Monthly Archives: February 2011

March Against the Cuts

Being green is not just about environmental matters and it would do none of us any harm to involve ourselves in other campaigns as well. That’s why some of us will be attending the March Against the Cuts in London on 26 March and why we shall also be protesting about the planned benefit changes which are going to lead to the poorest people in the country becoming poorer still.

Secretary of State for Work & Pensions Iain Duncan Smith has announced changes to the social security system which are intended to cut the amount spent on benefits by £18 billion a year from 2013. No matter how these changes are dressed up this is going to hurt. When public spending is being slashed and unemployment is rising it will mean sharing fewer resources among more people and only a fool will believe that increased poverty is not going to result, among the unemployed (which could include any of us at any time) the disabled (ditto), children and elderly citizens.

It isn’t necessary to wait till 2013 for cuts to bite however. From April this year changes to the Work Capability Assessment (WCA), designed to make it even harder to show that someone is incapable of work through illness or disability, will take effect. The aim of this measure is to take money off the poor in order to help pay for the excesses of the rich, whose unregulated greed led to the crisis of capitalism which got us into this financial pickle in the first place.

One particular example of how the rules work illustrates very clearly the inhumane nature of the new test. Currently a person who is registered blind is exempt from the WCA. This exemption ends in April and blind people will have to score 15 points on the test just like everyone else if they are to keep their entitlement to Employment & Support Allowance. The rule now is that if you are blind and possess a guide dog, and you can walk across a road with your dog and without the need for another person’s assistance, you do not score the necessary 15 points. To you or me this sounds very much like testing the dog rather than the claimant, and we might also ask what this particular challenge has to do with a working situation. Indeed, those of us who work in this field will be asking that very question when these cases come up for appeal, as they
inevitably will do so, from this Spring onwards.

If you are wondering why I am commenting on this on a green website, the reason is as follows. Even if we were indifferent to the injustices involved, which we certainly are not, it’s clear that as poverty increases local businesses will take a huge hit. With their
high overheads they cannot fairly compete with the supermarkets who use food items as loss leaders. There will be reduced demand for organic food, which is more expensive than the stuff flown in from overseas, and people will have less or no money available to take the costly steps required to make their houses more fuel-efficient, so these are issues which going to affect us all.

by Chris Connolly

Time to take the Tesco out of Food Policy

Green Party food policy supports the production of healthy and humanely produced food, giving priority to local production for local needs, integrated with habitat conservation. Greens also call for a fair price for family farm businesses and greater support for the provision of allotments and local markets. A Ministry of Food should oversee policy delivery. To stimulate greater home production, Government must make agricultural land available for sustainable production. Where possible, this land should be held in Trust for the community, preventing it falling into the hands of the big, intensive landowners. Government can lead the way by identifying underutilised public land, including that held by the Ministry of Defence - food security is an integral part of National security. It should also require that the Royal Estate follow its lead.

Local Authorities need powers to take over the management of under-utilised land, similar to the powers they have over vacant private housing, making this land available for allotments or smallholdings. They have to be empowered to rebuild the local market infrastructure that the supermarkets have destroyed. Schools and colleges should work to develop knowledge, interest, and skills in growing and preparing food, so encouraging young people to see agriculture as a worthy career.

When Peter Kendall, President of the National Farmers Union addressed his Union’s conference this February, he roundly criticised government’s failure to adopt a serious food policy. He said their approach was ‘leave it to Tesco’ - to leave it to the markets and rely on food imports to make up the growing food deficit. Greens support his warning that this is ill advised in a world where a combination of both rising population and prosperity and the increasing frequency of so-called ‘natural’ disasters, is putting pressure on food supply. He might have added that the reliance of western style agriculture on oil was adding a further twist to the rising spiral of food prices.

Historically the UK government has run a cheap food policy the purpose of which has been to underpin the low wage strategy that the captains of industry have wanted to pursue in order to minimise their costs and maximise their profits and dividends. In the days of Empire this involved importing cheap food notably wheat from North America and sugar from the Caribbean to provide adequate calories for the workforce. Now, this policy of relying on imports and letting the supermarkets use their muscle to force down prices, is failing.

Governments the world over have learned that if the workers get hungry they get upset and may riot. Inadequate food supply has been an underlying cause of the revolutions taking place across the Middle East. The World Bank acknowledges this and says that global food prices are at a dangerous level. In response, the G20 will meet to discuss the economic and political impact of food and commodity prices. French President Sarkozy, currently chair of G20, has blamed commodity speculators, and indeed, it is shocking that human beings will manipulate food prices for personal gain, consigning hundreds of thousands to hunger and misery. But the problem lies deeper than this naked greed.

The problem lies in the ‘commodification’ of the earth’s resources - turning everything into something for sale and then leaving supply to the market. Markets will always sacrifice long-term benefit for short-term gain; their interest is in profit not people. Governments have a duty to look after the long-term interests of the people, and they are failing to do this. They are in the position to develop policies that will deliver an adequate and balanced diet to their citizens. However, these policies will require a fundamental shift in methods of food production and distribution; it will require standing up to the powerful interests that are manipulating food and agriculture policy. It will require curtailing the dependence of food supply on oil.

