I thought I would post about some of the wild-life we have in Hulme. And how an inner city area can be made attractive to wild-life by showing some of my visitors.
A blog which reflects my own opinions about the (de)regeneration of Manchester. And how it has achieved nothing but put money into property developers hands. All history of Manchester is slowly being erased, with Ancoats Infirmary to be demolished. The blog is quite lengthy but worth a read.
As part of my objection to MMU’s plans for Birley Fields campus. I raised the matter of air pollution and how the development, especially the stopping up of certain roads, would increase to poor quality in Hulme. I especially emphasised that it would have a detrimental affect of the pupils of St. Philips Primary School. I also criticised their traffic, air and noise assessment as not being adequate or of being representative of the actual conditions.
The local councillors, including the councillor for the Environment, the Planning Officer and Planning Committee, ignored such concerns. If fact, the Planning Committee never conducted a site visit, even though this is a major development. Hulme already suffers from a high rate of ill-health, mental and physical.
No one in Government, National and Local are taking this situation seriously. In fact at a recent council meeting, it was stated that the emissions from Manchester Airport, do not fall on Manchester but the North Atlantic? And the National Government does not want to comply with any EU regulations, because they say they are bad for big business?
I agree with most of what she says, the UK has not done enough to stop us having an energy crisis in the coming years. But, I disagree about the need for nuclear, it has been the nuclear industry which has attracted investment where as renewables have received a pittance. Even Stern in his report, stated that it would take to long to get new nuclear built to prevent irreversible climate change and an energy crisis.
It is amazing that politicians need reports to tell them, what most people understand to be common sense. Though this is about social clubs and is sponsor by bingo clubs. It does highlight the importance of community groups and volunteers. This is why most of us were shocked when Manchester City Council, shut down Youth Clubs. They also do not realise the importance of Public Houses, as meeting places as free meeting places for community groups. In fact,in Manchester City Council, has actively worked to shut down any community group which it feels threatened by. Instead of listening what these groups have to say and working with them, to bring about a win/win situation.
I was asked to do a post on why environmental groups which are predominately white middle-class, do not attract more of the working-class? This is only some thoughts I had whilst doing some gardening and is not intended to answer the question at this present time.
The middle-class environmental activists dismiss the working-class (social & council housing tenants), as not caring about the environmental, even to the extent of scorning them.
They should stop to think, who is causing the most environmental damage? The working-class or the business and political classes? Who has failed the World most, the poor or rich?
The working-class are bombarded by advertising TV programmes and films showing how well off everyone else is. So they aspire to this, this of course the point of advertising and the consumer oriented media. These are the people who can least afford the things advertised, but they feel they have failed, if they do not have the things it would appear everyone else has.
So instead of telling those with the least, that they should do more, the environmentalist should be getting the message across to businesses and politicians, that they have to change. The way to try and change the ‘working-class’ altitude ( as well as banning advertising), is to educate the children in how to live more environmentally friendly. Such as schemes promoted by the Soil Association, which is the Food for Life Partnership. To empower the working-class by actually involving them with the decision making at the start of any project being proposed.
An interesting video from Oxfam, describing the concepts of ”The Doughnut’ theory of planetary and social boundaries within which we humans can thrive safely.
There is also a paper on the subject available: A Safe and Just Space for Humanity
And she has a blog on the subject and is keen for people to become involved: Kate Raworth
The 6 minute speech given by Severn Suzuki, who spoke at the 1992 Rio Summit at 12 years old. The speech was a written from contributors from all over the Globe.
After yesterday’s council meeting on Steady State Economy, I am saddened to read the Green Alliance recommending the views of this writer. Like yesterdays meeting, it is all about ‘Growth’, not about living within our means.
This is a guest post by Paul Polman, chief executive of Unilever. It is an extract from his contribution to a collection of writings about the Earth Summit, Rio+20: where it should lead, published by Green Alliance and the RSPB.
These are turbulent times for the world and for the business community, addressing this requires governments and business to work together to create the right framework for sustainable development at Rio+20.
We need to find a new model of growth, one that is equally conscious of the need of people and of the planet, and puts sustainability and equality at the heart of consumption. Sustainable growth must benefit the world’s hungriest billion people as well as the rising middle classes.
View original post 700 more words
This morning I attended a Environmental Scrutiny Committee meeting, where the public were invited to attend. Some of the committee members appeared pleased that a number of the public were their, with some of public putting forward short presentations. Bot when the Council’s economic advisers gave their presentation, my heart dropped. They were advocating ‘business-as-usual’, even though this is the cause of our present financial crisis. Also a councillor dismissed the importance of local food production, stating he wanted his electorate to stop smoking and drinking. He obviously does not understand, this is due to the inequalities of the present system and their lack of empowerment.
And in the workshop I attended, once again a councillor argued that the airport was low carbon, as the emissions did not affect Manchester but were felt elsewhere. And it was best the expanded Manchester Airport, because if aviation went elsewhere it would not be a low carbon as that of Manchester Airport. The attitude of some of the councillors are totally blinkered, they cannot see the real damage the airport is doing to Manchester and the surrounding area. And things will get worse with the building of the by-pass, so motorist can get to the airport faster instead of using public transport. These views were reinforced by Richard Leese, he even decided that one of the action points would not be Manchester’s but AGMA’s (Association of Greater Manchester Authorities).
It would appear the council leadership have not taken any notice of the mass of information on the unsustainability of ‘business-as-usual’. Someone from AGMA, when someone said the council needed to show leadership, said Richard Leese had showed leadership because he gave a speech! This is not leadership, in fact Richard Leese, is very good at saying the council is not responsible for this, they cannot do this or that. He does not show leadership, but is a bully boy who wants to get his own way no matter what others think.
It is a pity this video from the European Environmental Agency was not available to show them. Though, I doubt it would make much difference to the likes of Richard Leese