text:
About NHCRN
NHCRN Allies
Contact NHCRN
Community Rights Workshop
Democracy School
Fundraising Concert
Local Resolution
State Constitutional Change >
Amendment FAQ
NH Movement >
Community Rights FAQ
Informational Audio & Video Snippets
Right of Local Self-Government & Rights of Nature
Rights of Nature Movement
PERHAPS NORTHERN PASS IS FALLING TO OUR FATIGUE, BUT MY GENERATION HAS HAD ENOUGH, WE'RE DONE
www.laconiadailysun.com/opinion/letters/112034-k-hridaya-sivalingam-2-26-675-perhaps-northern-pass-is-falling-to-our-fatigue-but-my-generation-has-had-enough-we-re-done
To The Daily Sun,
Friends and neighbors have asked me why I am voting yes to Article 29, the Community Rights-Based Ordinance in Ashland. The reasons are many, but the simplest is that I'm tired.
I'm a resident, a taxpayer, and a mother raising children here and I'm just plain tired. I'm tired of watching large corporations use their size, power, and money to overrun local interests and destroy our environment. I'm tired of being told by state (and perhaps more sadly local leaders), that projects like Northern Pass are inevitable, beyond our control, and that we just need to suck it up and prepare for it. I'm tired of the "let's make the most of it" argument or the argument for "let's try to just mitigate the inevitable." I'm tired of being told we have no say, no power, all while watching corporations claim massive rights and future lost profits and dodge responsibility for harm after harm.
Perhaps Northern Pass is falling victim to my fatigue, perhaps my lens isn't 100 percent open to their claims of inevitable benefits of their project and articulated efforts to mitigate harm... but if this is the case, I'm not sorry. They are the straw that is breaking the camel's back for me and many in my generation. We're done.
No, you cannot expect us to rejoice that you're offering us free testing of our watershed and lagoons so that IF you cause harm we can prove it and attempt to receive a settlement. No. Just stay away from our watershed. Don't dig there, don't test there, don't put towers there, just leave one of our most precious facilities and resources alone for us to manage as a community.
With respect to my fellow community members that argue that a community rights-based ordinance goes too far, I say, no, its corporate rights that have extended too far and it's time for us to begin the process of curtailing them. With respect to my fellow community members who argue a community rights-based ordinance is risky or invites a lawsuit, I say, I'm tired of being bullied and feared in to compromise or flat-out forced in to decisions from forces beyond our control. I remind them that having a rights-based ordinance in place WHEN Northern Pass adjusts its proposal and requests reconsideration is a potentially valuable tool, one that we together can choose to enforce or not. We can assess if the danger of trying to implement it feels riskier or costlier than the risk of allowing towers across our land.
I see it as akin to going in to battle armed. We don't leave the tanks at the base in hopes we don't get shelled.
With respect to my fellow community members who argue a community rights-based ordinance makes them fearful of how individuals in the community would make use of the ordinance, I encourage them to read it in its entirety and recall that it does not take away any existing rights. Further, I assert that I'd much rather work together as a small community to address and protect each other's interests and assure individual fears are alleviated than to be the victim of external forces dictating what happens in our community.
With respect to my fellow community members who argue we should wait to see if the Community Rights Amendment (CACR19) passes and lends legal credibility to such ordinances first, I invite them to share with me when in our history they've experienced the law leading the change?
As disenfranchised and powerless as we feel, we must always remember that the laws are our creation, and that every amendment to every law has begun with a person, a people, a community asserting that the law as it stands should be challenged. We assert our sincere will and the legislators and law follow that will. So, I will be voting YES to Article 29, and I hope to find among my neighbors others who are tired and ready to claim what has always been ours.
K. Hridaya Sivalingam, PhD
EXECUTIVE SESSION RESCHEDULED
CACR19's Executive Session Is Now
Tuesday, Feb. 27th, 9:00 AM
Rm 301 Legislative Offices Building:
33 N. State, Concord, NH, 03301
At this session, the House Municipal & County Government committee will vote on how to recommend CACR19 to the full NH House.
PLEASE ATTEND to show the M&CG committee that We the People of the Granite State care very much about amending our state constitution to
Protect People, Principles, and
Places above Profit.
SO WHAT DO WE DO NOW?
The Community Rights Movement to the New Hampshire House: Let the People Decide What's Best
CACR19's Tuesday, Feb. 27th
executive session at 9:00 AM
CACR19 needs majority support in the full 20-member
House Municipal & County Government committee.
This means at least 11 members have to believe it is time to elevate people and nature above corporation and profit!
PLEASE CONTINUE TO CALL
HOUSE M&CG COMMITTEE MEMBERS
URGE THEM TO RECOMMEND THAT CACR19 OUGHT-TO-PASS
NOTICE COMMITTEE MEMBERS WHO ARE STILL UNCERTAIN!!!
Jane Beaulieu: Manchester, Hillsborough 45 (603) 626-1260
James Belanger: Hollis, Hillsborough 27 (603) 465-2301
Opposes
John Bordenet: Keene, Cheshire 05 (603) 352-0680
Clyde Carson: Warner, Merrimack 07 (603) 456-2562 Supports
Francis Chase: Seabrook, Rockingham 20 (603) 944-0830 Uncertain
Debra DeSimone: Atkinson, Rockingham 14 (603) 362-4314 Uncertain
Francis Gauthier: Claremont, Sullivan 03 (603) 543-7382 Opposes
Julie Gilman: Exeter, Rockingham 18 (603) 580-1393 Supports
Timothy Josephson: Canaan, Grafton 11 (603) 523-2023
Carolyn Matthews: Raymond, Rockingham 03 (603) 244-2027
Frank McCarthy: Conway, Carroll 02 (603) 356-9160
Mark McLean: Manchester, Hillsborough 44 (603) 668-0076 Opposes
David Meader: Keene, Cheshire 06 (603) 357-1340
Vincent Migliore: Bridgewater, Grafton 09 (603) 744-5800 Supports
Steven Rand: Plymouth, Grafton (603) 236-6587
Franklin Sterling: Jaffrey, Cheshire 14 (603) 532-8284
Brian Stone: Northwood, Rockingham 01 (603) 724-1404 Opposes
Bruce Tatro: Swanzey, Cheshire 15 (603) 352-3904
Susan Treleaven: Dover, Strafford 17(603) 749-2347 Supports
Tripp Richard: Derry, Rockingham 06 (603) 434-4674
Sample message: "Hello, my name is _________, and I am reaching out to you in support of CACR19 from the town of _________. I want to know that local majority voices matter, and CACR19 provides this assurance without limiting already established rights. I support the people of New Hampshire having the recognized, secured, and protected authority to protect the well-being of their municipalities and of the natural environments on which they depend. I urge you to vote ought-to-pass on CACR19.
Remember to leave your name & number!
IF A REPRESENTATIVE ASKS A QUESTION AND YOU'RE NOT SURE ABOUT AN ANSWER, PLEASE ASK IF YOU CAN GET BACK TO THEM ON IT -- THEN EMAIL THE QUESTION TO NHCRN FOR A RESPONSE THAT YOU CAN THEN SHARE WITH THE COMMITTEE MEMBER.
FAQ on CACR19
WHAT CACR19 WOULD ACTUALLY DO
If passed with 3/5 majority in the NH House & Senate, and if passed by 2/3 majority vote by the people, CACR19 would become Article 40 of our NH Bill of Rights.
It would codify that the individual citizens of NH have the recognized constitutional right to pass local laws in their town, municipality, city and county to protect both their human communities and the natural ecosystems on which their survival depends, including in the face of corporate harm--so long as locally-made laws would not infringe on real persons' existing rights under state and federal law.
Because rights are not gifted by any constitution but recognized and enumerated within them, CACR19 is purposefully not a proposed law but a proposed constitutional amendment seeking to specifically enumerate the individual right to local self-government within NH's State Constitution in the same way freed slaves' equal rights were recognized within the U.S. Constitution.
Finally, because laws enacted under this amendment would include protection of natural ecosystems (think air, water, soil) on which NH citizens depend, CACR19 mentions Rights of Nature. Precedent for Rights of Nature is growing in the U.S. and around the world as evidenced by scholarship, changing law, legal cases, and the International Center for the Rights of Nature.
Community Rights Organizing: Liberate Yourself from the Activist Hamster Wheel
The NCRN hosted a webinar on February 1, 2018:
To those who were able to join us and to those who have requested a recording of the webinar. We believe that this webinar is an excellent way to introduce new people and groups to the Community and Nature Rights Movement. It is also a catalyst for long-time activists to escape the "Hamster Wheel" that dictates our engagement and influence on political and fundamental change in our community...
Click Here to Read Entire Article and View Webinar
One Year Anniversary of our
"Rights of Nature" Solidarity Call
A year ago, February 2017, we hosted a Solidarity call with Mari Margil on the Rights of Nature. We hope you will take the time to listen to this 26 minute video to learn more about why our laws do not protect our environment and actually legalize the harms that our communities are exposed to by the corporate/government state.
Click Here for Solidarity Call Recording
Thank You for your activism.
Together we can create a movement worthy of nature,
our children and future generations!
Let the people vote on CACR19
www.fosters.com/news/20180223/to-editor-let-people-vote-on-cacr19
To the Editor:
On Feb. 6 the N.H. Community Rights Amendment, CACR 19, inspired so many supportive citizen testimonies that its House Municipal & County Government committee hearing ran 90 minutes rather than the scheduled 30. The following week, CACR 19 left its subcommittee with a 3-2 bi-partisan vote recommending it ought-to-pass.
The next step is CACR 19′s executive session on Tuesday, Feb. 27, at 9 a.m. in room 301 of Concord's Legislative Offices Building. The complete House Municipal & County Government committee will vote how to recommend CACR19 to the full NH House. If recommended ought-to-pass and approved in both NH House and Senate by three-fifths majority, then a two-third vote by the NH people would establish CACR19 as Article 40 of New Hampshire's Bill of Rights.
Supported by nine bipartisan co-sponsors, CACR19 seeks to codify the recognized constitutional right of NH citizens to pass local laws by majority vote to protect their human communities and the natural ecosystems (e.g. air, water, soil) on which they depend — so long as any locally-made laws do not infringe on real persons' existing rights under state and federal constitutions and laws.
CACR 19 would give New Hampshire citizens real voices against harmful corporate interests that routinely and successfully lobby legislatures and petition courts to apply state preemption to nullify local ordinances and any say NH people have over where they live and what projects come into their communities.
Plymouth's Rep. Steven Rand (D) outlines the solution CACR19 would offer legislators and constituents: "We represent constituents to create statutes, but the people represent themselves constitutionally. The constitution is higher than statutes. Giving them the chance to vote on CACR19 is the one thing we can do to support their ability to protect their health, safety, and welfare. It will help them expand, not decrease their rights."
Rep. Vincent Migliore (R) of Bridgewater, a self-identified conservative, believes that "In lieu of revolution, CACR19 offers a peaceful way for people to self-govern when the need arises." To those worried over CACR19′s scope, the NRA member quotes the amendment itself: "Local laws adopted pursuant to this article shall not weaken existing protections for, or constrict the fundamental rights of, natural persons, or their local communities, or nature, as those protections and rights are secured by local, state, federal, or international law."
Jaffrey's Rep. Franklin Sterling (R) shockingly retorts that "New Hampshire is not a democracy, it is a republic. This amendment changes our form of government to democracy and we are not a democracy."
In response, Swanzey's Rep. Bruce Tatro (D) asserts that New Hampshire indeed is a democracy: "CACR 19 is an amendment to a constitution that was formed by the people of the state. The people should have the opportunity to vote this amendment up or down. I'm not in favor of short-circuiting that."
For more information on CACR19 and the community rights movement in New Hampshire, please visit www.nhcommunityrights.org/.
Adam Tardif, Newmarket
Right to Protect Targeted by NH NRA
The NH NRA Chapter Targets Right to Protect
The NH Chapter of the NRA, Gun Owners of NH (GONH) opposition to CACR19 targets our individual right to protect our children, our property, and the natural resources upon which our lives depend. The GONH has resorted to intentional misrepresentation and fear-mongering tactics to dissuade this intelligent body of legislators to turn on its people and natural environments and protect corporate special interests over the well-being of Granite-Staters.
CACR19 – The NH Community Rights Amendment – would secure the right of local community self-government to be exercised only to expand, not to lessen, the rights of people as secured by state and federal constitutions.
GONH claims the proposed amendment would authorize local laws that restrict individual constitutional rights. The language in CACR19 is clear. The right of local self-government is precisely what the proposed amendment seeks to protect – which is in fact an individual right.
CACR19 would PROTECT all rights for natural persons – including 2nd Amendment gun rights – that are recognized in state and federal constitutions.
CACR19 codifies that the individual people of New Hampshire have the recognized constitutional right to pass local laws in their county, city, municipality and town to protect their human communities and natural resources in the face of corporate harm, so long as local laws do not infringe on real persons' existing rights under state and federal law including the 2nd Amendment.
Republican Representatives who are NRA members and sponsors of the NH Community Rights Amendment have consistently directed amendment naysayers to study CACR19's language: "Local laws adopted pursuant to this article shall not weaken existing protections for, or constrict the fundamental rights of, natural persons, or their local communities, or nature, as those protections and rights are secured by local, state, federal, or international law."
The right of local community self-government is a fundamental, individual political right – exercised collectively – of people to govern the local communities in which they reside.
The current list of "protections" individuals can exercise at the local level for themselves, their communities, and environments are few. Yet, corporations enjoy a long list of state-permissible legalized harms they can carry out against us: corporate water extraction; mining activities; industrial contamination of waterways, air, and land; large-scale storage and applications of toxic chemicals; superfund sites; harmful and unnecessary commercial energy projects; and so many more. Not only do corporations enjoy our individual personhood rights, they also use Dillon's Rule and preemption to infringe upon our individual rights as enumerated by our constitutions.
The people living in these affected communities are the ones who most understand what is at stake for the supposed "greater good" of the rest of the state. What negatively affects any one community will have a negative impact on neighboring communities. Cumulatively, the negative impact then becomes no longer for the "greater good" of the State, but for the good of the corporate entities exploiting New Hampshire communities for profit.
Don't give in to fear-mongering. Let the people decide if they want to protect their health, safety, and welfare by enumerating within the NH Bill of Rights the right of local community self-government. Government of right originates from the people which is why CACR19 should be put to the voters of New Hampshire.
Michelle Sanborn
President - NH Community Rights Network (NHCRN)
Executive Session for CACR19 Scheduled
CACR19 IS STILL IN THE RUNNING!
CACR19's Feb. 13th & 14th House Municipal & County Government subcommittee work sessions inspired engaging debate and resulted in a 3 to 2 vote recommending to the full committee that CACR19 ought-to-pass (OTP).
CACR19 is scheduled for an executive session where the full House Municipal & County Government committee will vote on one of 3 recommendations to the full House: ought-to-pass (OTP), ought-to-pass-as-amended (OTP/A), or inexpedient-to-legislate (ITL).
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 23RD AT
1:00 PM, LOB #301
Share the event on Facebook event!
CACR19 needs majority support in the full 20 member committee -- at least 11 members have to believe it is time to elevate people and nature above corporation and profit.
YOUR PERSONAL CALLS ARE INTEGRAL FOR REACHING THE HEARTS & MINDS OF THE HOUSE MUNICIPAL & COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE MEMBERS
HOUSE MUNICIPAL & COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE MEMBERS
URGE THEM TO RECOMMEND THAT CACR19 OTP
COMMITTEE CONTACTS AND TO-DATE CACR19 POSITIONS:
Jane Beaulieu: Hillsborough 45 (603) 626-1260 - Uncertain
James Belanger: Hillsborough 27 (603) 465-2301 - Opposes
John Bordenet: Cheshire 05 (603) 352-0680 - Uncertain
Clyde Carson: Merrimack 07 (603) 456-2562 - Supportive
Francis Chase: Rockingham 20 (603) 944-0830 - Uncertain
Debra DeSimone: Rockingham 14 (603) 362-4314 - Uncertain
Francis Gauthier: Sullivan 03 (603) 543-7382 - Opposes
Julie Gilman: Rockingham 18 (603) 580-1393 - Uncertain
Timothy Josephson: Grafton 11 (603) 523-2023 - Supportive
Carolyn Matthews: Rockingham 03 (603) 244-2027 - Opposes
Frank McCarthy: Carroll 02 (603) 356-9160 - Opposes
Mark McLean: Hillsborough 44 (603) 668-0076 - Opposes
David Meader: Cheshire 06 (603) 357-1340 - Uncertain
Vincent Migliore: Grafton 09 (603) 744-5800 - Supports
Steven Rand: Grafton 08 (603) 236-6587 - Supports
Franklin Sterling: Cheshire 14 (603) 532-8284 - Opposes
Brian Stone: Rockingham 01 (603) 724-1404 - Opposes
Bruce Tatro: Cheshire 15 (603) 352-3904 - Supports
Susan Treleaven: Strafford 17 (603) 749-2347 - Uncertain
Tripp Richard: Rockingham 06 (603) 434-4674 - Uncertain
Sample message: "Hello, my name is _________, and I am reaching out to you from the town of _________. As a resident of New Hampshire, I am concerned about the lack of local decision-making authority Granite State citizens have to determine what happens in their home communities. I want to know that local majority voices matter, and CACR19 provides this assurance. I support the people of New Hampshire having the recognized, secured, and protected authority to look out for the well-being of their residents and of the natural environments on which they depend. I urge you to vote ought-to-pass on CACR19. Remember to leave your name & number!
Constitutional amendment debated in NH House
www.laconiadailysun.com/newsx/local-news/111490-lawmakers-express-skepticism-about-constitutional-amendment-for-local-rights
NHCRN Comments: The committee scheduled 30 mins for the hearing, not an hour-and-a-half, and the hearing went on for almost 2.5 hrs, not 3.5 hrs. Also, it was the AFP lobbyist that said the 400 NH-member House is sufficient and therefore local control is not needed, not the committee members.
By THOMAS P. CALDWELL, LACONIA DAILY SUN
CONCORD — Supporters of a proposed constitutional amendment to grant New Hampshire communities the right to determine what is in their best interests for health, safety, and welfare got an intense grilling from members of the House Municipal and County Government Committee on Tuesday.
The panel had scheduled an hour and a half for the hearing on Constitutional Amendment Concurrent Resolution 19 (CACR 19), but after moving to a larger room to accommodate all those who wanted to speak, the hearing went on for more than three and a half hours.
Proponents argued that current law leaves towns powerless to stop projects that could drain resources, hurt the environment, and introduce toxic chemicals into their food or water.
Opponents expressed concerns that giving towns the power to halt projects that could provide an overall benefit to the state would disrupt the economy and undermine the state legislature and regulatory agencies.
Late in the day, as committee chairman James Belanger urged people to be concise with their comments, Stuart Leiderman of Center Barnstead asked for three minutes of oral testimony to accompany his written comments. His impassioned arguments in support of the bill had Belanger finally stop him: "I understand the idea behind the bill, and don't want to be disrespectful, but he asked for three minutes and he spoke for 13 minutes."
Leiderman was attempting to settle several questions that arose during earlier testimony. Rep. Francis Gauthier of Claremont repeatedly asked the various speakers how the current system of regulatory laws has failed to provide protection to communities. He cited his own activism in fighting an incinerator project in Claremont that the state Department of Environmental Services had "sanctified" and he said they finally won by taking it to the state Supreme Court.
"That shouldn't be necessary," Leiderman said. "This amendment would bring a consensus, not drive it to the court for a resolution."
Leiderman said the state constitution has been amended 213 times, which he termed "extraordinary."
"It's not the monolithic document that a lot of people think it is," he said. "Citizens look to the constitution for freedoms. It's a composite to meet the overruling forces, and this amendment should be looked at in that light."
He said that, instead of looking at government as an entity that operates by opinion — "that I'm right and you're wrong" — in order to survive, the government must respond to "the kinds of things New Hampshire cities and towns chronically face — contamination, for instance."
The state and federal government, Leiderman said, often rely on "natural attenuation" to deal with landfill sites, contamination at Air Force bases, and Superfund toxic sites. "Do nothing and let nature take care of it," he said.
"Those approaches are diminishing the chances for New Hampshire in the future," he said. "This amendment goes to the beginning of the constitution. It provides checks and balances between governments. … We're not talking about insurrection."
Home rule
CACR 19 is based on the constitutional principle that "All government of right originates from the people, is founded in their consent, and instituted for the general good," according to the language of the resolution.
Committee members pointed out that New Hampshire is not a home rule state where municipalities can make their own laws; instead, the 400-member House of Representatives ensures that people have an adequate voice at the state level.
Rep. Richard Tripp of Derry suggested that legislative authority would be undermined by allowing towns to make their own rules through rights-based ordinances, and then it would be the courts that end up with the ultimate authority.
Members of the committee kept asking the speakers how they would define "welfare" as outlined in the bill. They suggested it was too broad a term and is subject to individual interpretation.
Henry Ahern of Plymouth agreed. He said he opposed the bill not because of what it seeks to do but because of possible unintended consequences.
"Terms like 'welfare' and 'health' and 'public safety' change in meaning over time," he said.
"I own a deer farm," Ahern said. "I work land in two towns. If this passes, one town can say I can't plant certain seeds in that town. The same goes for the spreading of biosolids. Instead of facts, there can be an emotional reason for making these decisions."
Greg Moore, state director of Americans for Prosperity, argued that home rule would mean the state doesn't need a 400-member House, and it would take power away from the legislature.
"I have a lot of faith in the General Court," Moore said, noting that he once served in the legislature. "When you look at a constitutional amendment, it not what it's intended to do, but what it can do."
He said the amendment would allow individual towns to enact a sales tax. It also would open up the possibility of corruption, he said, arguing that it is difficult to bribe 201 legislators in order to have a majority on one's side, but getting a majority on a three-person board of selectmen would mean bribing just two people.
Michelle Sanborn of Alexandria, the president and coordinator of the New Hampshire Community Rights Network who also represents the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, testified that the amendment represents only limited home rule and would not override state and federal law.
"This is a people's amendment," she said. "It brings clarity to the people, the courts, and businesses. It gives people the right to protect themselves."
Several speakers spoke of out-of-state businesses that know how to navigate the state's regulatory laws to get what they want, and towns are powerless to stop them. Rights-based ordinances, they said, would take the process out of the regulatory arena and make it a constitutional matter.
Several speakers asked the committee for support so the amendment could go to the voters for a decision.
Before that can happen, both the House and Senate would need to agree to support the amendment. A House subcommittee will be reviewing the resolution on Feb. 13 and 14, at which time it will make a recommendation on its future.
inthesetimes.com/rural-america/entry/20896/community-rights-new-hampshire-corporate-power-self-government
BY JOHN COLLINSWhen you combine an economic system that requires constant growth in order to function, with a legal system that mistakes corporations for "people"—you inevitably wind up with a few extremely powerful corporations and a lot of powerless citizens. Furthermore, when that same system regards nature as property, thus allowing those in control to do whatever they see fit with a given area's natural resources, long-term ecological health takes a backseat to short-term profits. For decades, communities across the country have been learning this lesson the hard way.
In recent years, for example, energy development projects in New Hampshire have sparked resident concerns over contamination of local water supplies. In addition, according to the EPA's latest Toxics Release Inventory Program data, the small state is home to 127 of the 21,600 toxic sites monitored by the agency. Maintaining that a weakening of citizen's rights at home has left their communities defenseless against ever-worsening corporate abuses, a group of Granite Staters are challenging the legal system that in effect grants corporations a license to pollute by denying local governments the right to control what occurs within their jurisdictions.
When citizens determine that the actions of a corporation pose an economic, environmental or public health threat to their community—whether it's a new pipeline, a factory farm, a facility generating industrial waste, a mining operation etc.—and they try to stop that entity from setting up shop in their community, they're often surprised to learn that (despite what the Declaration of Independence says about "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness") they are powerless to do anything about it.
This is by design. Over time, one state legislature after another has passed preemption laws—legal doctrines restricting a city, town, or county's legal authority to regulate its economy or protect its environment—that prioritize corporate interests over those of local communities. In other words, corporations usually get what they want because the law, as it is written, is on their side, not yours.
Instead of fighting each and every corporate assault—on people or on nature—on a case-by-case basis, the community rights movement, a grassroots network of people who've had-it-up-to-here with corporate power, is working on the local, state and federal levels to address the problem at its source. The National Community Rights Network (NCRN) and its affiliates in states across the country are attempting to end government-sanctioned corporate exploitation by amending state and federal constitutions in order to "codify a community's inalienable right to self-governance."
This can be difficult. In many cases, before a proposed constitutional amendment can even get on a state's ballot, supporters must first convince state legislators to allow it. On Tuesday, February 6, members of the New Hampshire Community Rights Network (NHCRN) met with the state's House Municipal and County Government Committee in Concord in an attempt to do just that.
NHCRN organizers and about 50 of their supporters, including Thomas Linzey, the executive director of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (and a Rural America In These Times contributing writer), gathered to urge the committee to consider Constitutional Amendment Concurrent Resolution 19 (CACR19). This is NHCRN's second attempt to give New Hampshire voters a chance to decide for themselves whether or not to add a community rights amendment to their state's constitution—an amendment that would allow local municipalities to enact laws to protect their people and environment from corporate harm.
The full text of the bill can be found here, but reads in part:
Be it Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring, that the Constitution of New Hampshire be amended as follows:
I. That the first part of the constitution be amended by inserting after article 39 the following new article:
[Art.] 40. [Right of Local Community Self-Government.] All government of right originates from the people, is founded in their consent, and instituted for the general good; the people have the right and the duty to reform governments when those governments manifestly endanger public liberty; and sustainable environmental and economic development can be achieved only when the people affected by governing decisions are the ones who make them; therefore, the people of New Hampshire have an inherent and inalienable right of local, community self-government in each county, municipality, city, and town to enact local laws that protect health, safety, and welfare by recognizing or establishing rights of natural persons, their local communities, and nature; and by securing those rights using prohibitions and other means deemed necessary by the community, including measures to establish, define, alter, or eliminate competing rights, powers, privileges, immunities, or duties of corporations and other business entities operating, or seeking to operate, in the community. Local laws adopted pursuant to this article shall not weaken existing protections for, or constrict the fundamental rights of, natural persons, or their local communities, or nature, as those protections and rights are secured by local, state, federal, or international law.
While about a dozen New Hampshire towns already have ordinances geared toward ensuring the health, safety and welfare of their residents, municipalities cannot technically enact any laws the state doesn't allow them to. This is because, like all but 11 states in the country, New Hampshire follows the so-called Dillon's Rule—a doctrine that since 1868 has been a "cornerstone of municipal law" and holds that local governments can only enact laws that are approved by their state Legislature.
Twenty-six states, as well as Washington, D.C., offer initiative and/or veto referendum rights for their citizens—the ability to petetion a new statute or constitutional amendment through the collection of a minimum number of registered voter signatures—New Hampshire is not one of them. (Infographic: ballotpedia.org)
Urging Granite State residents to get behind their amendment, NHCRN organizers wrote the following in a letter-to-the-editor of Seacoastonline, an online news agency based in Portsmouth:Such recognition has been a long time coming to strengthen and restore "We the People's" right to self-determine the future of the communities we live in. This right has been all but suffocated by corrupt corporate privilege that has been woven into law and upheld by judicial precedents. Together with state preemption, this weakening of citizen rights at home has left us with no defense when corporate projects come to develop or to extract resources in our towns—much less when these projects contaminate where we work and live, often with toxic waste. We've seen this happen all across our state. We should be able to have a recognized right to local decision-making authority to determine whether or not we want these projects in our communities.
By empowering people with authority to use this self-determining voice, CACR19 would reinforce the viability of our civil rights by supporting our democratic right to cultivate communities founded in peace and civility in which no person or entity has free pass to violate the health, safety, or well-being of another person or of nature, and certainly not for profit. Each day that our government denies us full participation in determining this cultivation, we are discriminated against—blocked from accessing and engaging in our rightful democratic process to protect our basic and inalienable rights that are not limited to but which include our right to clean air, water, and healthy ecosystems.
These inalienable rights were the ideals that birthed this nation's experiment in democracy. And what is democracy if it is not the civic employment of people's inalienable right to have democratic authority over what happens in their communities? When we cannot protect ourselves through the self-government so integral to the principles of our Revolutionary ancestors, then we are not living in a democracy. We must not let this right to self-government go un-championed by a disengaged sense of civic duty, nor can we afford to lose it amidst the animosity found in our divided political aisles. Now is the time to unite both community and bi-partisanship solidarity and action to recognize our right to self-government.
What the Revolutionaries of this country fought for was not something they could buy. It was the right to pursue a self-determined life of honesty and goodness. For our legislators to deny us an enlightened path to access this self-determination is for them to admit doubt in their constituents' ability to reason over and to trust in the goodness that is in ourselves and in the ecosystems around us. CACR19 will secure our right to protect this goodness for a new future honoring people's and nature's natural right to sustainability.
Before the bill can go anywhere, the House Municipal and County Government Committee must vote OTP ("Ought to Pass"), at which point the amendment could continue to the House and Senate. If approved, only then would it be placed on the ballot for voters to decide. CELDF's Thomas Linzey tells Rural America In These Times the public turnout on February 6 was good despite the fact the flu was "running rampant up there." "We have nine co-sponsors who are committed, so we're in a better place than last year at least," he says. The next subcommittee hearing is scheduled for February 13.
Below is an interview in which Tom Groover, vice-president of the National Community Rights Network's (NCRN) board of directors, speaks with CELDF organizers Michelle Sanborn, Monica Christofill and NHCRN member, Douglas Darrell, about their effort and why they feel it is more important than ever that they succeed in putting the measure before New Hampshire voters.
For more information about the NHCRN or the proposed constitutional amendment, contact info@nhcommunityrights.org or visit www.nhcommunityrights.org.
Local Governance Advocates Try Again To Amend State Constitution
nhpr.org/post/local-governance-advocates-try-again-amend-state-constitution#stream/0
Advocates for more local control in New Hampshire are trying again to amend the state constitution, this time to let municipalities pass laws protecting people's health and the environment.
A dozen New Hampshire towns already have ordinances geared toward ensuring locals' health, safety and welfare, sparked by big energy developments or water quality concerns.
But Granite State municipalities technically can't enact any laws the state doesn't allow them to. So supporters say those ordinances wouldn't hold up in court – which is why they need a constitutional amendment.
They tried to pass the so-called Community Rights Amendment two years ago, but failed amid concerns it would give municipalities too much power and undermine state government.
Like most states, New Hampshire follows what's called Dillon's Rule, where municipalities derive all their governing abilities from the state Legislature.
A minority of states has varying degrees of the opposite – home rule, where towns and cities can govern freely as long as they follow state and federal law.
Lobbyists for the Community Rights Amendment told the House local governance committee Tuesday the proposal only creates a narrow degree of home rule in New Hampshire. They were joined by dozens of residents and families who support the bill.
Rep. Wayne Burton, a Democrat and co-sponsor, says the amendment would give citizens recourse for when they don't feel the state has their best interests at heart – such as when it permits an unwelcome local land use.
"When the character of the town is severely threatened, the people in local level ought to have an ability to pass a law or regulation under this," Burton says. "That's what this is for."
The amendment is scheduled for several work sessions before it can go to the House floor. (Read the full text of the bill here.)
CORRECTION: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that about 10 states follow Dillon's Rule. In fact, about 40 do.
Plymouth Is Latest To Try Blocking Big Energy Projects With Local Ordinance
nhpr.org/post/plymouth-latest-try-blocking-big-energy-projects-local-ordinance
By ANNIE ROPEIK • 3 MINUTES AGO
The town of Plymouth, N.H.
New Hampshire has put the brakes on the Northern Pass energy project for now, but some towns are still prepared to block it with local laws asserting their view on big utility development.
Plymouth is the latest municipality to approve an ordinance saying certain energy projects, while allowed under state law, are harmful to local health and environment.
When such laws are enforced, developers either have to go elsewhere, or sue to build in town.
Eversource didn't respond to a request for comment on how they'll handle the handful of community rights ordinances along Northern Pass's route if the project wins its forthcoming appeal to the state Site Evaluation Committee.
The Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund has been helping write these ordinances in New Hampshire since 2006. Organizer Michelle Sanborn says they've been sparked by Northern Pass, large wind farms and other concerns.
"It's basically withdrawing their consent to be governed in the manner that the state is dictating that they be governed," she says of Plymouth's ordinance.
Sanborn's group is also lobbying for a state constitutional amendment to affirm towns' right to pass these ordinances.
That proposal gets a hearing in the state House of Representatives' Municipal and County Government Committee, Tuesday at 2 p.m.
Plymouth residents take aim at Northern Pass with new ordinance
www.unionleader.com/energy/Plymouth-residents-take-aim-at-Northern-Pass-with-new-ordinance-01312018&source=RSS
PLYMOUTH — Residents have adopted an ordinance they believe will give them the authority to ban Northern Pass from building within town borders.
During a special town meeting on Thursday, residents voted by secret ballot 132 to 19 to adopt a Community Rights-Based Ordinance designed to strip legal power from corporate entities that seek to force unwanted activities on a town.
Richard Hage of Concerned Citizens of Plymouth, who helped spearhead the development of the ordinance, urged its adoption, telling townspeople to "invoke restorative justice to broken law."
"It's our next best shot at banning Northern Pass," he said.
The $1.6 billion project to bring hydroelectric power from Quebec into New England has a 192-mile route through more than 30 communities; 60 miles of the transmission lines would be buried.
Northern Pass work along Plymouth's Main Street could last over two construction seasons; dozens of businesses have expressed fears about financial losses during the construction.
The Site Evaluation Committee is currently considering whether to approve the project.
Henry Ahern, who raises red deer at his local farm, expressed his concern that if the Rights-Based Ordinance passed he would be forbidden to use bio-solids as fertilizer on his fields or precluded from planting certain seeds.
He proposed an amendment sun-setting the ordinance after eight years.
Chris Wood, who is also involved in agriculture, shared Ahern's concerns, but said he would rather see the amendment exclude farmers than include a sunset provision.
Hage told voters the ordinance's language on prohibitions "makes it clear we are trying to protect farmers, not attack them."
The amendment was defeated.
Resident Frank Miller read from a copy of the New Hampshire Constitution, which he noted predates its federal counterpart. He said the ordinance mimics the document and its assertion that all men are free, sovereign and independent.
"It's a function of self-determination, of how we are going to be," he said.
David Moorhead said he opposes Northern Pass. He said plans to bury a stretch of the Northern Pass transmission line along Main Street would be the death knell for some businesses. But he also expressed concern that the ordinance would make the town subject to a lawsuit.
State Rep. Steve Rand, D-Plymouth, said he is one of six sponsors of a constitutional amendment that if passed "would not only make these types of ordinances OK, but desirable."
If adopted, Rand said, the town would likely be sued. But he said a constitutional amendment "would provide an umbrella, making it immune from legal challenge."
The ordinance became effective immediately and as written will apply to any and all actions that would violate it, "regardless of the date of any applicable local, state, or federal permit."


