watermelon spring 2023 on line edition

 watermelon

Conference Newsletter of Green Left Spring 2023

Online Edition

Picket lines are the working class at our most beautiful. By Tarsam Singh

 

Capitalism makes social crises and it is Trade Unions that solve them through strikes. So, the Tories cause a depressing poly crisis where our people can’t afford to live and are dying in hospital car parks; where the planet is on fire and we can’t afford the heating. But amid the desperation and despair, rays of light: we respond with the biggest wave of strikes since the 80s.

 

Strikes are the working class at its most powerful, inspiring and creative. Our picket lines are where we concentrate our woes and hopes, our solidarity and resistance to say “Enough! No more! We demand better and deserve better!” So say our railway workers, nurses, posties, civil servants, barristers, Amazon workers, lecturers, teachers, ambulance workers, drivers, retail workers, doctors and dockers, and the many others who make society and keep it running. Take pride in our class, our unions and our principles that have been forged in struggle down the ages: Unity is strength. Your strongest weapon is those you work with. NEVER CROSS A PICKET LINE! Principles that have gained us the eight hour day; the weekend; sick pay; parental leave; holiday pay; the end to child labour; and safe working environments

CONTENTS

Picket Lines Are the Working Class at Our Most Beautiful. by Tarsam Singh

The Death of the NHS by Joseph Healy

Campaign Against Climate Change and Green Party TU group

The Carbon Capture-Hydrogen-Biomass Complex  by Ellen Robottom

Climate Organisations in Solidarity with Striking Workers

Be Green or Seem to Be Green? A Government Question by Erwin Schaefer

No Coal in Cumbria by Alan Todd

Nuclear Power: A Dangerous Throwback, Unfit For 21st Century Needs? by Pete Wilkinson

Back To Basics – Back to The Philosophical Basis by Tina Rothery

Another Europe Is Possible – observations from the members’ meeting – December 2022  Erwin Schaefer,

Shire Elections at the Dawning of a Greater Gerontocracy RURAL NEWS by Alan Wheatley

Safe-guarding greener jobs in an age of transition – “Bold Solutions: The economic, climate and energy crises and how to fix them” Erwin Schaefer, as London Green Party Trade Union Liaison Officer (job-share)

Poem, and Join Green Left

 THE DEATH OF THE NHS?

Joseph Healy writing for Covid Action. 06 Jan 202306 Jan 2023

 

This sounds like a dramatic title, but in truth, it is not. What we are witnessing before our very eyes is the death of the NHS. The waves of COVID and flu washing through a debilitated health system starved of funds for more than a decade and with a workforce depleted and depressed means effectively the end of public health in England. 

The decision to allow COVID to let rip and the removal of all mitigations since June last year have led to this, along with years of underfunding. A system that was already finding it difficult to cope has been unable to deal with waves of COVID infections, which, along with flu, have been consistently happening since last winter. The periods between the waves have been shorter, and the breathing space given to exhausted NHS staff has been less and less.

 During the summer and autumn months, there was a noticeable increase in COVID infections in hospitals. This was driven by the lunatic decision of hospital trusts, driven by the Department of Health, that hospital staff and patients not be required to wear masks—the result was that many patients and staff went down sick with the virus. 

Now, in the winter months, which many experts predicted would see a wave of infections, the health system is left trying to cope with the irresponsible decisions of the government on COVID. Added to this, the refusal to pay nurses a decent wage and the general exodus of health staff from the NHS, and the perfect storm resulting from this, is no surprise. 

Horror story after horror story arrives from the frontlines, including one hospital that has a junior doctor acting as “car triage” as his job is to visit patients waiting in the car park. It has always been the Tory plan to destroy the NHS, and now it is succeeding. COVID, together with the refusal to properly fund the NHS, has led to this, and we now may be about to witness the first collapse of a public health system in the developed world.

THE CARBON CAPTURE-HYDROGEN-BIOMASS COMPLEX

NOT TOO BIG TO CHALLENGE, (DESPITE THE GREENWASH!)

This is an adaption of a series slides presented by ELLEN ROBOTTOM, of the Campaign against Climate Change at the Green Left  meeting 7 February 2023 HOW TO COMBAT THE CUMBRIA COALMINE AND OTHER RETROGRADE ENERGY PROJECTS video at https://youtu.be/_cj5F5_hnGI

 How can we develop a mass campaign for a radical alternative “big picture”, and can this help to amplify the struggles around specific installations and technologies like new coal, hydrogen for homes etc.

In the context of the British gov’t’s declared aim of “Net Zero by 2050”, various corporations are lobbying for huge public subsidies and policy pathways designed to reassure private investors and which lock in a role for fossil fuels. This entails a massive greenwash and disinformation, about jobs as well as technologies. This includes the promotion of carbon capture, hydrogen, “carbon removals” eg biomass with carbon capture and storage. And  CO2 pipelines and storage shared by industrial and power “clusters”, drawing existing and new high emitting businesses into further spatial concentration and functional interdependency.

