Tag Archives: Derby

Cuts To Our Democracy

The 7% cut being made to Derbyshire services is not just a blow to public services, it’s a strike made directly at those with the least amount of power to fight back. The £1.4 million cut to the local Library service is a shock to the system, and many feel that it is merely the tip of the iceberg. Once the quality of services begins to dwindle, the customers and investment will inevitably follow. Many people rely on the services provided by the Council and their Libraries to do things most of us take for granted. Not everyone in Derby can afford internet access, so the Library has it for free. Not everyone can afford books, clubs or ‘how to lessons’, so they are provided for free. Taking away these services is taking away the voice of those who struggle most in society.

In the light of these cuts the Lib Dem pledge to save the libraries starts to look a bit hollow – once you examine how they plan to cut jobs and automate the service, rather than retaining knowledgeable staff. Many local residents in the city rely on the facilities of the local Library, especially young people, parents of young children, older residents and disabled people. This policy has the same ConDem trade mark as the Education Bill, a plan to reform schools into Academies. Speaking about this Bill, Green Party leader Caroline Lucas MP said

“We should be improving the quality of every local school for all children, rather than accelerating Labour’s programme of academies to deepen divisions between schools.”

The National Union of Teachers has described the bill as an “attack on the very existence of democratic accountability, free state comprehensive education.” Only a hand-full of Derbyshire schools have applied for Academy status so far, but the real worry is this change in mindset. Once we start to accept that privatisation is a part of our culture then we are giving away our rights to democratic representation.

The access to education is not something to be reserved for ‘more privileged’ children, and the same goes for the right to access basic services like our Libraries. Derbyshire will to loose out on £39.9 million in the coming budget; £23.6 million is going from child and adult services. It looks like we are entering into a time where Democracy is reserved for the rich and able, and Academic elitism is set to ruin the dream for countless young people.

Tom Reading

Jane Temple – Green Party Candidate for Darley Ward, Derby

Jane Temple has lived in Derby for 21 years and in Darley Ward for the last 11 years. She is a railway engineer and a long-standing campaigner on environmental and social justice issues. Jane wants to live in a city and country that recognise the finite resources of our planet. The use and development of those resources must be sustainable and for the benefit of all. This has motivated her to stand as a Green Party candidate in the last three local elections. The issues she is campaigning on include:

  • Improve choices for people to walk, cycle and take the bus.
  • Give pedestrians and cyclists greater priority at signalled junctions and crossings.
  • Set a default speed limit of 20 mph for residential areas.
  • Make council buildings better insulated.
  • Work to provide free insulation for households in Derby, as achieved by Greens in Kirklees.
  • Amend planning rules to require that new buildings have the highest levels of energy conservation and generate their own renewable energy.
  • Protect Derby’s heritage, for example by re-using historic buildings.
  • Restore the listed Derby Hippodrome, extending and remodelling it to form a large modern theatre.
  • Bring empty houses back into use. The council should take a lead by renovating 40 West Avenue, the prominent property at Five Lamps that is currently derelict. This council-owned building should then be rented out.
  • Seek alternatives to waste disposal that do not lock the council into long-term incineration contracts.
  • Keep green spaces green.

How The Greens Would Help Students

Students of the University of Derby submitted these questions to candidates in the Derby and High Peak constituencies:

1.  As the economy is moving towards recovery, how would the economic policies of your party help those looking for graduate employment?

The Green New Deal, which we have adopted, envisages the creation of one million green jobs, including investment in renewable energy technology, public transport and social housing. All of these initiatives will provide opportunities for graduates with technical and people/project management skills. We will seek to promote leadership opportunities for women in particular, requiring 40% of board members of larger companies to be female within 5 years. (For more information see http://www.neweconomics.org/projects/green-new-deal)

2.  The average student debt is approximately £27,000 upon graduating.  How would you reduce the cost of higher education without lowering standards?

The Green Party manifesto has a carefully costed pledge to abolish tuition fees. The cost of higher education is to be funded out of general taxation, maintaining current spending and standards:

Norwich Green Councillors Call For The Abolition Of University Tuition Fees
Norwich City Council on 2nd March, resolved to support the Union of UEA Students’ Higher Education funding campaign and write to the Government opposing an increase in tuition fees.  Green Party Councillors asked the Council to call for fees to be abolished altogether, but this proposal was voted down by Labour and Conservative councilors, who supported retaining the current fees of up to £3,000 per year for students.  Green Councillor Adrian Ramsay, who will be making a submission to the Browne Inquiry in to Tuition Fees on behalf of the Green Party, commented: “I am pleased to be joining the student demonstration against tuition fees. If I replace Charles Clarke as MP I will fight for tuition fees to be replaced by a fairer funding system involving a return to grants for students so that talented young people can go to university regardless of their background.”

3.  Building upon this; how would you maintain the quality of public services, in particular universities, in an atmosphere of public funding cuts?