Traveloka is one of the leading flight and hotel booking platforms in Southeast Asia ( China, Singpapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Japan, Hong Kong, South Korea, Vietnam, Philippines and other) serving more than 100,000+ flight routes and 100,000+ hotels worldwide. We work hard to provide our customers with the cheapest hotel and flight rates every day!
If you still searching for a cheap hotel? Book hotel online by using Traveloka's technology. They have wide selection of hotels and promotion with no booking fee and best price guarantee only on Traveloka. If you don't know which hotel you should choose in your destination city, simply type the name of your destination city. The results will show the hotels in that area. You can also filter the results based on the rating, prices and popularity - which may be helpful in your quest for the perfect hotel.
Honest Price - No hidden charges. What you see is what you pay!
Secure online transaction - Security and privacy of your online transaction are protected by RapidSSL authorized technology. Receive e-ticket or hotel voucher directly in your email.
Most extensive search results - Comparing cheap flights and hotels has never been this easy. Find top hotels from budget to 5-star, and brands such as Fragrance Hotel, Hotel 81, as well as airlines like Singapore Airlines, Tigerair, Jetstar, AirAsia and many more.
My Cards, the faster way to book, the secure way to pay - Save time by adding your card details only once for all future transactions. All information is fully encrypted for data security, so there's no need to worry.
Manage your bookings online - Log in to access your e-ticket/hotel voucher on all your devices, retrieve booking or request refund online.
24/7 Customer Service - Need help? Contact us any time via email, phone or live chat.
traveloka.com only accepts iBanking, visa, MasterCard and Kiosk.
Asiatravel.com is Asia's leading online travel company that offers a global inventory of over 8 million travel products worldwide. Its online booking feature for all-inclusive packages strongly appeals to travellers seeking convenience, instant confirmation and extra savings. Its ability to provide full travel services at packaged prices establishes its distinctive position in the online travel market.
Asiatravel.com maintains a strong travel brand recognised for its reliability, sincerity and integrity for consumers and partners alike. Its recent award includes the Best Online Travel Agency 2015, for the 3rd consecutive year by TTG Travel Awards Asia Pacific.
All-Inclusive Travel Packages - A leading online travel product is our all-inclusive package booking feature that provides travellers, even on a last minute, the ability to book all the necessary travel components in a hassle free booking experience for that perfect holiday trip.
Transportation Portfolio - Our flight engine searches real time flight schedules and fares of over 500 leading airlines of each flight sector available so that you are always assured of getting to your desired destination. Multiple destinations can also be booked within one transaction as the system searches for the best connections and combined fares even from different airlines.
Activities Portfolio - Booking sightseeing and tour activities together flights and accommodation as a package is highly recommended as there are additional savings. But sometimes it is difficult to decide in advance, so they have specially created this option for you to book separately from an extensive range of tours, tickets into theme parks and attractions, private or shared transportation, and a whole range of other touristic activities in over 50 countries worldwide. Many of these activities can be booked just a day in advance and some even for the same day.
They also provide customer feedback / testimonials about asiatravel.com on the official website.
asiatravel.com accepts Visa, MasterCard, AMEX, JCB, Paypal and specially Alipay also, that is more suitable for china visitors who want travel to other countries in future.


