The question to be addressed is why individuals need to re-locate in order to have social and occupational mobility. This raises issues about investing in the local economy, keeping money and skills in a locality. There needs to be a strategy and committment that the better paid/ skilled/ professional jobs are weighted in favour of local people. Barriers to job uptake need to be further understood. The other approach is not to pity those left behind, but to have a greater acknowledgement of the value and necessity of unskilled/ non-professional jobs and recognise the efforts of people doing valuable unpaid work both inside and outside the home.
The fuel shortage of last autumn made these issues more apparent
regards
Pat Nicholl
Pat Nicholl
Heart Health Worker
Liverpool Central West Primary Care Group
[log in to unmask]
0151 285 2019
>>> Alex Scott-Samuel <[log in to unmask]> 02/16/01 06:58pm >>>
Dear colleagues,
I'd like to canvass your views on a rarely
discussed issue. While everyone gets very excited these
days about social cohesion, less attention is paid to a
necessary prerequisite: continuity of residence. If people
are to be part of a neighbourhood's social glue they
clearly need to remain in that neighbourhood for at least
the medium-term - and, in principle, the longer the better.
This continuity of residence principle is diametrically
opposed to contemporary ideas about the importance of
social and occupational mobility - which often imply that
those 'left behind' by the migratory exodus from
disadvantaged neighbourhoods are to be pitied. I would be
very interested in your comments on this apparent paradox.
With best wishes,
Alex
******************************************************************
Alex Scott-Samuel
EQUAL (Equity in Health Research and Development Unit)
Department of Public Health
University of Liverpool
Whelan Building
Quadrangle
Liverpool
L69 3GB
Tel (+44)151-794-5569
Fax (+44)151-794-5588
e-mail [log in to unmask]
******************************************************************
|