Emily wrote on her Facebook about what she said to National M.P. Louise Upston: "To be clear - we wanted Upston to listen not speak. And because of that, she left. I was begging her to meet with us, since she will not answer repeated requests for a meeting.
We have 350 stories from parents horrendously impacted by the cuts to disability support. Parents who have lost carers, lost access to amazing programmes like riding for the disabled, parents who now have no respite. Upston will not meet with anyone to accept the book of collated stories to read. Penny Simmonds wouldn’t either. They don’t want the evidence of what they’ve caused."
And: "[H]er necklace alone is probably what I earn in a year. I think it was her smirking face that made me break down. She was completely unmoved, like a robot, when I talked about a mum who had attempted suicide after losing all respite. She just did not care."
Beautiful and poignant threads onto which the four days and myriad jetsam are arranged to celebrate time and place. Complementing and enriching each other in generative implication. Not imposed. Not calculating profit or loss, just engagement and joy. What does a political functionary regard as profit, as loss? Numbers, not names.
One thing that strikes me about the attitude of the very wealthy (i.e. National M.P.s) to disability is that they act as if there is a clear dividing line between the able-bodied and the disabled. Actually, anyone can become disabled at any time- most people need support sometime in their life, whether that's temporary or permanent. It's like the very rich can't imagine the possibility of interdependence. Or maybe they think that if it happens to them they can buy their way out somehow.
Yes Rosie, perhaps there is a fundamental lack of imagination which facilitates the acquisition of disproportionate financial wealth. Such persons cannot imagine for instance how wealth accrues at a cost to others and to the environment. They cannot imagine how the system privileges them out of all proportion to their innate human capacity. Wealth is ultimately a proxy for giving and receiving. It gets in the road of real human interaction and interdependence.
L O S S. T E A R S. I only just realized that this word is what tears at my heart to bring me to tears.
Emily wrote on her Facebook about what she said to National M.P. Louise Upston: "To be clear - we wanted Upston to listen not speak. And because of that, she left. I was begging her to meet with us, since she will not answer repeated requests for a meeting.
We have 350 stories from parents horrendously impacted by the cuts to disability support. Parents who have lost carers, lost access to amazing programmes like riding for the disabled, parents who now have no respite. Upston will not meet with anyone to accept the book of collated stories to read. Penny Simmonds wouldn’t either. They don’t want the evidence of what they’ve caused."
And: "[H]er necklace alone is probably what I earn in a year. I think it was her smirking face that made me break down. She was completely unmoved, like a robot, when I talked about a mum who had attempted suicide after losing all respite. She just did not care."
Beautiful and poignant threads onto which the four days and myriad jetsam are arranged to celebrate time and place. Complementing and enriching each other in generative implication. Not imposed. Not calculating profit or loss, just engagement and joy. What does a political functionary regard as profit, as loss? Numbers, not names.
One thing that strikes me about the attitude of the very wealthy (i.e. National M.P.s) to disability is that they act as if there is a clear dividing line between the able-bodied and the disabled. Actually, anyone can become disabled at any time- most people need support sometime in their life, whether that's temporary or permanent. It's like the very rich can't imagine the possibility of interdependence. Or maybe they think that if it happens to them they can buy their way out somehow.
Yes Rosie, perhaps there is a fundamental lack of imagination which facilitates the acquisition of disproportionate financial wealth. Such persons cannot imagine for instance how wealth accrues at a cost to others and to the environment. They cannot imagine how the system privileges them out of all proportion to their innate human capacity. Wealth is ultimately a proxy for giving and receiving. It gets in the road of real human interaction and interdependence.
Graeme, indeed. I wrote about that just prior to the election: https://rosiewhinray.substack.com/p/sharers-not-owners