text:
For other uses, see Injustice (disambiguation).
Injustice, one in a series of allegorical capitals depicting vices and virtues at the Ducal Palace in Venice
Injustice is a quality relating to unfairness or undeserved outcomes. The term may be applied in reference to a particular event or situation, or to a larger status quo. In Western philosophy and jurisprudence, injustice is very commonly—but not always—defined as either the absence or the opposite of justice.[1][2][3]
The sense of injustice is a universal human feature, though the exact circumstances considered unjust can vary from culture to culture. While even acts of nature can sometimes arouse the sense of injustice, the sense is usually felt in relation to human action such as misuse, abuse, neglect, or malfeasance that is uncorrected or else sanctioned by a legal system or fellow human beings.
The sense of injustice can be a powerful motivational condition, causing people to take action not just to defend themselves but also others who they perceive to be unfairly treated. Injustice within legal or societal standards are sometimes referred to as a two-tiered system.[4]
relationship with justice
sense of injustice
Professor Judith Shklar has written that Western philosophers tend to spend much more time discussing the concept of 'justice' rather than 'injustice'. On the other hand, she states both historical writing and fiction use instances of injustice as subject matter far more often than justice.[5]
In philosophy and jurisprudence, the dominant view has been that injustice and justice are two sides of the same coin—that injustice is simply a lack of justice. This view has been challenged by professors including Judith Shklar, Thomas W Simon and Eric Heinze, who consider that justice and injustice are independent qualities. So, in this minority view, you can increase the justice of a situation without reducing the injustice. Heinze has even gone as far as to argue that an increase in justice can actually cause an increase in injustice.[2][3][5]
A relatively common view among philosophers and other writers is that while justice and injustice may be interdependent, it is injustice that is the primary quality. Many writers have written that, while it is hard to directly define or even perceive justice, it is easy to demonstrate that injustice can be perceived by all.[6] According to von Hayek, the earliest known thinker to state that injustice is the primary quality was Heraclitus, whose view was echoed by Aristotle and dozens of others down the centuries. Hayek said that writers often express the idea that injustice is the primary concept "as though it were a new discovery", suggesting the view is rarely directly expressed in theories on Justice. But Hayek went on to say that legal positivism has proved that injustice, not justice, is the primary quality.[7]