Geographically this comprises six clusters of high-emitting industries two of which are on the north east and northwest coasts of England,

The East Coast Cluster comprises Zero Carbon Humber and Net Zero Teesside, consortia of energy and foundational manufacturing industries, and the Northern Endurance Partnership (headed by BP) operating CO2 storage. This Includes: Drax woodburning biomass power station. And a shared pipeline network to carry hydrogen to industrial and power generating customers, and CO2 from industrial and power installations to permanent storage below the North Sea (Northern Endurance Aquifer). In addition, the Humber Zero project at Immingham includes production of blue and green hydrogen to local industries and, potentially, homes, CO2 storage and pipeline transportation to a depleted gas field.

In the northwest, Hynet NW (Liverpool Bay and North Wales could offer– blue hydrogen for homes and industry, carbon capture, pipeline and storage in depleted gas field

In these locations Adding bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (CCS)is portrayed as a “negative emissions technology”. As such, it is deemed critical to the “zero carbon” pathway, as residual emissions from fossil fuel burning and industrial emissions with CCS can be “offset” with these “negative emissions”

CCS is the centrepiece of fossil fuel giants attempts to paint their operations as “green”. 

Even carbon capture and usage for enhanced oil recovery is described as a climate benefit as it marginally reduces the energy used in the extraction process, and some CO2 remains in the depleted oil well! Government and industry statements that this technology is “proven” are quite simply false.

Claims for job creation are hugely inflated, fail to present any alternative scenarios against which to compare projections, and fail to mention that the whole project could be a house of cards. For example, Drax is often quoted in local press as “supporting 10,000 jobs”, but This figure actually applies to the peak year of the construction phase and includes indirect and induced jobs. After that, the number dwindles to 375 direct, 960 indirect, and 1,800 induced - no redeployment plans mentioned.

A similar picture is seen for job numbers projected for the Humber cluster, the East Coast cluster and the UK as a whole.

Benefits for domestic energy users seem equally dubious. One study finds “[u]sing green hydrogen to heat buildings via boilers would be almost six times less energy efficient than heat pumps powered by renewable energy and require a 150% increase in primary energy generation”. Retrofitting homes and neighborhoods for hydrogen would be far more disruptive than claimed in greenwash directed at householders, and the energy far more costly.

H2 is more dangerous than natural gas and more prone to leakage due to small molecule size.

OPPOSITION

Stepping up systematic organising in TUs and TUC is key – challenging current policy in support of this programme, as well as demanding radical alternatives.

Anti-fracking campaigns provide a strong model of how people can be radicalised by what starts as a local issue.

Could the Drax campaign similarly mobilise more people by focusing more on the dangers of the pipeline? Likewise, the proposals to put hydrogen into people’s homes, (NB Whitby and Ellesmere Port residents are organising against trials).

Campaigns need to Focus on an overarching, unifying message, eg multiple ways of greenwashing fossil fuels. This can help connect and scale up campaigns – but also needs strong focus on the alternative  Climate Jobs and their co-benefits.

CLIMATE ORGANISATIONS IN SOLIDARITY WITH STRIKING WORKERS

Three climate activist organisations – Campaign Against Climate Change, Climate Justice Coalition and Greener Jobs Alliance – have jointly written to the General Secretaries of trade unions involved in the current wave of industrial action.  

With the government’s only answer to the multiple crises we currently face being to ‘clamp down’ on the right to strike and protest, the unity of our respective goals and the need to come together in common cause couldn’t be more clear.  Here is the text of the letter to PCS:   

 

  Letters have also been sent to CWU, RCN, RMT and UCU which are identical other than the specifics in the third paragraph.

 To: Mark Serwotka, General Secretary, PCS

 As trade unionists and activists campaigning on the climate crisis, the organisations represented in this letter wish to express our unequivocal solidarity with your dispute.  We stand with you in your fight against the cost of living crisis and against threats of further austerity policies which would bring even worse suffering.

 As fossil fuel dependency pushes up the cost of living, the same oil and gas giants which are making multi-billions in excess profits at the expense of ordinary households are also driving climate breakdown, an irreversible catastrophe from which the poorest suffer and the richest profit. 

We recognise the fundamental role our civil servants will play in providing the essential underpinnings of a decarbonised society - planning, coordinating, protecting and training to enable the transformations we need to take place.  It is imperative that we see off this government’s repeated attacks on the civil service.

We stand squarely with you in your struggle and through solidarity we will achieve victory.

 We hope to continue to build closer links between the industrial struggle and the fight against climate breakdown – they are, in a very real sense, the same fight.

 With all solidarity and best wishes.

Claire Arkwright, National Coordinator, Climate Justice Coalition

Suzanne Jeffery, Chair, Campaign Against Climate Change

Tahir Latif, Secretary, Greener Jobs Alliance

BE GREEN OR SEEM TO BE GREEN? A GOVERNMENT QUESTION 

Erwin Schaefer, West Central London GP

 Germany has  Green government ministers and Greta Thunberg gets carried off by police from a protest camp, in full view of the world’s media, where occupiers tried unsuccessfully to stop the destruction of a village, Lützerath, to expand an existing coal mining area. And everyone knows coal is ‘bad’. What’s going on?

