Every Asylum Seeker has a name

What do you think of the term 'boat people'? Note I didn't ask what you think of refugees, but the term itself. When you see or hear the term 'boat people', what immediately comes to mind?

For me, it's boats. Makes sense really. That's the first word. People, used almost as an afterthought.

So I think of boats - not people, not faces, not names and not stories. Boats.

I don't stop with boats. The people, the faces, the names and the stories follow afterwards. But my guess is I'm not the only person whose initial thought when faced with the term 'boat people' is boats.

And I don't think that's an accident.

The Guy Sebastian song, 'Get Along' contains the lyrics, 'And it's easy when they're faceless, to hate the other side.'

It's not only easy to hate people when they're faceless, it's harder to show compassion. We humans may not seem like it at times, but we really do care about other humans - that is when we see their faces, learn their names and hear their stories. Some may show more empathy than others. But the person who can look into someone's eyes and hear their story of suffering or pain or loss and not be moved in any way is rare.

But if we generally care about individuals we're not so good about caring about strangers - particularly groups of strangers - whose names we don't know, whose faces we haven't seen and whose stories we haven't heard.

It's like the natural inclination to care about other humans stops - perhaps because in some way we stop seeing them as humans - or at least as humans the same as us. We've been doing it for hundreds of years. We say they're not like us - not civilised like us or not Christian like us or not intelligent like us or not feeling like us. We turn them into groups with labels, rather than seeing them as individuals. We refuse to hear their stories. We refuse to learn their names. We refuse to look into their faces.

And the more removed we are from those names and those faces and those stories, the easier it is not to care.

So how much easier is it to turn away from the plight of refugees when we see 'boats' rather than people? A boat is a thing, a mode of transport, a problem, a threat. A boat deserves no compassion, no empathy.

Those boats are filled with people - but it's so hard to care about those people when their names and their faces and their stories remain hidden from us.

The Gosford Anglican Church has had some very good signs up recently. But this one I think is my favourite:

Every Asylum Seeker has a name.

We may not ever learn their names. We may bundle them altogether in one group called 'boat people' and replace images of their faces with images of boats in our head. But their names don't disappear just because we give them a number and turn them into a statistic. Their faces don't become blurry just because we label them 'boat people'. And their stories aren't erased just because we haven't heard them.

And chances are - human nature being what it is - if we learnt their names and saw their faces and heard their stories, we would care.

So let's care anyway - as if we had learnt their names and seen their faces and heard those stories. Because those names and those faces and those stories still exist - even if we do try and hide them behind the term 'boat people'.

            

Why I'm not a big fan of economic growth

People sometimes tease me for not thinking the economy is important. It's not that I think it's unimportant. But I do think we place too much emphasis on it. And I think often decisions are made as if economic growth was the most important aim, when there are other things that are far more important. We've prioritised the economy over well-being, when it should be the other way around. 

Let's take two policy decisions by the Labor Government recently.

The first is the decision to take all single parents off Parenting Payment when their youngest child turns eight and place them on Newstart instead. Newstart is not enough to live on - so it forces these parents into any work they can find - and their choices are limited because of their child-caring responsibilities. 

From an economic perspective, this makes sense. On one hand, you can hand out money to parents to stay at home. On the other hand, you force people into working so they're not only contributing to the economy with their labour, but also through paying for child are and more consumer spending.

However, is the economy really the most important thing here? Shouldn't the most important thing be the health and well-being of our children. I was lucky enough to be able to work from home until just recently, when my youngest was 11. And while we may not have had much money, what we did have was way more precious - time together. I'm not saying all parents should stay at home until their children finish primary school. But I do believe those that want to should be encouraged. No, they don't contribute as much to the economy, but they contribute an awful lot to the well-being of their children and often the wider community. 

The next area is refugees. I received something in my mailbox the other day about how much illegal boats are costing us. We've reduced real people who are hurting and suffering to a dollar figure. If the economy is the most important thing, then maybe this makes sense. But it's a sad world we live in, if that's the thing that matters most.

Compassion is never cheap. In dollar terms, what we spend when we're compassionate will often exceed what we receive. But in well-being terms, what we receive is priceless. Being compassionate does have benefits - not only to those who are helped, but to those who are helping. 

And if we remove the economic focus, let's look at what refugees bring to Australia. Not only do they bring the opportunity for us to show compassion, they bring their lives, their culture and their stories. They bring the opportunity to enrich the lives of all those who come into contact with them. Surely that's worth something!

The other problem I have with economic growth is that it can suggest that it is only economic transactions that are important. Health, love, enjoyment, nature - all are seen in dollar terms. Instead of weddings being seen as a chance to celebrate love and begin a life together, they're huge events that require lots of consumer spending. Weight management, match-making and Eco-tourism are huge industries. A hug, a giggle, a walk in our local neighbourhood don't contribute to economic growth. But if someone can find a way to make money out of them, they will. 

And does consumer spending really equal happiness? How much of what we buy is actually making our lives better? And often our buying is a reflection of things that are wrong, not how happy we are. Yesterday I spent money on a pillow for my sore neck and medication. Yes, they contributed to my well-being - but I'd say the conversation I had with my sons in the evening probably had more to say about my general well-being that my consumer spending did.

The economy is important. We need money to provide the basic services that people need. And there's nothing wrong with wanting Australians to have good lifestyles beyond those basic services. But growing the economy shouldn't be the ultimate goal. Improving the well-being of people should. The economy is just a tool to help us do that. When people's well-being suffers because it's not good for the economy, then something is wrong.