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Daniel Overbey, AIA, NCARB, LEED Fellow (LEED AP BD+C, ID+C, O+M), WELL AP is an Assistant Professor of Architecture at Ball State University and the Director of Sustainability for Browning Day Mullins Dierdorf in Indianapolis, Ind. His work focuses on high-performance building design and construction, environmental systems research, green building certification services, energy/life-cycle assessment modeling, and resilient design. He can be reached at djoverbey@bsu.edu.
In their latest Infrastructure Report Card, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) gave our domestic wastewater infrastructure an average grade of D+ citing 772 communities in the U.S. in which wastewater and rainwater drain into the same treatment system. These combined sewer systems can experience capacity issues following heavy rain events, resulting in overflows containing a combination of rainwater with untreated human and industrial waste, toxic substances, debris and other pollutants. Termed "combined sewer overflows" (CSOs), these events can significantly impair water quality and affect public health and wildlife. In the Great Lakes region alone, a 2016 EPA report to the U.S. Congress identified 184 communities that discharge CSOs into the Great Lakes Basin. The report cited 1,482 CSO events in 2014, discharging an estimated 22 billion gallons of untreated wastewater into the Great Lakes Basin.
This EPA report comes on the heels of a series of lawsuits brought against several municipalities by their respective States in concert with the EPA to spur action to address ineffective CSO infrastructure. In many cases, the municipality signs a consent decree and commits to constructing something akin to a deep tunnel infrastructure system sized to carry the overflow and keep it out of the natural water bodies. Such infrastructural upgrades are extremely expensive. The EPA estimates $271 billion is needed for wastewater infrastructure over the next 25 years.
These strategies come with varying degrees of effectiveness but together they constitute a formidable solution to strive toward zero overflows. Milwaukee and other cities have long considered green infrastructure as a primary solution toward realizing effective rainwater management.
However, the biggest contributor to overflow events when a deep tunnel infrastructure is present are acute, heavy rain events where the volume overcomes the conveyance capacity of the deep tunnel system. The solution: the rainwater during these events must be temporarily slowed down. I'll offer that there is one strategy particularly well-suited to help stem the tide of rainwater overflow during an acute, heavy precipitation events: blue roofs with smart drains—or smart blue roofs.
In order to truly achieve zero overflow events, it is critical that we reconcpeutalize our roofscapes with regard to their role in rainwater management— and it is not as difficult to achieve as you might think.
Blue roofs are membrane assemblies on low-sloped roofs. These roofs are designed to hold pools of water for a period of time not-to-exceed 48-hours, with depths (which are commonly greater than 6 inches) varying greatly based on the structural capacity of the building below. Blue roofs weigh up to 80 percent less than green roofs. The temporary load of the blue roof is already accounted for by codified structural requirements in colder climates (due to the factored-in snow load). Blue roofs require minimal site modifications. You just need a really good roofing membrane and installer and then add smart drains (i.e. drains with electronically automated drainage valves).
Amid our internet-of-things era, why not have the roof drains tied in? Smart blue roofs (i.e. blue roofs with smart drains) tie into a remote server that determines when a storm event is coming. The server will in turn instruct the rooftop drain valves to close via cellular communication. The closed valves will turn the roof is a shallow retention pond. Rainwater is held throughout the duration of the storm as the server determines when water should be released into the rainwater drains. When the timing is right, the valves are opened and water is released into the drains.
Smart Blue Roof: Diagram of Basic Components.
Adapted by permission from and courtesy of Hanging Gardens.
Image adapted by Daniel Overbey.
Drains have physical overflows in case of malfunction and thus cannot hold more water than specified and engineered.
The valves are programmed to automatically release water if it has been held for more than 24 hours without communication from the server.
Each drain is self-diagnosable and notifies the control center and building owner of failure.
The system has a built-in leak prevention system that is tied into the smart controls.
To be clear, I am not advocating for blue roofs in lieu of green roofs. Due to the various additional human health and environmental benefits offered, green roofs are superior to blue roofs. However, smart blue roofs can cost 75-90 percent less than green roof systems. When a green roof is not an option financially, a blue roof should still be within grasp.
Whether green or blue, a city's low-sloped roof real estate offers an enormous opportunity to blunt the strain on wastewater infrastructural capacity experienced during acute, heavy rainfall events. Our roofscapes will play a critical role in any comprehensive municipal strategy to achieve zero overflow events.
Advice, Techncal Info, or Advertisement?