 Some historical background: The dependency on Russian gas has been promoted since the days of the social-democratic Schröder government (who had a directorship with Gazprom after politics), then, for 16 years by the conservatives under Merkel. Along the lines of – ‘we know Putin is an unsavoury character, but his gas is good and we can control him via our economy’. Well, karma’s been bad for the succeeding coalition since 2021. The Green Secretary for The Economy and Climate Protection has had to go cap in hand to other unsavoury countries with a generous German chequebook getting some gas. There is, this winter, no shortage but the population still feels the effects of years of some degree of austerity, price rises and the general unease about the current situation. Not quite to UK standards but individual perception is the key.

 After the Fukushima disaster in 2011 the Merkel government was forced by public reaction to close Germany’s nuclear power plants. They were due to be closed by 2022; the Greens in the current government insisted on the shortest possible extension and in a few weeks’ time, by April 2023, Germany will be a nuclear-free country – still with the unresolved mess of storage and decommissioning – and some convenient French nuclear electricity…

 Coal, on the other hand, has been the mainstay of the country’s industrial power. Originally slated to be closed by 2038, the Greens forced a commitment for 2030 and most plants and mines will indeed close by that date. This includes, crucially, the mining and coal burning facilities near the Dutch border that attracted all the attention.

 Why, for the sake of seven years, are the German Greens with their influential role in government prepared to accept some serious shredding of their environmental credentials? Didn’t they remember the lessons from the Hambach Forest occupation a few years back – a separate mining area in the same region - that finished with the usual police action, an accidental death and subsequent court rulings which eventually saved the forest anyway?

 Since the early days of a green movement in Germany, there has been a seesaw between what used to be called ‘The Fundamentalists’ and ‘The Realists’, with the faction accepting some rules of political engagement and compromise gradually becoming dominant and winning increasing numbers of seats in national, regional and local governments. They sit on a growing baseline of roughly 20% voting preference in a proportional context. Such a party is a different beast to a party that is hunting around for a few hundred council seats, a second MP and a desperate need to be politically validated. The concern over there is more like being seen as the progressive, environmentally aware but politically responsible force in government; green middle-class concerns about the uncertain ‘Here and Now’ overriding the desperate, empathetic cries of their hard-core campaign supporters. Not fighting a losing battle about an abandoned symbolic village and being accused of putting the country’s energy security at risk – yes, that is a sad reality in the game of dirty politics.

 Just to round off this foray into contemporary German politics – the police forces are federally devolved to the regional state level and this particular state, once heavily industrialised and dominated by the social democrats, is currently ruled by a Green-conservative coalition. So, in essence, Greens authorised the removal of Greta Thunberg along with the other activists by police force, so that a private company, RWE, can mine up to an additional 800 million tons of lignite coal (the dirty version, with a high sulphuric content) to keep coal power plants going for another seven years.

 Some sources claim that RWE would rather not have to deal with this negative publicity issue as they prefer to focus on being one of the world’s largest generators of renewable energy, operating on a global level. They also happen to be one of the largest carbon dioxide emitters in Europe. But they appear happy enough to milk the coal-cow to its last bitter carbon molecule.

 What could be done, from an ecosocialist perspective? Where can the degrowth voices be heard in this debacle? And from an internationalist perspective, wind and solar are not sufficiently integrated yet. There is serious ‘Green Jobs’ potential, given goodwill, cooperation and public ownership of resources.

 But the starting question remains: How does a Green Party with governmental responsibilities stay true to its ethical, environmental commitments without having to move inviolable red lines?

An adaption of a series slides presented by Alan TODD, at the Green Left meeting 7 February 2023 HOW TO COMBAT THE CUMBRIA COALMINE AND OTHER RETROGRADE ENERGY PROJECTS video at https://youtu.be/_cj5F5_hnG

Allan Todd is a climate and anti-fascist activist; a member of Left Unity’s National Council; and author

There are many environmental reasons why the proposed coalmine in Cumbria shouldn’t go ahead. Yet this Tory government’s support for the new coalmine - along with its approval of new oil &; gas projects, the ‘Dash for Growth’, &; plans for Investment Zones – will make matters worse.

One reason why this NEW mine needs to be opposed is the Environment Agency estimate that parts of Cumbria are likely to be lost to rising sea levels by 2050,. The latest COP Reports show virtually all their previous predictions have proved too conservative: climate changes are happening more severely and rapidly than originally estimated. Yet, it’s clear that, some energy’ companies - with help from governments - are intent on increasing their emissions.

The decision to approve a new coalmine in Cumbria has proved, controversial: locally, nationally and internationally. As COP26 agreed to reduce coal production, that is not surprising.  This was why the Tories postponed announcing the decision until after COP27.

West Cumbria Mining (WCM) is owned by EMR Capital - a hedge-fund based in Australia but registered in the Cayman Islands. They admit 85-90% of production will be exported - yet Tory politicians, such as Workington’s MP and Copeland’s mayor, continue to make ‘misleading’ claims such as: “For as long as we need steel, we’ll need coking coal”; or that the mine will reduce the UK’s steel industry’s ‘need’ for imported coke. They do so, despite Chris McDonald, CEO of the Materials Processing Institute (operating on behalf of the UK’s steel industry), stating “There isn’t anyone in the steel industry who’s calling for the mine.”

