|
Post by postscript on May 20, 2006 14:03:42 GMT
I don't think it is mandatory to have field experience before becoming a UNICEF Ambassador. That title was awarded to Hayley in 2003 but fer first field trip (to Ghana) wasn't until last year. Nicola was due to visit Lesotho but apparently had to cancel at the last minute due to contracting flu. I'm not sure if we already have the New Scotsman article about it or not, but it appears HERE. Roger Phrasing Roger! She says 'future ambassador'. May be the same applied to Hayley 2003 but she represents NZ, so I thought they were country based. So would Nicola then be for Scotland? Not that I'm in any way wishing to diminish Nicola's credentials, just being protective of Hayley being slghtly ahead of the game and at a younger age! Peter
|
|
|
Post by postscript on May 20, 2006 14:12:23 GMT
Hello Joe, Peter and Roger! Checking with the UNICEF International and UK websites and the newspaper article linked by Roger, I can see that Nicola seems currently to be a UNICEF Celebrity Supporter (website here and here and here ) and future Ambassador ( here). There is a list of UK UNICEF Celebrity Supporters in one of the FAQs accessible from the drop-down box here but it does not appear to be up to date. Cheers, Dave Thanks for clarifying and quantifying everything Dave! Peter
|
|
|
Post by roger on May 20, 2006 16:26:27 GMT
Hi Peter, My phrasing was intentional as I was referring to what you said here: I'm not wishing to diminish Nicky's contribution but to be an ambassador you need to have field experience and we all know Hayley spent some time seeing the reality in Ghana, hence her bike/trike initiative. Peter Roger
|
|
|
Post by postscript on May 21, 2006 8:44:27 GMT
Hi Peter, My phrasing was intentional as I was referring to what you said here: I'm not wishing to diminish Nicky's contribution but to be an ambassador you need to have field experience and we all know Hayley spent some time seeing the reality in Ghana, hence her bike/trike initiative. Peter Roger I was referring to the phrasing in the article itself that you presented but maybe we're inadvertently at cross purposes, so we'll agree to differ Peter
|
|