The Power Probe PPTEMPKIT is a dual-zone digital thermometer with a wireless remote temperature sensor. The remote temp sensor can transmit temperature readings up to 60m (195ft.) away from base unit. Monitor temperature differences – ambient vs. AC outlet, inside vs. outside temps, and more. Use movable clip to attach remote to air vents or grilles to monitor outlet temps.


If you refrain from trampling the sabbath... if you honor it, not going your own ways, serving your own interests, or pursuing your own affairs; then you shall take delight in the Lord.
The news reports daily inform us of unethical behavior by people who are supposed to be the pillars of society. We hear of judges taking bribes, police abusing or even murdering unarmed citizens, politicians engaged in "sexcapades," and perhaps worst of all, coverups of clergy sexual misconduct. Sometimes we will hear of an attorney or a politician or a doctor called before a professional ethics board. So what are these "ethics" that people keep talking about — and violating.
Well, ethics is a system of morality — for deciding what is right or wrong. And it should come as no surprise that there are a number of different ethical systems, just as there are many different philosophies and religions. Some ethics are intertwined with specific religions or philosophies, but many of them have impact well beyond the faithful or the philosophers. I'd like to explore a few of these systems, in order better to understand where Jesus and his teaching on ethics fit into this big picture of morality: how do we know if something is good or evil.
One ethical approach is to take a look at the results of an action, and to decide whether the action was good or bad based on the results, in particular in terms of utility or usefulness: is the result productive or destructive. This is likely the common-sense way that most people think about good and bad. The proof is in the pudding. Of course, it raises two questions: first, results are not always what we intend them to be. We might well be able to say that the results of an action are good or bad, but that will not really tell us whether the person who did those things intended them to be good or bad, and surely the morality must lie in the person. What if there was no intention at all? What about, for instance, an accident? This is precisely how the law courts distinguish between manslaughter and murder — the lethal result is the same, but we don't judge manslaughter as seriously as we do murder, because the person who did the action didn't intend it, and is judged less harshly.
The second question raised by a results-oriented ethic goes a bit deeper. How do you measure, apart from gut feelings, if the result of an action is good or evil? A number of philosophers, from Epicurus of ancient Greece on up through Jeremy Bentham of Georgian England, came up with a reasonable way to measure good and evil, based on the amount of happiness or pleasure. This forms part of the many a political or economic system: I'm sure you've all heard the expression, "the greatest good for the greatest number," in terms of well-being or happiness. And any people find this notion easy to understand, and it is very popular. I think if you were to scratch the surface of most people's thinking, you will find this underlying it: what is best for most is best. The downside, however, is the way in which it becomes too easy to trade off the happiness of the many for the sufferings of the few, or the one. It is a favorite puzzle of ethicists to ask such a question as, "If you could stop a train from going over a cliff and killing 100 people on board by pushing one man in front of the train to stop it, would it be moral to do so?" I know if you were to ask that question, you would see some hands go up, and say, yes! Others would say, no. This ultimately is the ethical question to which Caiaphas answered Yes, he explicitly chose the death of Christ because it was expedient that one should suffer instead of many. So in spite of its common-sense attractiveness this utility ethics falls a bit short of providing trustworthy guidance, and might lead you to do something very bad indeed.
A number of the philosophers of the centuries before the birth of Christ made a similar judgment on using utility as a benchmark. Among the most important of them all was Aristotle, who in later years simply came to be referred to as "The Philosopher." He was an exponent of what is called virtue ethics. In this system you incorporate the notion of happiness, of well-being, but combine it with the character of the person who is acting, cultivating personal virtue, and righteousness, and uprightness, and most important of all, moderation. as the best guide to doing good.
That too sounds logical, but in a way it is a kind of circular reasoning: good actions are what good people do, much as art is what artists do. But isn't there bad art? And while it is true that a good tree brings forth good fruit — isn't it the goodness of the fruit that tells us that the tree is good, and not the other way around? Moreover, relying on such a way of thinking, relying on ones own sense of virtue, that we are good in ourselves, can blind us to our failings. A recent study found that people who reported themselves as the most generous, and could prove it on the basis of what they gave to the church or to charity, were also the ones who were most likely to cheat on other matters; and it is also a sad truth that in spite of their zeal to "defend marriage," the divorce rate is actually highest among Evangelicals. People who think of themselves as good in their own eyes seem to feel entitled to a "pass" to do the occasional bad thing; much as someone who has stuck to their diet feel they "owe it to themselves" to binge with a quart of ice cream — and so undo any good their diet might have done.
Dissatisfaction with these forms of ethics led to yet another philosophical answer: the ethics of duty. This is the ethics of law. If you want to know what is right or wrong, look at the law-code and it will tell you — simple as that. This form of ethics is popular precisely because it appears to give clear guidance. It is the ethical form of the Law of Moses, which spells out what is good or bad in black and white, in words ultimately attributed to God's own hand and voice at Mount Sinai, written on stone and spoken in a voice that terrified its hearers, so that they begged not another word be spoken.
This is one of the problems with duty ethics — rules provoke even more rules, and very clever ways around them. And although Jesus, as a Jew, respected the spirit of obedience and duty, he also had a bone to pick with those who were more caught up in the letter than the spirit of the law.
And so he advocated, as we see in the gospel passage today, an ethic based on love — and love not just as an emotion but as an action. We know that he taught — from the law — that you should love your neighbor as yourself. But in today's passage he brings the point home — literally home — even more keenly by saying, essentially, "Forget the neighbor! You should treat this woman at least as well as you would treat your own livestock!" No wonder he is angry, and those who tried to send that poor, sick woman away are ashamed!
Jesus rejects any ethic based on selfishness, pleasure, expediency, usefulness, or a mere list of regulations. He would never think of throwing one person under a train in order to save others from going over a bridge; but he would — and he did — throw himself under the headlong rush of all of our sins, giving his own life so that we might not perish, but have everlasting life.
Ultimately any ethical system must stand the test that Jesus set in the Golden Rule: to do as you would be done by — not just not doing things to other people that you would not want done to yourself. But actively doing for others what you would want done for you. That is whey he said that there is no greater love than to give your life for the life of someone else — to throw yourself down on that hand grenade, killing yourself in the process, but saving all of those around you. There is no greater love than to give yourself for the sake of others, because that is what anyone would want done for them, isn't it? Don't we all want to be saved? And aren't we glad that someone has saved us!