The two biggest steel producers in the UK - Tata Steel and British Steel -   say they won’t be using Cumbrian coke; because they’re rapidly de-carbonising production by using clean hydrogen; or because Cumbrian coke has high sulphur content. The drive to green steel, means that by the mid-2030s, many steel companies may have moved away from coal completely. Another ‘argument’ for the mine is stopping UK dependence on Russian imports . This has been put forward by Mike Starkie - Copeland’s unelected Tory mayor - who, has tried to link the mine to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Yet, according to Chris McDonald, “It would not displace a single tonne of Russian coking coal. “and Tata Steel states it doesn’t use any Russian coke .

The people of Cumbria don’t need an “1850s technology”:  that’s left many ex-miners suffering from Black Lung Disease. Between 2001 and 2015, this disease killed almost 9000 former UK miners.

Instead of the 500 jobs claimed to be on offer, green jobs are needed. Both Cumbria Action for Sustainability, and the Local Government Association, have produced studies showing how 6000 to 9000 jobs could come to Cumbria via a programme of renewable energy and home-insulation. Unlike the coalmine, such a programme would mean lower household energy bills,

The real reason why Tory politicians are lobbying for an Australian-based hedge-fund is a desperate attempt to hold at the ‘Red Wall’ Labour seats they won in 2019.

The government approved the proposed new coalmine for Cumbria in December 2022, at present, WCM’s 2021 accounts show  a shortage of funds, and the need to raise extra money in order to begin work.

The proposed mine is on the former site of various chemicals companies, which have left behind very contaminated/ hazardous waste (mainly heavy metals). This is currently capped-off underground by concrete slabs – because the safest thing to do was to leave the site undisturbed. The ‘contaminated land’ designation was only removed on condition that those slabs remain. Yet WCM, haven’t done any of the scientific investigations required to see if mining safely beneath this waste is feasible; nor of hazardous waste disposal. To do so, they’ll need to remove the concrete safely, and then transport the waste – but there isn’t a Cumbrian hazardous waste facility. Additionally, WCM need to construct a new ‘drift’ tunnel over an old anhydrite mine, currently full of toxic waste.  In 2017, the Environment Agency recommended refusal of the mine proposal, because waste could escape into the Irish Sea. So, it’s risky to have given planning permission before all relevant studies are completed.

Although environmental groups - such as Greenpeace, FoE, and XR North Lakes - make cases against the mine, the main practical opposition is currently via two legal challenges, essentially over the CO2 emissions which, , haven’t been properly considered by the government, thus making the approval of the mine unlawful.  On 13 January, both South Lakes Action on Climate Change (SLACC) and FoE filed papers for their challenges process. SLACC - should hear  by 1 March whether their legal challenge can go ahead. But the legal process could be dragged out until June. Even if the court challenges are won, the government could simply re-issue permission slightly different from the current one. If the permission for the mine is allowed to stand, WCM will still need to obtain the necessary permission licences from the Coal Authority and the Marine Management Organisation

Nonetheless, it’s possible preliminary work could start on the site this Spring. So, acting on the precautionary principle, we need to be thinking and planning - NOW - what our first steps will be, Knowing the government’s decision would be announced in early December, West Cumbria FoE and XR North Lakes made plans for a gathering at the mine site: either to celebrate or to protest the decision. As a result, following a protest in Penrith on Friday 9 December, there was a mass protest at the coalmine site on Saturday 10 December:

The next step is surely to begin making plans -now - ‘Blockadia’: putting bodies on the line to stop fossil fuel projects with the public support of climate and scientific experts – inspite of legal rights to effective peaceful protest being greatly reduced since 2019.

 LINKS

CAFS: https://cafs.org.uk/the-potential-for-green-jobs-in-cumbria/

SLACC: https://slacc.org.uk/west-cumbrian-coal-mine-slacc-legal-challenge-lodged-at-the-high-court/

https://slacc.org.uk/decision-made-to-proceed-with-legal-challenge-to-government-decision-on-coal-mine/

https://www.facebook.com/SLACCTT

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/challenge-the-cumbria-coal-mine/

FoE:https://friendsoftheearth.uk/climate/legal-challenge-filed-over-cumbrian-coal-mine

https://friendsoftheearth.uk/climate/legal-challenge-

launched-over-cumbrian-coal-mine

BLOCKADIA:

https://thischangeseverything.org/the-documentary/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQhflH4alO0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3I0jtOh0GzA

NUCLEAR POWER: A dangerous throwback, unfit for 21^st century needs?

Pete Wilkinson

Against today’s backdrop of technological innovation in electricity generation through utilising ambient energy sources, nuclear power is starkly exposed as an antiquated, complex and dangerous throwback from the days of nuclear weapons and the cold war. It requires uranium as fuel which, in the reactors operating in the UK today, is from Russia or Russia-influenced countries. It is expensive and slow to deploy, rendering its putative ‘low carbon’ benefits ineffective in the fight against climate change. Its technology is a fine balance between extreme temperatures, lethal radioactivity and shrinking water reserves.

