A green supplement in the Guardian recently, The Green List, gave an interesting round up of global environmental developments this year. I thought it would be good to talk about this now, as we near the end of the year, to see how much more needs to be done in 2008.
Here are some of the highlights. In March, the UK Government published its draft climate change bill. In June, the G8 summit was hosted by Germany. The US finally agreed to "seriously consider" a 50 % cut in carbon emissions by 2050, but with the caveat that their involvement relies on India and China also joining the party. In July, the House of Commons, environmental audit report for 2006-07 said that the UK 2050 target is incoherent, as a cut in UK carbon emissions by 60% by 2050 is unlikely to achieve the Governments other goal, of limiting global warming to a rise of 2C. In August, the Government awarded more than £1million to projects approved by the carbon trust. At the Labour Party Conference in September, Brown said that Britain will become the first country in the world to write binding limits on carbon emissions into law. In October, Al Gore and the IPCC shared a Nobel Peace Prize. And in December, the UN Climate Change Conference will be hosted by the Government of Indonesia in the island of Bali.
What is clear in all of the legislation and discussions this year, is that although progress is being made, it needs to be done more quickly and more radically - because unfortunately the risks poised by global climate change itself, will not wait for all the bureaucracy to be straightened out.
Monday 26 November 2007
Monday 19 November 2007
Brown's First Environment Speech
Today Brown gave his first major environmental speech since he became Prime Minister See here for more info
A major announcement was that the independent climate change committee (established in the Climate Change Bill published earlier this month) will be asked to consider new evidence suggesting that developed countries need to aim for an 80% cut in carbon emissions by 2050. The ambitious targets seem to be pushing the nation to the forefront of global efforts to tackle climate change. A very welcome part of the speech was that Brown would encourage allies such as the US to make similar pledges (although we wait with bated breath to see what actually happens). He said any successor pact to the Kyoto Protocol must pledge to hold the rise in global average temperatures to no more than 2 C.
Brown said tackling the problem would require a "fourth technological revolution" on the scale of the development of the steam engine, the combustion engine or the microprocessor. He said: "The climate change crisis is the product of many generations, but overcoming it must be the great project of this generation." He said up to one million British people could be employed in the environmental industries in the next two decades.
But the important question is what would the Government actually do to achieve this revolution? Here are a few points that he spoke about:
Brown said the government hoped to build in Britain one of the world's first carbon capture facilities — a process that involves collecting carbon dioxide and pumping it in liquid form into porous rock layers underground, where it cannot contribute to warming the atmosphere.
On a smaller scale, Brown was convinced that the UK could eliminate free carrier bags - or "single-use disposable bags".
A major announcement was that the independent climate change committee (established in the Climate Change Bill published earlier this month) will be asked to consider new evidence suggesting that developed countries need to aim for an 80% cut in carbon emissions by 2050. The ambitious targets seem to be pushing the nation to the forefront of global efforts to tackle climate change. A very welcome part of the speech was that Brown would encourage allies such as the US to make similar pledges (although we wait with bated breath to see what actually happens). He said any successor pact to the Kyoto Protocol must pledge to hold the rise in global average temperatures to no more than 2 C.
Brown said tackling the problem would require a "fourth technological revolution" on the scale of the development of the steam engine, the combustion engine or the microprocessor. He said: "The climate change crisis is the product of many generations, but overcoming it must be the great project of this generation." He said up to one million British people could be employed in the environmental industries in the next two decades.
But the important question is what would the Government actually do to achieve this revolution? Here are a few points that he spoke about:
Brown said the government hoped to build in Britain one of the world's first carbon capture facilities — a process that involves collecting carbon dioxide and pumping it in liquid form into porous rock layers underground, where it cannot contribute to warming the atmosphere.
On a smaller scale, Brown was convinced that the UK could eliminate free carrier bags - or "single-use disposable bags".
Friday 16 November 2007
Decade of Sport
It was interesting to hear James Purnell's ambitious vision for sport outlined in his speech to a Progress seminar this week. He was clear that the argument about the power of sport to deliver against Health, Education and Home Office objectives is well recognised.
I hope so - because from what we're hearing all is still to play for in the allocation of priorities for the current CSR round. There are testimonies after testimonies of how sport, and good role models - coaches, teachers, personal trainers etc have transformed the lives, and life chances of millions of people.
So, if the Secretary of State is right, perhaps the power of the Department of Health's budget could, in part, be re-focused towards sports participation, and the ensuing requirement for qualified coaches, and the DCSF's towards meeting the 5 hour promise for our kids. Who knows, maybe even the Home Office could prioritise team sports - especially in the high-risk, hard to reach population - because surely - every kid needs a chance and a role model.