Problem: On April 30, 2009, the common stock of Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing ("3M") closed at a price of $57.60 per share. On that same date, the July 2009 $55 Calls on 3M common closed at a price of $4.90.
1) The premium on this in-the money Call can be understood in terms of two value components. Describe briefly and quantify these two components.
2) Assuming the stock price of 3M does not move for the remaining life of the Call, what would be expected to happen to each component of premium as the Expiration Date approaches?
Zhao agrees to an interest rate swap in which it pays LIBOR to Lee Financial and Lee pays 6.8% to Zhao. What is Zhao's resulting net payments?
As part of the company's financial statements, each annual report includes an extensive section of notes to the financial statements.
Which of the following financial assets would be most susceptible (vulnerable) to a decline in value if interest rates increased?
Today's spot rate of the Canadian dollar is $.80. What would be the spot rate forecasted for one year ahead?
If the cost of goods sold is 80 percent of the selling price, should Mr. Procrustes adopt the more stringent policy?


The 1st National Competition and Reinhardt's golem invasion.
Grid appeared in public and always used a greatsword. Nevertheless, the public perceived the best user of the greatsword to be Chris, not Grid. It was natural. Grid overwhelmed his enemies with skills and items, but his ability with the sword itself wasn't special. The ability he showed at the time of fighting the Red Knight was merely excellent.
On the other hand, Chris' greatsword technique caused the viewers to feel wonder.
A greatsword covered in a blue light. It had a considerable weight to it at first glance and felt good in his hand. The speed wasn't fast. But a considerable pressure was felt from it.
This was the effect of the passive skill, Rule with Might's Path. All enemies in the path of the charge had their casting speed and agility slightly reduced.
Piaro stood still despite Chris' rush. The disappointed Chris mistook it for fear.
No, his opponent's level wasn't low. It was just that his level was higher. The Rule with Might's Path skill had a greater effect depending on his strength. The effect of having 3,000 strength at level 314 was now being demonstrated.
Chris neared Piaro, who was standing like a stone, and wielded his greatsword.
There was no superfluous movements in the slash. There was a violent explosion of wind and the target was pushed back.
Chris admired. The size and shape of the greatsword was very suitable, making the time it took to pull back the sword shorter than usual.
So far, he had used hundreds of greatswords, but this was the first time he had a greatsword that was perfect for his hands. It seemed to be a greatsword made exactly for him. He felt awe towards the maker, Grid.
Chris' gaze had been glued to Grid's Greatsword. He was confused as he looked towards Piaro. It was because Piaro was still alive and well. Piaro clicked his tongue.
Was he mistaken? Chris was feeling confused when he suddenly saw the cut up straw hat at Piaro's feet.
Like most westerners, Chris, a Canadian, had fantasies about ninjas. He knew a little bit about ninjas, and learned that there was a ninja technique where the body was swapped with something else. Once he saw it, he was certain that Piaro was a ninja pretending to be a farmer.
Chris was nervous. He guessed that now the ninja would throw knives at him, or aim a lightning punch at him.
Like other warriors, Chris' agility was only 200, because he focused his stat points on strength. It was virtually impossible for him to see and respond to the enemy's attacks.
Chris got ready to fight back. He could overcome his lack of agility with thorough preparation and prediction. Piaro felt pleased at the sight.
His lord had many outstanding talents. In particular, Regas and Ibellin were amazing. And the man in front of him had their level of talent. It was a more refined talent. This was the first time since Kraugel.
Piaro acknowledged Chris. He pulled out a weapon with a serious expression.
Chris gulped. Would he pull out a recognizable ninja weapon? Or maybe a whip? A ball and chain?
Chris' head spun quickly. He would take different actions depending on what weapon Piaro pulled out. But the weapon Piaro held completely deviated from Chris' predictions.
That's right. Piaro's weapon was a hand plow. It seemed to have just been used, as it was covered with moist soil. Chris failed to conceal his embarrassment as he shouted.
Was there a need for long words? It was better to show it with actions.
Piaro moved. It was truly tremendous speed suitable for a ninja. The distance that Chris decided was ideal was instantly narrow, and the hand plow moved.
The incensed Chris swung his greatsword. He was determined to blow away the hand plow and Piaro. However.
As he aimed for Piaro's chest, the hand plow struck the front of the greatsword. Chris' balance collapsed and his upper body leaned forward.
The eyes of the captains watching widened. They couldn't understand why Chris looked like this. But Chris and Zirkan were different. They determined the situation in an instant.
Large weapons were much heavier and longer than one-handed weapons. The weight was great and had to be focused in order to exert more destructive power. Chris was faithful to the basics, and Piaro aimed for this. He accurately grasped the point where Chris focused the weight of the greatsword and struck it, causing Chris' center of gravity to shift.
Wasn't this like the protagonists of the 20th century Hong Kong movies? The hand plow flew towards the stumbling Chris. It was an attack that used the recoil of hitting the greatsword to link the next strike. Chris felt a chill and raised his shoulders. The hand plow that should've pierced his neck struck his shoulder instead.
Even if this was a critical hit, it was an unbelievable amount of damage. Piaro was stronger than a named boss. Chris groaned and tilted his body forward. After limiting Piaro's movements by sticking close to his body, he recovered the greatsword.
At this time, the greatsword moved naturally to strike at Piaro's heart. Based on his hundreds of thousands of combat experience, Chris showed his dignity that threatened the enemy no matter what situation he was in.
A smile appeared on Piaro's face after he was lightly wounded on the chest. He sprinkled several small seeds at Chris' feet.
Why were seeds being sowed in a battle? Chris was confused, before suddenly realizing.
The opponent was a ninja. Ninjas were people who used tricks to deceive the enemy. Chris glanced away from the seeds that fell at his feet. It was a fatal mistake to ignore this.
Chris tried to swing his greatsword again. The seeds that Piaro sowed had sprouted and clasped tightly around Chris' ankles and thighs.
Plants instantly grew from the seeds that were just sown? In addition, the pressure of the plants was very high. It wasn't something that could be understood with Chris' common sense.
It was natural. It was a legendary skill. Piaro who chose the path of a farmer after forsaking a sword saint! The 'Free Farming' method that he completed after becoming a farmer was at a level comparable to the legends in history.
In other words, today's Piaro was much stronger than the one who competed with Grid.
The second? Then who was the first?
Chris' ego was shattered. The difference between them was just one level. He couldn't overcome that level difference, but he believed he was stronger. But he was weaker?
Piaro pulled out a plow and started digging at the ground. As it struck the ground, the soil rose up and became a barrier that blocked the blade.
Satisfy had started exactly two years and two months ago. He steadily trained with the goal of becoming number one. He was even equipped with the best items. Chris thought this person was a ninja who hid as a farmer, but he actually was overwhelmed by a real farmer?
He suffered defeat from farming methods such as sowing, plant growing and plowing.
Chris barely managed to restore his mental state. The opponent was someone who beat Zibal. It was naive to think he could win when his level was lower than Zibal's, but Chris couldn't tolerate this.
Chris used Tyrant's Strength which temporarily increased his strength by 20%, tearing apart the plants binding his lower body. It was done with pure strength. Piaro saw this and thought.
Free Farming Style 1 'Sowing' and style 2 'Rapid Growth.' The durability of the plants grown was weaker than expected. It was proof that Rapid Growth hadn't reached the right level yet.
As Piaro vowed this, the energy blades covered Piaro. The hand plow defended against every strike, then Piaro tried to break Chris' center of gravity again.
Piaro was surprised to see Chris' skill in recovering his greatsword every time the hand plow collided with it.
Piaro acknowledged it and started to swing his hand plow. His skill with the farming equipment overwhelmed Chris. But Chris' momentum didn't go down. His chest was struck but he didn't retreat as he shouted.
It was like a lion's roar. There were farmers and users scattered throughout the vast fields. They were amazed and frightened, while the captains of the Giant Guild also blocked their ears. It was the power of Chris' second class, Tyrant.
There was no one who would be safe when facing Tyrant's Growl. Chris used the gap caused by Tyrant's Growl to attack the temporarily confused Piaro.
There was an earthquake centered on Piaro. The only person able to withstand this earthquake was Chris, the one who caused it. Chris expected Piaro to be swept away by Tyrant's Advent.
Chris was at a loss after using the skill. He saw Piaro standing on a large number of rice plants growing out of cracks in the collapsing land.
It was strange. It sounded like Piaro was trying to make Chris do something. Chris was feeling confused when rice rained down on him. He defended by swinging his greatsword.
Hollow rice. They were a weak plant that had no sense of weight. No, this was a concept higher than aura. Chris couldn't endure it, and became a rag along with Grid's Greatsword.
20 minutes after saying goodbye, Chris returned. He handed his greatsword to Grid. Grid frowned as he checked the greatsword, which was cracked.
Chris believed that this incident was caused by Grid. The monster called Piaro was Grid's subordinate, so he was forced to think this way.
He couldn't believe the rumors. Grid was rumored to be stupid, but he was actually incredibly scary. Grid extended a hand to Chris.
It was 10 times more expensive than the normal repair price. It was an unreasonable price, but he couldn't refuse the transaction.
Chris handed over 853 gold with trembling hands and returned to the fields. The five leaders of the Giant Guild had to work there.