Unmitigated direct cooling from the sea or from rivers has a devastating effect on marine life:  Hinkley Point C, should it ever be completed, is expected to kill 11 billion fish over its projected lifetime of 60 years. French engineers have labelled the EPR ‘too complicated to build’. It generates radioactive waste which requires indefinite, constantly monitored storage for thousands of years, representing an intergenerational burden of unacceptable proportions. Nuclear reactors emit millions of microscopic, radioactive particles of uranium, the health effects of which are bitterly contested. Nuclear reactors suffer from a syndrome known as ‘low frequency, high consequence accidents’:  see Windscale 1957, Three Mile Island 1979, Chernobyl 1986 and Fukushima 2011. The search for a geological disposal facility has relied on imposition on unsuspecting and hostile communities.  The switch to volunteerism since the recommendation from the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management in 2007 has not produced a ‘willing community’ after fifteen years of effort.

Uranium is a finite resource.  After mining, it has to be milled, enriched to increase its fissionability, fashioned into pellets, configured into assemblies, transported at every step before being loaded into a reactor core in the heart of a complex building which itself has generated an unhealthy carbon footprint. This ‘front end’ of the fuel cycle is carbon heavy and capital intensive as is the ‘back end’ which begins with the removal of a third of the exhausted or ‘spent’ reactor fuel after a year or 18 months in the reactor core to make way for fresh fuel to be loaded at a permanent, geological disposal facility (GDF) for  super-hot and highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel . 

 The cost of decommissioning the UK’s nuclear reactors, the ‘interim’ storing of spent fuel pending the locating of a site for a GDF, and the entombing of the detritus has been estimated at £260bn by an independent expert, the industry itself admits to £131bn.

The anti-nuclear argument is countered by the claim that the lights will go out without ‘always on’ nuclear. But nuclear plants are not always on (maintenance outages, refuelling and precautionary shut-downs occur) and are not good at following the fluctuating demand, as they require lead times to ‘fire up’.   load factors – the ratio of how much nuclear electricity was produced as a share of the total generating capacity - also give an indication of how important nuclear is power to powering the grid.  In 2016, the nuclear average load factor was 80% which fell to below 60% in 2021.  And, ‘baseload’ is a concept which has been dismissed by the CEO of the National Grid as irrelevant in national  electricity provision.

 The advantage of renewable technologies, particularly wind, solar and tidal power, is that the source of the energy arrives at the blade of the wind turbine, the face of the photo-voltaic cell or to the tidal barrier totally free of charge, avoiding the entire ‘front end’ cost typical of nuclear power and hydrocarbons. However, renewables are having a dramatic impact on the demand for rare earth metals such as lithium, copper, cobalt and manganese, the appropriate management of these presents a dilemma to the energy sector.

 Successive governments, when confronted by dwindling installed electricity capacity which the UK faces as ageing nuclear plants face closure, seem to think only in terms of increasing supply rather than reducing demand.  There is considerable scope for the latter but only in recent months has this government presented electricity reduction measures to consumers.  Concerted, urgent national action is long overdue.  To avoid a ‘lights out’ crisis in the we need to embark on a community-driven campaign to reduce electricity demand.  Evidence suggests that there is a 30% opportunity to be realised.  However, this government has ignored the mandatory fitting of solar panels on all roof-top spaces, retrofitting thermal efficiency measures, the wholesale switch to LED lighting and treating ‘energy crisis’ with the urgency it requires, to keep the lights on and meet our climate change challenge by 2050.  Nuclear power won’t do it because by the time the front-line test-case of Sizewell C produces one kilowatt of nuclear power, around 2035, the energy sector is required to have reached its own net-zero carbon target, rendering the low carbon claim for new nuclear ineffective in making more than a passing contribution.

Pete Wilkinson

Committee on Radioactive Waste Management member 2003 – 2007

Former advisor to the Office of Nuclear Regulation

Deputy Chairperson, Sizewell site stakeholder group

Deputy Chairperson, Together Against Sizewell C (TASC)

Co-founder Friends of the Earth

Co-founder Greenpeace UK

BACK TO BASICS – BACK TO THE PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS by Tina Rothery

We’re in an ecological crisis, ,yet politics continues to fudge the action required to save ourselves and all else that depends on nature and the environment Does our Party have the right focus for this crisis?

Each member has their own particular take on what the purpose of the Green Party of England & Wales is ‘a political party seeking electoral power’ but what do we want that power for? GPEW makes clear in the Philosophical Basis that it’s not about being IN power, it’s decidedly more moral than that:

 PB503 We will even work with those who disagree with us where sufficient common ground can be found to do so. However, we do not seek power at any price, and will withdraw our support if we are asked to make irreversible or fundamental compromises

When I first read the Philosophical Basis, I decided to join the Party. which I saw as the ‘political wing’ of a global movement of campaigners; facing each crisis with science-based facts and stubborn determination to protect our life-support-system.

I’ll admit a UK-politics naivety but, realising how unjust life was and how dangerous many political decisions were, I came to GPEW to see if anything could be done to try to stop the nonsense masquerading as democracy.

Under First Past the Post GPEW stands little  chance in a 2-horse race. I was not deterred. GPEW is clearly the Party needed during an ecological crisis – that’s the very reason it was formed!