We do not intend to cut public spending as a whole although we would reduce spending in certain areas, (defence, road building, expanding prisons for example), and save £2.5 billion by not introducing ID cards. We believe that we should pay for public services with a taxation system that promotes fairness and rewards behaviour that’s good for society and good for the environment. This will mean raising taxation for high earners, many of whom will be graduates, who thus will be repaying the cost of their education.

4.  As local councils provide much of the services that students use, how much responsibility would you like to see local councils have?

The Green Party manifesto calls for the revival of local government, with the introduction of proportional representation to encourage a grassroots democracy in smaller community and district councils. Such authorities should have enhanced powers over those areas of policy best settled at the local level including housing, education and the promotion of wellbeing by supporting cultural and sporting activity. Eventually this reinvigorated local democracy would have new tax raising powers delegated from central government.

5.  Given a finite pot of money in the Treasury, which would be your priority – returning those to work who could or supporting those who could not work?

This is a false and cruel dichotomy. All who are able to work must have the option to do so. Unemployment should not be used as either an economic or a political instrument. It represents a waste of our most valuable resource, human talent and aspiration. To squander this resource is gross mismanagement. Any person is at risk of suffering unemployment, may be through redundancy, injury, illness or because family circumstances. People in this situation should not be stigmatised. In many cases, they continue to make contributions to society. The humane and civilised society, to which we aspire, would continue to count all people as its members and beneficiaries, regardless of employment status.

6.  What are your views on how to combat Climate Change?

The failure of the Copenhagen Conference makes it more obvious than ever that finding a global solution to climate change must involve global justice. Rich countries need to reduce their emissions drastically, we think by 90% from 1990 levels by 2030, starting now! Our manifesto refers to the new three Rs: Remove, Reduce, Replace. Remove demand where possible, reduce demand through for example, energy efficiency measures, and recycling and replace fossil fuels with renewable energy. The lead must come from government, both through direct investment and through enacting the necessary legislation and tax regimes for a sustainable low carbon economy.

For more information and policy detail go to http://www.greenparty.org.uk/

Waste Disposal in Derbyshire

There is a proliferation of new waste disposal technologies, these need to be carefully evaluated in terms of their carbon footprint. Some are good, some less so. The Greens are not against new technology. While domestic waste is coming under control and is now decreasing in England and Wales (around 27 million tonnes annually) commercial and industrial waste continues to grow, though it has been kept in check by the recession. Industry is not yet covered by direct targets on waste. These will  come in via European legislation which the Green Party supports. This should help industry wake up to the fact that waste is an avoidable cost, and also represents a loss of potential profit.

The Green Party calls for waste minimisation as a priority, then reuse, recycling and recovery of value (including) energy, and finally landfill. In principle, we would support the concept of zero waste, in practice the policy recognises that it will take time and investment to achieve this. Green Party policy opposes incineration. The reason is that it represents a waste of resource and thwarts our long-term aim of zero waste. However, the issue of pollution as a result of incineration can be overstated. All modern incinerators now operate under the Waste Incineration Directive. They are the cleanest of combustion plants, cleaner than roads! The main problem with incinerators from our point of view is that they conform to the centralist economic/political model rather than the decentralist strategy that we propose. They tend to be large, ‘industrial-scale’ plants which require inputs (including waste) to travel large distances to make them viable.

Green Party policy is cautious on gasification, the technology rejected in Derby.  It looks like the technology proposed would incorporate plastic in the gasification process, in which case the energy output, be it gas or electricity, would not be renewable. This is one of our reasons for opposing it. In addition, it looks like it is a big facility bringing waste in from all over Derbyshire, adding up the transport carbon footprint, again reason for opposition. It is unlikely that emissions would be a serious issue, gasification occurs necessarily in a closed low oxygen environment, so emissions are minimised. The question about the ‘bottom ash’ remains.

Anaerobic Digestion (AD) is generally welcomed, though it has limitations that policy-makers need to understand. It causes only a partial breakdown of the biomass content of waste, a significant residue remains for disposal. This can be used for compost if it is clean, that requires full screening of the input waste, which involves expense. The residue has to have a long-term market. Land has a limited capacity for taking applied compost: over-apply it and methane will be produced. The markets also need to be nearby so that transport miles are not being stacked up. Therefore, AD is good on a small scale in rural areas and with a segregated waste stream, e.g. food and garden waste, doubtful for big urban areas, and still need waste segregation and a solution to residual waste.

The Green Party calls for more recycling and curbside segregation, however some curbside schemes seem to be getting out of control. Stockport now has a 3 or 4 bin system. We should consider the carbon footprint of all these bins, which are made from petrochemicals, and be sure that no further collection miles are being created compared to a single bin collection. In some residential areas such as flats, segregated bin systems do not work, so to meet targets, some form of waste processing is necessary. In cities it might be better to go back to single bins with weekly collections and invest in clean, state of the art materials recycling facilities with energy-generation to power the process and the collection fleet. Such a closed cycle system is technically possible now.