The Cannock Chase area has many healthcare facilities for your health needs. Hednesford has the Hednesford Valley Health Centre on Station Road.
For a full list of GPs in the area please look at the NHS Choices website.


text:
Commons: 17 December 2012
Volume 555: debated on Monday 17 December 2012
Mrs Sharon Hodgson
(Washington and Sunderland West) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
(Mr Eric Pickles)
While the irony of your earlier remarks sinks in, Mr Speaker, I will inform the House, ahead of Wednesday's local government settlement, that it is clear that every part of the public sector needs to do its bit to pay off Labour's deficit. My Department is cutting its running costs by 44% and will shortly publish best-practice guidance for councils on how they, too, can make sensible savings. A written statement published today outlines how Sir Ken Knight will undertake a review into savings in the fire and rescue service, protecting front-line fire engines and fire stations, but cutting waste, inefficiency and out-of-date practices. Finally, the pop-up shop, which opened in my Department today, shows how councils can use their property assets to better effect, both to support small firms and to save taxpayers' money. Truly—Napoleon was right—we are a nation of shopkeepers.
Mrs Hodgson
Could the Secretary of State tell the House why the Government are holding back £300 million- worth of early intervention funding over the next two years? If, as rumoured, it is for payment by results, how does he expect cash-strapped councils to be able to afford the vital prevention and early intervention work and programmes when they have to manage a cut of more than 40% in budgets over the lifetime of this Parliament?
Mr Pickles
I will make a statement covering this issue on Wednesday. The hon. Lady makes an important point. It is important to understand that part of the settlement has meant the rolling up of a number of previously ring-fenced grants. This one has been retained. The money that has been held back will be applied to local authorities. I can tell the hon. Lady that her figure is not entirely right; I think she might be pleased by the settlement.
Graham Evans
(Weaver Vale) (Con)
T5. Research has shown that trade unions receive a subsidy of £113 million at taxpayers' expense. We all believe in trade unions and think that they are a force for good, but does my right hon. Friend agree that local taxpayers will be surprised to hear that their council tax is subsidising trade union activity in local authorities? (133624)
I am glad that my hon. Friend is a massive fan of trade unions. Indeed, I believe that the trade union movement has done many marvellous things for this country. One thing that has been great is its independence from employers, and I am desperately worried that the taxpayers' money that is subsidising trade unions might impinge on that independence. I will shortly be issuing guidance to local authorities about how we might strengthen trade unions by removing some of their funding.
Hilary Benn
(Leeds Central) (Lab)
How many people who go out to work of a morning does the Secretary of State estimate will see their council tax rise next April because he has decided that people on low earnings should pay more council tax?
The right hon. Gentleman is entirely wrong in his premise. It is his party that says that pensioners should pay. It is his party that is seeking to tax the poor. It is my party and the Liberal Democrats that are offering some support. The right hon. Gentleman had better look after his own party before he comes here and lectures us.
The Secretary of State, of course, did not want to answer the question. The answer is that nearly 800,000 people who go out to work every morning face a potential rise in their council tax bill next April, when people who are on the top rate of tax will get a tax cut. If we look at what is happening in his own back yard, Brentwood borough council has just published a case study on its own scheme, which I have here. Under its proposals, a working mum who works more than 24 hours a week could see her council tax bill rise by more than £600 a year. Why is he so hellbent on penalising people who go out to work?
That, of course, was before we intervened and offered our process, which will protect people and ensure that nobody has to pay more than 8.5%. What does the right hon. Gentleman say about his own councils, which are looking to make people pay 30% on council tax? He has been singularly neglectful in his duty. He knows that his Government, had they been successful at the last election, would have made £52 million of cuts. So far, he has not accepted a single one of our cuts. The right hon. Gentleman is inconsistent in his consistency.
Michael Fabricant
(Lichfield) (Con)
In answer to Question 1, my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing referred to PopUp Britain and pop-up shops. Was that just a bright idea within his Department, or did he get professional advice from people who are actually in business?
The Minister for Housing
My hon. Friend makes a very good point. I am glad to say that the sponsors for PopUp Britain included Intuit and the John Lewis Partnership.
T2. When I worked in the homelessness sector under the last Government, statutory homelessness fell by 70%. Last week's "Panorama" programme showed the heartbreaking human cost of this Government's appalling record on homelessness: homelessness is up, rough sleeping is up and more families are stuck in bed-and-breakfast accommodation for longer. What are this Government going to do about it? (133621)
Mr Prisk
We are taking a proactive role to ensure that rough sleeping in particular does not happen. That is what "No second night out" is all about. In London, where it has been trialled, 70% of people spend just one night on the streets. We need to tackle those numbers, but it is wrong to simply say that everything is gloomy; there is good action, there are positive ideas from councils and we have to work together.
Tessa Munt
(Wells) (LD)
If the Secretary of State decides to designate a local planning authority, under proposed new section 62A to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, planning applications can be made directly to him. What mechanisms will be in place to ensure that the influence of local people through consultation is not reduced if the voice of local authorities is excluded from the process?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
(Nick Boles)
I thank my hon. Friend for her question, because that is an important point. In the very few cases in which planning authorities are designated as poorly performing, it will be possible for major applications to be referred directly to the Planning Inspectorate. After relentless questioning from her Liberal Democrat colleagues in Committee, I came to understand that it is particularly important that the Planning Inspectorate is given clear guidance that it should consider using local hearings, so that people can put their views across, rather more regularly than it does for appeals, when local views have already been taken into account. I have already started discussions with the Planning Inspectorate to ensure that that happens.
T3. The Secretary of State is leaving the financial settlement for local government until the last minute, and there is great unfairness among the most deprived councils in the country. For example, in Stoke-on-Trent we are having to pay an extra £130.75 per person because of cuts, whereas in the Secretary of State's own constituency the sum is £29.40. Will he take that into account in the financial settlement before he finalises it, so that there is fairness for local councils? (133622)
Of course there will be fairness in the system, but we need to understand that one reason why the hon. Lady's authority is facing a larger cut than mine is that it receives a much larger amount. I think Labour expects my authority not only to contribute to the pot but to have its entire grant removed, and then it expects us to increase taxation. I remind her that it was Labour that left a number of vulnerable authorities dangling over a cliff edge and the coalition Government who put money into pulling Labour's irons out of the fire.
(West Worcestershire) (Con)
Villagers in Martley in my constituency are keen to develop their own neighbourhood plan, but the district council has told them that their alternative to a greenfield site might mean that both sites end up being developed. Will the Minister please clarify the situation for my constituents?
It is obviously difficult for me to talk about an individual case, but I would be happy to hear more about it from my hon. Friend. It is important that neighbourhood plans strengthen the powers of local communities to determine where development should and should not happen. If the neighbourhood plan is in general conformity with the local plan, the neighbourhood plan's policies will take priority and will help protect her constituents from unwanted development on speculative sites.
Tristram Hunt
(Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab)
T4. In towns and cities across England, local authorities are being forced to close museums, shut care homes and end library provision, but the Government found £250 million to empty the bins more regularly. What kind of abysmal, philistine, reactionary Government put dustbins above library books? (133623)
The people who are putting dustbins above those things are people who care about the general service provided to the electorate. The hon. Gentleman is a bit of a luvvie, so no doubt he is looking intensely at the drop in culture, but that is a matter for local decision, and he is wholly wrong. People should look at how an authority can get more money in by exploiting and using its cultural heritage. Frankly, he is just lining up a bunch of luvvies. He should listen a little bit more.
A proposed housing development in Micklethwaite in my constituency was rightly rejected by Bradford council, the appeal was rightly rejected by the planning inspector and that decision was upheld by the Secretary of State. The courts have sent it back to him for redetermination. May I urge him to stick to his guns and reject that unwanted planning application? If he wants to come back to Micklethwaite to reacquaint himself with the area and see how inappropriate the application is, he will be welcomed by local residents.
I know Micklethwaite well, but we will consider the matter in a quasi-judicial way. We will ensure that the views of the residents of Micklethwaite and the council are given due weight, and I hope to announce my decision in the near future.
T7. The Home Secretary recently refused to give me any information about the impact on local services, such as housing and community services, of the ceasing of the restriction on migration from Bulgaria and Romania. Does the Secretary of State have an estimate of how housing and other community services will be affected by that change? (133626)
As far as I am aware, we have only anecdotal evidence, which is not sufficient for someone of the hon. Gentleman's stature.
Fiona Bruce
(Congleton) (Con)
My constituents in Sandbach are furious that the Hind Heath road planning application, for 269 houses on prime agricultural greenfield land, has been granted on appeal. The pressures on road surfaces and infrastructure will be unsustainable, and the decision flies in the face of localism, as the area was not classed for development under the Sandbach town plan. Will the Minister explain how development on such a wholly unsustainable site can be justified and what can be done to ensure that further, similar applications by developers are not granted across my constituency?
My hon. Friend has been a tireless advocate for the residents of Sandbach. She will understand that I cannot comment on particular cases, but I think it is fair to say that her local authority has been a bit backwards in coming forwards with a local plan. However, I am glad to say that, under its energetic new leadership, it has recently published a draft plan for public consultation, which will provide her constituents with a defence against speculative development.
Heidi Alexander
(Lewisham East) (Lab)
T8. The Secretary of State will know that 17 fire stations in London have been earmarked for closure, including Downham in my constituency. Given those front-line cuts to emergency services, is it right that Boris Johnson's 10 closest advisers have a combined salary packet of more than £1 million? (133627)
(Brandon Lewis)
There is an integrated risk management plan for London. It is good that the London fire commissioner has said he is committed to maintaining the current standards for the time it takes for fire engines to get to incidents. Therefore, it will be a local decision based on local need, taking into account clear local risks.
(The Wrekin) (Con)
At this Christmas time, when many robins feature on Christmas cards, and given that the Secretary of State is Parliament's pre-eminent ornithologist, can he tell the House what his Department is doing to protect Britain's declining common bird population?
I think I am more of an undignified twitcher than an ornithologist. Clearly, there is the wildlife directive and we look to ensure the protection of various species, but we have to understand that in the nature of the way that agriculture and the like are changing, the patterns we have seen traditionally among British birds are likely to change in the decades to come. That will be to the benefit of some species and to the detriment of others.
Ms Karen Buck
(Westminster North) (Lab)
Ministers have sent out a strong message to London councils that they should not be placing homeless households far outside the capital and away from their community network support and children's schools. On Friday, however, I met a gentleman in employment who is being placed in Milton Keynes. Will the Minister tell me if it is acceptable for the gentleman to be placed in homeless accommodation and immediately lose his job, and if anyone is in charge?
(Mr Don Foster)
We have recently introduced new rules that make it absolutely clear that local authorities have to ensure that the accommodation they provide is reasonable, and that they must take into account issues such as jobs and education.