I noticed that GPEW was heard by creators of other parties’ Manifestos– in fact the Labour Manifesto of 2019 was so similar to GPEW’s Manifesto that FoE said: “The Labour party has come out top in Friends of the Earth’s environmental assessment of the main UK-wide party manifestos, with the Green Party and the Liberal Democrats also putting forward a wide-range of significant policies to respond to the climate and ecological crisis.”

 Would Labour have done as much, without being reminded by Green Councillors, Peers and our MP – that the issues can’t be ignored? It may be near-impossible to gain enough MPs to impact Parliament but at least we can champion truth and force others to include our policies. We only fail at getting the credit.

Everyone of every Party or none, needs unpolluted air, clean water, a survivable climate and the biodiversity of nature. This is the urgent mission that sets us apart from other parties

 PB201. Our survival depends upon the continued survival of all the ecosystems which evolved before us. The Green Party therefore sees humanity as necessarily a dependent part of the natural environment. When human activity threatens the environment around us, that activity threatens our future survival. Political objectives should accept our dependence, not seek to transgress it. We do not believe that any other species is expendable.

When I  started opposing fracking,  stopping it was a distant  aim. My every decision  was based on getting  closer. A lot of GPEW members feel that the ‘elections-first’ approach  damps down  other campaigns. Although many  GPEW members are involved in XR, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, challenging HS2, fighting for clean air, opposing sewage-dumping, defending trees etc., we don’t see these as particularly GPEW campaigns.  . Our Green Politics is about more than our Party or just politics:

 PB501 We do not believe that there is only one way to change society, or that we have all the answers. We seek to be part of a wider green movement that works for these principles through a variety of means. We generally support those who use reasonable and non-violent forms of direct action to further just aims.

Sustaining our moral core and our aims is tough in a politics, which involves FPTP voting, dubious funding and biased media,. I recall how refreshing it was to see Caroline Lucas  tour of ‘leave’ areas to understand what the  issues were; i she genuinely cared. Not that the media paid much heed of course.

Clearly we need political change and GPEW has the focus on the environment that’s needed , other Parties merely pay lip-service for votes. We need more than adding  to our impressive list of Councillors or another MP.

We need to continue to act beyond politics. Rapid change is going to happen ‘naturally’ as nature continues to be depleted, agriculture pollutes soil and waters and fossil fuel projects  do more harm. Every decision we make must first consider “where’s the environment/climate/nature/ecology in this?”

We all want GPEW to ‘win’ and to be much more than a pressure group –but at least, we are an effective pressure group. In 2020 Caroline Lucas introduced the Climate & Ecology Bill that has received cross-party support and is making its way through Parliament. Many GPEW Councillors have succeeded in putting motions to Councils. IF the CE Bill was to pass – it would mean that plans to frack, to build new coal mines,  to pollute and allowing nature to waste away would be illegal..

 Furthermore, the CE Bill would remove the need for spending so much time protesting to save the environment – the law instead would simply yet firmly, make that sort of thing illegal.  If we focused valuable energy and campaigning into getting Caroline’s Bill into Law, we will  achieve what our Philosophical Basis expects of us as a Party and maybe  we’d have the credibility to get into power despite FPtP.

Although it feels like the cost-of-living crisis, social injustice, class wars, privatisation of vital public services and corrupted politics should be a priority as they ensure that the vast majority suffer whilst the very few succeed, in the end everything depends on the environment. All our fights for a fairer, greener society will count for nothing if we stay on a planet-wrecking trajectory there will be no justice.

Another Europe Is Possible – observations from the members’ meeting – December 2022

Erwin Schaefer, West Central London GP

AEIP was formed in the aftermath of the brexit referendum by several progressive forces with support by high-profile Green Party members. It has over the years successfully campaigned for migrants’ rights, against Islamophobia, has supported Freedom of Movement with the EU, the struggle against austerity and, in the last year, has been on the side of the progressive resistance against aggression in Ukraine.

At its core it is a pro-European group aligned with a progressive view of a cooperative Europe. As an elected member of the National Committee, I recommend checking them out online and joining.

We need to get away from the gaslighting by the Tory government and their false narrative of ‘illegals’, as such language encourages far-right acts of violence. But we do need to have the difficult conversations in the deprived areas and to channel the anger, showing genuine working-class solidarity with the lived experience of people to find the common struggle against austerity and conflict – and to show we have more in common with immigrants than divides us. There are human faces and stories attached to people who should better be known as ‘undocumented workers’. Leaving conflict areas to simply stay alive and not be drawn into a war, or to escape from the effect of climate change is a fundamental human right and Britain, as a major arms exporter as well as a major contributor to carbon emissions, needs to look at what is being done.

Cost of Living / Energy / Climate crisis is it also a crisis in the credibility of our main stream media? Why are we accepting this particular crisis as a matter of fact and not challenge it as the outcome of a failure of global capitalism? Climate justice and workers justice are part of the same struggle. Green New Deal and Green Jobs proposals could be seen as a reaction to the 2008 financial crisis but governments failed to take the required decisive action.  international solidarity with workers in even more repressive countries is necessary – what impact do the recently introduced West African oil and gas imports due to Russian restrictions have on the local communities? These cannot be positive developments,  within the same economic model that caused the earlier crises in the first place.