It's not all about money - but if we are to get the participation agenda right - as we promised in the 2012 bid - getting the nation active will require significant central funding. It will probably need to be allocated locally, but it will require money from central Government. The Secretary of State is right - this could be the decade of sport - where the UK does achieve his vision of world class excellence in participation and performance. But this will not happen by accident - it will require deliberate investment and strategic oversight. And that's the real challenge for the SofS - will he provide the leadership, focus and energy that sport and the nation needs?
I hope so - because from what we're hearing all is still to play for in the allocation of priorities for the current CSR round. There are testimonies after testimonies of how sport, and good role models - coaches, teachers, personal trainers etc have transformed the lives, and life chances of millions of people.
So, if the Secretary of State is right, perhaps the power of the Department of Health's budget could, in part, be re-focused towards sports participation, and the ensuing requirement for qualified coaches, and the DCSF's towards meeting the 5 hour promise for our kids. Who knows, maybe even the Home Office could prioritise team sports - especially in the high-risk, hard to reach population - because surely - every kid needs a chance and a role model.
It's not all about money - but if we are to get the participation agenda right - as we promised in the 2012 bid - getting the nation active will require significant central funding. It will probably need to be allocated locally, but it will require money from central Government. The Secretary of State is right - this could be the decade of sport - where the UK does achieve his vision of world class excellence in participation and performance. But this will not happen by accident - it will require deliberate investment and strategic oversight. And that's the real challenge for the SofS - will he provide the leadership, focus and energy that sport and the nation needs?
Tuesday 6 November 2007
Minister for Fun
Rt Hon James Purnell MP, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, gave a Keynote address at the Progress Annual Conference this Saturday. He was introduced as the Minister for Fun, which I suppose makes sense, as he described his most recent duties had including attending the World Cup and visiting the theatre! Seriously though, Culture, Media and Sport is a really important for the health and well being of the nation, and so it was interesting to hear what he had to say.
He said that the way to win the next election would be by making progress, with the power tranferred, wherever possible, to the people. He said we need to personalise the public services, and that cannot be done centrally.
James was asked a number of questions following his speech. One of the questions was based on the media accusation that Brown is more socially conservative (small c!) than Blair with regards to issues such as booze, gambling and the internet. James took the middle ground in his response, saying that there is always a balance to be struck between freedom and responsibilty. Another question was from a representative from Labourhome.org. He asked how James proposes to really let people become engaged with politics through new media. James said that new media is changing the way politics works. James made a really pertinent point about how new media needs to be used for effective communications and not just to show (or pretend) that politicans are leading edge.
He said that the way to win the next election would be by making progress, with the power tranferred, wherever possible, to the people. He said we need to personalise the public services, and that cannot be done centrally.
James was asked a number of questions following his speech. One of the questions was based on the media accusation that Brown is more socially conservative (small c!) than Blair with regards to issues such as booze, gambling and the internet. James took the middle ground in his response, saying that there is always a balance to be struck between freedom and responsibilty. Another question was from a representative from Labourhome.org. He asked how James proposes to really let people become engaged with politics through new media. James said that new media is changing the way politics works. James made a really pertinent point about how new media needs to be used for effective communications and not just to show (or pretend) that politicans are leading edge.
Capturing that elusive successful green agenda
Every political party at the moment seems to be looking at environment as a way to consolidate their position for the next general election, and Labour is no exception. I attended an environment seminar at the Progress Annual Conference, and some very controversial issues were discussed.
The first point to note is that, of the 30 or so people at the seminar, almost all of them were men (as were the 3 panellists, and chair), interesting as I wouldn't have considered this as a particularly male dominated area. But I suppose that calls for a whole other blog entry!
The first panellist to speak was Paul Flatters, Managing Director of Opinion Leader, a polling organisation. He has been researching the public mood on green issues for over 20 years. Surprisingly, he said there is a strong argument that green issues will not have a big impact on the next election (as opposed to 56% of those polled who think that crime will shape their voting behaviour). He said that an impact on voting is more likely in a negative way - a lot of anti climate change proposals are vote losers. He thinks that the main way environment will be important is in its repositioning of the Conservatives, as it can be used as a way to make voting Conservative more credible again, and seen as more outward looking. It is interesting then, that even with the Conservative's big push on envionmental issues, Labour and Conservatives are pretty equal in the polls on this issue - it is the Liberal Democrats who are considered to have the best environmental policies.
Martyn Williams, from Friend of the Earth, said that it is not just down to Cameron that Labour has lost the lead on environmental issues, he thinks Labour are just not performing well enough. He thinks it is important to focus on the fact that we can cut greenhouse gas emissions by spending government money, not just taxing, for example by providing people with grants to insulate their homes. Where Cameron has been successful with environmental issues, it is important to note that many Conservative councils are opposing wind farms, which obviously slightly diffuses the message.
Phil Woolas MP, Minister for (or against!) Climate Change, said that we have to create more of an understanding about the economics of climate change. He spoke of how the UK is leading the global debate in the area, and will be one of the few countries in the world that meets their Kyoto target.