There is no real food policy in the UK. The last Government began a tentative process to look at the issue spurred on by the rise in oil prices and the global food riots of 2008. Professor Tim Lang, a leading thinker on food policy and then advisor to the Cabinet office, exposed some revealing thinking underpinning entrenched government attitude to food supply. Defra was of the opinion that self-sufficiency was neither possible nor a desirable goal for a trading nation. They also took the view that the UK could and should buy on open markets. National food security was relevant for developing countries they conceded, but not for the rich countries of Western Europe. The Labour Government did not complete its policy review and we can presume that under the present administration Defra has returned to this default position. If it does recognise a problem, it will doubtless listen to industry lobbyists and see the solution in more intensification, mega-dairies, and GM technology. More reliance on increasingly scarce oil in other words.

Since Defra questions self-sufficiency, it is fair to ask if it is possible. This question was asked in 1975 by Kenneth Mellanby, founder Director of Monk’s Wood Ecology Research station, which of course has now been closed. His answer, given in a book ‘Can Britain Feed Itself’ was a clear ‘Yes!’ More recently, Simon Fairlie, editor of ‘The Land’ revisited Mellanby’s work in the light of today’s population and land-use. This time he gave a qualified ‘yes’. We could do it, but meat consumption would have to decline by about one half.

A stunning demonstration of what happens if you take oil out of food production is to be seen in the film “The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil” about Cuba after it lost Russian oil and still not able to afford other sources. In its 2006 Living Planet Report, the WWF named Cuba as the only sustainable country in the world. This was largely due to its system of organic food production, made necessary by its lack of oil. Cubans enjoy a high standard of health with a life expectancy of 78, equivalent to any developed country.

Pioneers in the UK are showing the way. Around the country, Transition Communities are looking seriously at local food security, developing the important concept of ‘food catchment area’. With rising prices set to continue, their work is less academic and increasingly urgent, made even more so by the inability of Government to address the matter. In Manchester, Unicorn Grocery specialises in ethically grown and wholesome fruit and veg. The cooperative business has bought 21 acres of prime growing land at Glazebury, Warrington. Its intention is to lease out plots to organic growers and provide the outlet market for the produce, bringing healthy, locally grown food to urban south Manchester. It is initiatives like this that government needs to foster, not GM and mega-dairies.

[Mike Shipley February 2011]

Drought hits the Amazon – again.

In 2005, the Amazon basin experienced what at the time was called a ‘once in 100 year’ drought. Changes in normal rainfall patterns were at the time attributed to unusually warm seas in the South Atlantic. As a result of the drought, large areas of rainforest began to die back and as they did so, began to release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The Amazon basin, one of the worlds great carbon sinks, became a carbon emitter. In all it was calculated that five billion tonnes of carbon dioxide were released.

In 2010, it all happened again. Two ‘once in 100-year’ events within 5 years prove nothing, yet it is cause for concern. The 2010 event was more intense than the 2005 drought with rivers dropping to record low levels disrupting the life and economy of Amazonia. Preliminary calculations indicate that the resultant dieback will release even more carbon dioxide than the 2005 drought - an amount equivalent to the annual release by the USA. Some tree deaths will be a long-term result of the 2005 drought that left many weakened and unable to tolerate further drying. By the same argument, the final impact of the 2010 drought will not be felt for several years, the climate over the next decade will determine the fate of trees weakened but not killed last year.

A joint team from Brazil’s Amazon Environmental Research Institute and the University of Leeds, which has just produced a report on the drought, is carrying out research into the impact of these droughts. Dr Simon Lewis, from the University of Leeds, who co-authored the report with Dr Paulo Brando of AERI, said, “Having two events of this magnitude in such close succession is extremely unusual, but is unfortunately consistent with those climate models that project a grim future for Amazonia.”

The Amazon rainforest is one of the world’s great carbon sinks covering an area approximately 25 times the size of the UK. Scientists at Leeds have previously shown that in a normal year the forests absorb approximately 1.5 billion tonnes of CO2. However, for 2010 – 11, they predict that Amazon forests will switch from a carbon sink to a net emitter, releasing more than 5 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide over the coming years. In addition to this figure, there will be the release from the continuing logging operations and forest fires that may well be more frequent following the drought. Suddenly the world has been joined by another USA.

Over the last three years the Southern hemispheres has seen a succession of extreme events. The Brazilian droughts, the fires in Victoria, record floods in Queensland and the biggest tropical cyclone ever recorded in Australia. The monsoons that caused the flooding in Pakistan were under the influence of the southern oceans. None of this should surprise us. The southern hemisphere is the blue hemisphere, dominated by its oceans and these extreme events are attributed to ‘abnormal’ warming of the oceans. Climate is intimately tied to oceanic conditions; oceans are the heat store, exchanging energy with the atmosphere, so driving weather patterns. In a warming world, it is the southern hemisphere that will experiences climatic changes first. However, the world has one integrated climatic system - where the south leads, the north will follow.

[Mike Shipley.]

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