There hasn’t been a generalised social movement in this country since the early 2010s. The various groups that do exist are diverse but with a broad agreement it should be possible to find some overall alignment.

The main event, for me, was a zoom call on Russian anti-war activities, with an activist, in Russia, online, and a Ukrainian activist in the room.

 The Western Left failed after Chechnya and after 2014 to effectively oppose Putin; there was also possible failure by Russian opposition. Insufficient thought was given to fair trade and social justice between all countries after the collapse of the USSR.. The roots of the conflict lie partially in post-war and post-cold war events and international mechanisms should still be used to find solutions. But it is also a crisis of capitalist societys being dependent on Russian resources. Ideally, cooperative trust should exist in the face of international issues such as Syria and Iran.

The economic sanctions are not yet felt enough in Russia, not to change the attitude of the population about the conflict.

Russian tactics used in Ukraine are similar to previous events in Syria, Yugoslavia and Chechnya, with widespread population suffering. Human rights violations are not new and Russian society has huge steps to take towards full human rights.

There is opposition to the state, but Russia has an aging population, with large rural poor areas where Soviet rhetoric still dictates that ‘the state knows best’.

There is also significant influence by the orthodox church that largely follows the Kremlin rhetoric.

Some affected people have left the country but for anyone inside Russia, while they can join increasing numbers of protesters, they know the consequences.

Russia has a historical mindset of ‘life is cheap’ and the huge loss of life, not least due to ill equipped military, combined with a primarily masculine society means that feminist, non-violent changes will not be happening in the country while violence is so inherent. But significantly, women are daring to speak out against historical and generic violence normalised in society.

Will Ukraine end up as a new colonial territory between Russia and the West?

Q: “What can the West do?” – Russia needs to find its own voice; right now it needs support through war protests not political protests; an international civic movement taking steps towards supporting transformation of Russian society; also including criticism about environmental war effects.

Can sanctions stop war? There are too many aspects preventing a clear answer.

 Shire Elections at the Dawning of a Greater Gerontocracy

RURAL NEWS by Alan Wheatley

 

2023 is a Shire Elections year and I suspect that the 2019 ousting of Tory domination on Herefordshire Council by a coalition of Independents,’ and Green Party, united by a manifesto for greater public transport and cycling provision vs Tory plans for more roads to ‘ease congestion’.

Public transport provision is costly for those whose comparative youth excludes them from Senior Bus Pass and other age benefits, and Herefordshire is a geographically large county. Those below state pension age are also excluded from full Council Tax Reduction Support,. A Senior Bus Pass (age 60+) costs £10 for 4-years . Yet current Monday-to-Saturday bus provision can help lighten the financial load at a time of burgeoning inflation in what New Internationalist magazine calls ‘the cost of greed crisis’(1).

‘Information’ toward ‘informed choices’ comes from many sources including advice from Public Health England and our own observations. As an example, I now realise that the ‘walking with heavy shopping helps build muscle mass and bone density’ advice issued on the Diabetes Protection Programme (DPP) I attended May 2018 to March 2019 needs to be age-nuanced with, “Don’t let your mind make appointments for you that your body can no longer keep.” By the end of DPP I had lost 10% of my body weight, but by overdoing things, six months after DPP, I had a hernia before my 66th birthday.

So, for large Hereford Co-op shopping loads, I now use large wheelie case (dragged behind me, not slouched into) rather than shopping bags, and don't shop when there is no bus service. (No longer, at age 69, will I carry heavy shopping bags between bus stops.)

Yes, 2023 is a Shire County Elections year as veiled ‘vote Conservative’ letters to Hereford Times point out. Councils have 4-year terms of office, UK Central Governments 5 year terms; and both the Elections Bill that comes into force in May 2023 (2).   Chancellor of the Exchequer Jeremy Hunt’s proposes a hike in the State Pension Eligibility because‘we can no longer afford’ so many state pensioners. Years earlier, as Health Secretary, on the cue of a working tax credit cut for for low paid families, he said that Britons should work much harder “like the Chinese

Welcome to the ‘corporate demolition of the welfare state’.(4) “Work to death or get private ‘income protection insurance’” trumps welfare state “from cradle to grave” ethos.

What services would a Herefordshire elected Conservative Council from 2023 gladly axe? I shudder to think, while I wonder what little Herefordshire Green Party will do for ‘levelling up’. “To please some of the voters, some of the time”?

Meanwhile, public transport provision: use it and explore it, if you can afford to, or lose it.

(1) https://newint.org/node/29987

See also
https://newint.org/features/2022/12/05/wealth-safari-cargill-family-bernard-looney-gautam-adani-bernard-arnault

(2) https://www.camdennewjournal.co.uk/article/we-must-oppose-this-bad-elections-bill

(3)  https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-hunt-wants-poor-brits-6580580

(4) https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/disabled-researchers-book-exposes-corporate-demolition-of-welfare-state/

Safe-guarding greener jobs in an age of transition – “Bold Solutions: The economic, climate and energy crises and how to fix them”

Erwin Schaefer, as London Green Party Trade Union Liaison Officer (job-share)

As this recent TUC seminar attests, unions are responding to the challenges of decarbonising industrial jobs. Starting with ‘communicating a socially just ambitious vision’, the need to radically tune into people’s experiences and aspirations and to be willing to listen to their fears about their livelihoods is really the only way to engage workers. Involve people affected by the transition process decisions. Solidarity instead of instances of perceived hypocrisy. The unifying villain can be found in the form of a capitalist system reliant on fossil fuels and common ground can be found mutually exploring inspirational green jobs that are not in conflict with tangible, realistic and genuine changes.