A conclusion from the debate was that there needs to be some upside about environmental changes, it can't just be about stopping people doing things, after all it would be very difficult to win an election that way.
The first point to note is that, of the 30 or so people at the seminar, almost all of them were men (as were the 3 panellists, and chair), interesting as I wouldn't have considered this as a particularly male dominated area. But I suppose that calls for a whole other blog entry!
The first panellist to speak was Paul Flatters, Managing Director of Opinion Leader, a polling organisation. He has been researching the public mood on green issues for over 20 years. Surprisingly, he said there is a strong argument that green issues will not have a big impact on the next election (as opposed to 56% of those polled who think that crime will shape their voting behaviour). He said that an impact on voting is more likely in a negative way - a lot of anti climate change proposals are vote losers. He thinks that the main way environment will be important is in its repositioning of the Conservatives, as it can be used as a way to make voting Conservative more credible again, and seen as more outward looking. It is interesting then, that even with the Conservative's big push on envionmental issues, Labour and Conservatives are pretty equal in the polls on this issue - it is the Liberal Democrats who are considered to have the best environmental policies.
Martyn Williams, from Friend of the Earth, said that it is not just down to Cameron that Labour has lost the lead on environmental issues, he thinks Labour are just not performing well enough. He thinks it is important to focus on the fact that we can cut greenhouse gas emissions by spending government money, not just taxing, for example by providing people with grants to insulate their homes. Where Cameron has been successful with environmental issues, it is important to note that many Conservative councils are opposing wind farms, which obviously slightly diffuses the message.
Phil Woolas MP, Minister for (or against!) Climate Change, said that we have to create more of an understanding about the economics of climate change. He spoke of how the UK is leading the global debate in the area, and will be one of the few countries in the world that meets their Kyoto target.
A conclusion from the debate was that there needs to be some upside about environmental changes, it can't just be about stopping people doing things, after all it would be very difficult to win an election that way.
Ed Balls MP - Keynote Speech at Progress Annual Conference
On Saturday, I attended the Progress Annual Conference. Progress 'seek to promote open debate and discussion of progressive ideas and policies.' The overall subject of the conference was 'Towards the General Election: How can Labour win?'
The first speech of the day was by Rt Hon Ed Balls MP, Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families.
His speech covered the NHS, reiterating the idea of a clear remit not just to treat ill health, but to prevent it. He spoke of an NHS that is more personalised and more focussed on the needs of individuals.
Of education, he had both good news and bad news. There were the best ever results at KS2, GCSE, A-Level this year, but the UK is still one of the lowest developed countries for children staying on post 16. Part of his solutions was that for 14-19 year olds, we need to break out of vocational qualifications being seen as second to academic qualifications.
One of the questions he was asked was a concern about whether the break of up of the previous Department for Education and Skills, had led to a weakening of education policy. He responded that we now actually have 2 education secretaries - John Denham for Adult Skills and Universities, and Ed Balls for education up to 19.
The first speech of the day was by Rt Hon Ed Balls MP, Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families.
His speech covered the NHS, reiterating the idea of a clear remit not just to treat ill health, but to prevent it. He spoke of an NHS that is more personalised and more focussed on the needs of individuals.
Of education, he had both good news and bad news. There were the best ever results at KS2, GCSE, A-Level this year, but the UK is still one of the lowest developed countries for children staying on post 16. Part of his solutions was that for 14-19 year olds, we need to break out of vocational qualifications being seen as second to academic qualifications.
One of the questions he was asked was a concern about whether the break of up of the previous Department for Education and Skills, had led to a weakening of education policy. He responded that we now actually have 2 education secretaries - John Denham for Adult Skills and Universities, and Ed Balls for education up to 19.
Thursday 1 November 2007
Motivation
Gordon's right, you can't educate those you can't motivate. Interesting then to see Gordon explicit in his support for the Independent Schools Sector. Not necessarily a natural area for Labour, it's good to see support from the Front Bench.
What then of the motivations of those who seek to dismantle the independent school sector?
Why would you want to eradicate world class education from the UK? Clearly, not everyone is independently educated - I wasn't - but I don't begrudge those (like my brother) who were.
Surely the key is to find to right school for every child - and that will differ from family to family. By ruling out options and choices on principle we risk sacrificing our children's education to an out-dated and in my view erroneous point of view.
What could be the motivation for that?
What then of the motivations of those who seek to dismantle the independent school sector?
Why would you want to eradicate world class education from the UK? Clearly, not everyone is independently educated - I wasn't - but I don't begrudge those (like my brother) who were.
Surely the key is to find to right school for every child - and that will differ from family to family. By ruling out options and choices on principle we risk sacrificing our children's education to an out-dated and in my view erroneous point of view.
What could be the motivation for that?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)