Flavour – Awele Mp3 Ft. Umu Obiligbo, 2Nite Music highlife singer, Flavour N'abania teams up with popular South Eastern Nigeria Igbo traditional group band "Umu Obiligbo" on a brand new song titled Awele.
Ije Awele in Igbo meaning Lucky, Save Journey is a must listen to all who want good things to come their way this year. Awele video!
The Song is Directed by Adasa Cookey.


text:
package org.primeframework.mvc.control;

import java.io.Writer;

import freemarker.template.TemplateDirectiveBody;
import org.primeframework.mvc.PrimeException;

/**
 * This class is a proxy for the FreeMarker directive body.
 *
 * @author Brian Pontarelli
 */
public class FreeMarkerBodyProxy implements Body {
  private final TemplateDirectiveBody body;

  public FreeMarkerBodyProxy(TemplateDirectiveBody body) {
    this.body = body;
  }

  /**
   * {@inheritDoc}
   */
  public void render(Writer writer) {
    if (body != null) {
      try {
        body.render(writer);
      } catch (Exception e) {
        throw new PrimeException(e);
      }
    }
  }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Q: Python List Comprehenion Get JSON Values I have a JSON like:
data = [
    {"word": "Hi", "lang": "en"},
    {"word": "Bonjour", "lang": "fr"},
    ...
]

I want to execute a function (named db.insertIntoSwearWords) for each key-value pair.
This is what I've done so far
words = [item['word'] for item in data]
langs = [item['lang'] for item in data]
res = [db.insertIntoSwearWords(words[i], langs[i]) for i in range(len(words))]
result = [{'word': words[i], 'result': res[i]} for i in range(len(words))]
print(jsonify(result))

which gives me:
[
    {"result": true, "word": "Hi"},
    {"result": true, "word": "Bonjour"},
    ...
]

MY PROBLEM:
Just wondering if there is any better way to write this program with fewer lines. I'm not a fan of for i in range() really. I'm just curious how can I do the list comprehension with for word, lang in item syntax.

A: You can use the built-in zip function.
For example:
>>> a = [1, 2, 3]
>>> b = ['a', 'b', 'c']
>>> c = [(i, j) for i, j in zip(a, b)]
>>> c
[(1, 'a'), (2, 'b'), (3, 'c')]

Also, you can do
>>> list(zip(a, b))
[(1, 'a'), (2, 'b'), (3, 'c')]

Which gives the same result.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Local Search is Exploding! We have seen a huge increase in Local Search and year on year numbers just keeps going up. The BIA Kelsey Group who are advertisers in the mobile space. Referencing these figure local search advertising revenues could top $8 billion within four years. Specifically, BIA/Kelsey forecasts local search advertising revenues to increase from $5.1 billion last year to $8.2 billion by 2015.
Specifically, BIA/Kelsey forecasts local search advertising revenues to increase from $5.1 billion last year to $8.2 billion by 2015.
But is a compound annual growth rate of 10% too ambitious of a projection? Not at all, says Booth.
Based on the findings of the report and its corresponding projections, local search activity will continue to fuel this emerging market's profitability to dizzying new heights.
It's projected that by 2015 30% of all search volume will be local in nature.


text:
After the clapping stops: the crisis facing migrant care workers
The COVID-19 pandemic has shone a spotlight on care work like never before. Care workers and other key workers have been applauded and celebrated, yet there is a looming crisis facing the care sector. British and migrant care workers have stood shoulder to shoulder through this pandemic, yet Brexit and the UK's broken immigration system create specific risks for migrants. EU citizens rights' have been put at risk by the EU Settlement scheme, while migrants from outside the EU face extraordinary visa fees, difficulties maintaining their status and vulnerability to exploitation.
On Tuesday 20 April join us as we discuss the risks that migrants working in the care sector face, what this means for the sector, and what needs to happen to ensure their rights are protected.
Chaired by Nadia Whittome, MP for Nottingham East since the 2019 general election and former care worker, a role she continued part time when COVID-19 struck. In April 2020 she spoke out publicly about the lack of PPE available for care home workers, and was fired from her care work role for doing so.
Shereen Hussein
Shereen is a Professor of Health and Social Care Policy at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Shereen is a Co-Investigator and theme leader in the Sustainable Care programme of work and Co-Director of an NIHR funded Policy Research Unit focusing on commissioning health and social care in England (PRUComm), she also acts as an expert advisor to the WHO on issues related to the LTC workforce and global ageing. She has a longstanding and influential research agenda on migration, long term care and ageing and has led several projects focusing on the drivers, motivations and experiences of migrant workers in the social care sector in England.
Caitlin Boswell
Caitlin is EU Citizens' Project Officer at the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants. She campaigns for EU citizens' rights through reform of the EU Settlement Scheme and monitoring its impact particularly for marginalised groups most at risk of slipping through the cracks in the scheme.
Kinga Milankovics
Kinga is a self-employed care provider and co-founder of the Hekate Conscious Ageing Foundation, a membership organisation that promotes sustainable, conscious living and ageing. She was previously a Researcher and lecturer St Istvan University (1994 - 2008), Hungarian delegate to the Board of the European Women's Lobby (2008-2010) and is an active campaigner and organiser in areas of social and environmental sustainability.
Myrna (not her real name) has been living and working in the UK for 16 years, including as a care worker for the last two. Originally from the Philippines, she has seen the devastating and disproportionate impact of the pandemic on her community. Since the outbreak of COVID-19 she has been intensely afraid of getting ill and of losing her job, and as an undocumented migrant she lives in constant fear of being reported to the Home Office. She will be speaking about her experiences of working through the pandemic and the need for urgent policy reforms to protect all workers, no matter where we're from.
This event has now ended. Read our blog on the crisis facing migrant care workers.
Start: 20th April, 2021 at 3:30pm
End: 20th April, 2021 at 4:45pm
Updated: 2nd June, 2021
Author: Ruth Stokes
Report launch: "We also want to be safe": undocumented migrants facing COVID in a Hostile Environment
Join us for the launch of our new report, shining a spotlight on the devastating impact of Hostile Environment policies during the pandemic.
ON DEMAND: Climate Justice is Migrant Justice - Together we Win!
Join us to hear from campaigners at the forefront of the struggles for racial, migrant and climate justice.
ON DEMAND: Roundtable on Resisting the Digital Hostile Environment
Join JCWI's online roundtable event with Liberty and Foxglove Legal on Friday 30th July with participants from the migrants' rights and civil liberties sectors to discuss: - Resisting the digitisation of the Hostile Environment: How to advocate for a system that protects everybody's rights? - Impact on individuals: How can practitioners assist clients who have a digital-only status? - The bigger picture: How does the digitalisation of immigration enforcement within the wider data rights agen
The EU Settlement Scheme application deadline has passed - what happens now?
What happens now the EU Settlement Scheme deadline has passed? What should campaigners do next?
ON DEMAND: Beyond Labels: Refugee Week exhibition 2021
Our call to Boris Johnson: Lift the EUSS deadline!
JCWI wrote to the Prime Minister calling on the Government to lift the deadline for the EU Settlement Scheme. (June 2021)
ON DEMAND: In conversation with Leah Cowan - author of Border Nation
We're delighted to welcome Leah Cowan, author of forthcoming book Border Nation, in conversation with JCWI's Minnie Rahman.
When the clapping stops: EU Care Workers after Brexit
Our research showing that as well vulnerable EEA+ citizens, care workers and other key workers – the very people we are relying on to pull us through the COVID crisis – are in real danger of being left behind by the EU Settlement Scheme.


48000 Rawang, Selangor Darul Ehsan.
MyJURF will not be responsible for any loss or damage caused by the usage of any information obtained from this portal. Meet MyJURF in facebook Persekutuan Lompat Tali Malaysia.