of a different order to the daily risks people face in refugee camps trying to avoid violence and get enough food, before they even start worrying about an education for their children.
That’s part of why I would prefer to see the refugee quota raised than a few one-off additional intakes of Syrians. I prefer to avoid competitions over whose suffering is greater, but I don’t see much difference between the plight of Syrians in Al Zaatri, and, for example, Somalians in Dabaab, or any of the people in other camps and conglomerations of the displaced around the world.
-
That's one way of looking at it, Sofie. The other way is the "no publicity is bad publicity" approach. When my mother had her books published she sent them to Patricia Bartlett in the home that Miss Bartlett would call for them to be banned, which she figured would do wonders for book sales.
Of course, in this instance the book has been "banned", though possibly only temporarily, and you can apparently still buy it for Kindle on Amazon. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the author finds he gets a nice sales bump from this latest reporting.Back on topic... well-written Donna, and I agree there is absolutely no excuse for not doubling our quota at least. Does anyone know if there will be the opportunity for public submissions to next year's review?
-
Hard News: To have a home, in reply to chris,
If someone is homeless and in desperate need, should you offer them accommodation when you know that your place might actually be a death trap?
Yes. The homeless person is not comatose. You can tell them what the risks are at your house, "it's not much, but it's home", and give them the option. They may not take it, of course, in the same way that the current refugees would generally rather not settle in Hungary or Greece despite the fact they are not in immediate danger there: understandably, they would prefer to go somewhere they are welcome and have at least some chance to forge a better life for their families.
-
Hard News: To have a home, in reply to Steve Barnes,
That is so much like “It’s ok, Labour did it”.
So very much the opposite: it's saying "It's not OK, whoever does it".
-
Hard News: To have a home, in reply to Steve Barnes,
Whatever, Steve. I'm still raw from seeing photos of dead toddlers on beaches, so forgive me if I kind of think the important thing from this post is that we've got a long history of "could do better" in refugees and immigration policy, and the current crisis may be enough of a slap to bring us round to actually doing better, even if only in passing, rather than it being all about any political party or whose eyes are older.
-
Hard News: To have a home, in reply to Steve Barnes,
I saw that as a way of pointing out that governments of all stripes have been less great than they might have been in their immigration policies. It's not about putting down Labour. It's about being even-handed in criticism.
-
As I just commented on facebook: I will be very pleased if the New Zealand government agrees to take more refugees. Every country should do more than it thinks it can to help our fellow human beings.
I will also be embarrassed, because by agreeing to take more refugees now, and not last year or any other time in the last 28 years, our country only illustrates a basic racism: Millions of our fellow human beings have been living and dying in refugee camps and escaping from war every year in that time, but the public voice to increase how many we are prepared to take only comes now because the current wave of refugees is bothersome to Europe, not because the plight of refugees there is any more (nor less) desperate than those of the last three decades in less visible parts of the world. -
I first saw it on Sideswipe yesterday morning, which went out at 5am, a good 5 and a half hours before this was posted. Kate Shuttleworth had tweeted it at 6.32pm the night before.
-
Hard News: Not yet standing upright, in reply to Matthew Poole,
Thanks for that Matthew, I saw that "due authority" drivel doing the rounds too, thought about trying to respond to it, and then thought of the many, many more pressing things I had to do. So really appreciate seeing someone else do a better job of it than I would have anyway.
-
Hard News: Not yet standing upright, in reply to JacksonP,
1.64 billion dollars. Add the international factor, and great fuck tonnes of cash is the answer.
Only if we decide everything must change immediately. Corporates do that because of branding, but if we decided to grandparent it, there'd be no need to change things in a rush, and that would keep the cost down.
Also, I'm not sure that a) it would be a multiplier, or b)that a corporate logo is the best analogy. Corporates have their brand on everything - all their stationery, their office signs, all sorts. But I'm struggling to think of many places the flag is used. There are a bunch of actual flags in council offices round the country, and a good quality flag is expensive. But I can't recall seeing it on letterhead.