 

Moving on to ‘future-proofing high carbon jobs’, the same theme of solidarity emerged. Workers threatened by redundancy because their deprived areas do not attract alternative work opportunities, or due to old age, are in a particularly precarious situation and may be open to far-right propaganda. A labour activist from the ‘Global South’ made the valid point that solidarity needs to include all potential victims of a globalised capitalist system; there are many workers in countries seen as providers of cheap labour, with little protection, few rights and being vulnerable to corporate and political abuse.

 

The next debate on ‘climate energy and inequality: interlinked solutions focused on London as an urban example for existing Green New Deal examples – dangerous and deadly air pollution as one of the reasons for a necessary transition and ongoing work by City Hall to establish retrofitting solutions to help keep houses warm and reduce residential fossil fuel consumption. The massive current skills shortage in the UK was repeatedly mentioned throughout the day and I noted, with interest, how union reps unfavourably compared the training and apprenticeship options in this country with the ones actively being pursued in the EU. Seen from a competitive point it is a concern, seen from an empathetic secure employment scenario, it seems clear that the voices condemning the government’s approach to a meaningful transition with full workers’ rights, job security and satisfying work are only going to get louder.

 

‘Green jobs must be quality jobs’ should be an obvious statement and the next panel debate led on the crucial need for skills training, yet again, and demands for quality green jobs that provide well-paid unionised work. The North Sea gas conversion in the 1960/70s was mentioned which provided much needed skilled work at the time; but there is no leadership from government for any recognition that workers in deprived areas, or in aging industries, need to be listened to. Once again, the UK situation compared poorly to more sustained efforts being made in Europe. Green jobs can be made attractive and well-paid but will the current economic system – aka globalised capitalism – enable or prevent investments? Do we really have to let the private sector finance transition technologies, training and apprenticeships and still expect an outcome that favours workers’ rights, empathetic support of workers wishing, or needing, to leave their jobs, training and education that is fit for the future and satisfying well-paid jobs?

 

Talking about the public sector, the final panel debate explored ‘public ownership of energy – for a safe climate’ with the assertion that energy supply must be run for the people by the people and not for private profit, as the current non-public energy ownership has tangible, visible, negative effects on our energy cost structure. Another mention of Europe, where public energy supply ownership is much more prevalent, followed by a shocking comparison of the costs of the bail-out payment for energy cost assistance. If one contrasts these costs to-date of around £2.7 billion with estimated costs of nationalising the ‘Big 5 (or 6)’ (British Gas, EDF, e.on, npower, Scottish Power, SSE) which would run to approximately £3 billion, the chance to nationalise our power supply has been thrown away in favour of maximising private profiteering.

Private ownership has no incentive for training investment. The public will, however, have to deal with – and pay for – net zero action anyway, irrespective of public or private ownership.

 

A brief analysis of the event from an eco-socialist perspective: Nobody is disputing the urgent need for a transition towards a zero-carbon world anymore, but the debate needs to framed around solidarity for affected workers, the need to listen to their expertise and concerns. This must also include workers in ‘outsourced’ countries who desperately need our solidarity in their struggle against globalised capitalism. It is a government’s responsibility to ensure workers are supported at all stages in their lives – from young people needing comprehensive, meaningful and attractive apprenticeships to workers needing new skills training for satisfying future-proof jobs to people choosing other options – and this government is, unsurprisingly, failing in its duty.

I want to finish with the impression that unions appear to be coming round to the realisation that having put some trust in the Tories’ promises surrounding the exit from the EU, they have become disillusioned by the realities.

Solidarity – training for green jobs – international outlook – public ownership.

25/2/2022 Old man lies in bed, sleepless, listening to the radio voices, That, late at night, can lull him; Talking of cricket matches, or bringing Stories, music and recipes from far-off places. But the radio voices aren’t comforting tonight, The old man turns over and tries to sleep Because nightmares might be better Than listening again To voices of desperation and defiance in the face of fear. He’s heard them before Calling from the Czech lands as the tanks rolled in. Young man went out to shout, In the street outside the Russian embassy. He can’t even do that now. So, he just has to listen To the ingredients describing the recipe For Chicken Kiev.

GREEN LEFT ONLINE Green left facebook  https://www.facebook.com/groups/GreenLeft/ Green left website https://wordpress.greenparty.org.uk/greenleft/ Green left blog http://greenleftblog.blogspot.co.uk/ Green Left twitter @GreenLeftUK

JOIN GREEN LEFT  Green Left subscriptions are £7 per year, FREE for unwaged/low waged. pay by standing order   Please contact: Green Left Co .jmbaileyx@yahoo.com