BBC – Press Office – The Century of the Self

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

One of the problems those fighting for action on climate change, consumerism and for a more democratic politics, is getting the general public to take notice.  This press release from the BBC, about ‘The Century of Self’, a TV series which explores Freud, the PR and advertising industries.  Describing how corporations and politicians have developed these tools to manipulate the public at large.

BBC – Press Office – The Century of the Self.

And of course, the political elite like to frighten people with the perceived threat from Muslim extremists, as an excuse for removing basic freedoms from the public.  The blog below looks into a recent press release from Europol, which seems to suggest there has been an increase in religious inspired terrorism in Europe.  Ylva Nilsson goes on the explain the report indicated, the increase in terrorism has been by separatists and left-wingers and not religiously motivated

http://blogs.euobserver.com/nilsson/2013/05/04/about-spin-and-diy/

GreenbuildEXPO and the Green Deal

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

On the 8th and 9th May 2013, Manchester Central hosted the GreenbuildEXPO, which was sponsored by Manchester City Council, which I attended on the 8th.  On initially walking around the various stands, the one thing that struck me was, that it was all geared up for the Green Deal.  I did overhear someone saying that Green Deal advisor’s must tell people that they receive a payment of £150, I wonder how many do?

The opening speech was by Ashley Crumbley, CEO of Wigan and Leigh Housing Company and on the board of Greater Manchester’s Low Carbon Economy Board.  He stated how great it was that the Government is going down the road of supporting Biomass (Why? Biomass is neither green or sustainable: Biomass myths).  Then he talked about Greater Manchester’s Carbon Hub of which he was a member and of the leadership of Sir Richard Leese (What leadership, he is taking part in a government initiative and it was Nottingham that led the way on Climate Change over a decade ago.  That is playing at ‘follow the leader’ not leadership).  He then went on to talk about Kevin Anderson, who keeps scaring us (as if what Kevin was saying was some sort of joke).  He mentioned that 2 degree C, is the limit between dangerous and very dangerous climate change!  And that Manchester is working to accelerate into reducing carbon emissions (where?).  He then went onto state the business case is still not clear.  Executives do not think there is clear guidance and also the finances are not there and of the cost of borrowing.  (What happened to Leese’s leadership?  If you save energy, you save money, simple and cost of borrowing when it is the lowest it has ever been, except those on the Green Deal, who is he kidding).  He than mentioned Greater Manchester is the second largest growing hub outside of London.  He lastly mentioned a Japanese organisation (what happened to Leese’s leadership, that a foreign organisation has to be brought in, to lead?  What about all the innovation that is supposed to be happening in Corridor Manchester and Manchester Science Park?) NEDO, who are setting up a eco-community trial, maybe in 2014?

I have thought for some time this ‘Green Deal’ only benefits large companies, especially the big 6. People are struggling to pay their energy bills and many in Manchester suffer from fuel poverty. Going to the GreenBuild Expo in Manchester only reinforced this impression. Then I read a letter in the Architects’ Journal’s Annual Green issue (28.02.13): Green Deal: costly…

‘Regarding your article about the Green Deal (AJ 31.01.13), I’ve felt like a little boy who told the Emperor he was in his underpants. I have worked as an architect on all types and sizes of projects, both public and private sector, I have recently attended many Green Deal-related workshops and seminars. I also sit on the Small Practice Committee at RIBA, where the Green Deal has been discussed at length. Here are my thoughts on the topic: The Green Deal seems to be a very expensive way to fund improvements, with the only beneficiaries being the City (via high-interest loans), the government (collecting VAT and meeting carbon reduction targets), assessors, suppliers and installers (making normal profit margins) and private energy firms, which will be almost encouraged by the government to increase rates to make the ‘Golden Rule’ work. The Green Deal appears to be aimed at people who do not have the money to pay for improvements up-front (which would be cheaper), but the government assumes these same people will have enough money to pay vastly higher energy bills. Property values could be adversely affected by Green Deal alterations and outstanding debt that will be attached to the property.  I would not want to buy a house with a charge on it, so assume no one else would, either.  My guess much of the equipment being promote now could be obsolete in less than 5 years – long before it is paid for.  I have not heard mention of Building Regs Approval of Green Deal improvements.  I have recently…’ Marianne Davys, Marianne Davys Architects.

I can only agree with Marianne’s comments but go further and say the emperor is absolutely stark naked and possibly stark raving mad.

Simple steps towards local prosperity

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

Here in Manchester, Manchester City Council has taken a very different approach.  This can be seen clearly in Hulme, with its redevelopment in the 1990s, an ASDA was one of the first retail units built.  The other smaller retail units and the very small market were built later, and as such have struggled to exist.  In fact, the market is now a B&Ms, with a few ex-stallholders still having a presence.  The council repeated their mistakes in Bradford, with the area being renamed New Eastlands and a large ASDA being built near to the stadium.  A large supermarket is to built in Ancoats, now referred to as New Islington, with very few local business still in existence.  The gentrification of Manchester has been a total failure but politicians still enthuse about Manchester’s success!

Simple steps towards local prosperity

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

Except for the use of foul language, which is unnecessary, this article does expose Tesco’s hypocrisy and cynicism. The Government has not got a clue about fiscal matters, making people poorer has a detriment of the local economy and eventually the nations economy. This Government and the opposition are driving this country into a hole, it will never recover from.

johnny void's avatarthe void

tesco-exploitationTesco claim to have called on the DWP to scrap benefit sanctions in a response to a letter asking them about their use of forced, unpaid workers.

In a humiliating snub to Iain Duncan Smith, the company set up their own workfare scheme outside of the Jobcentre system last year.  Tesco say that this scheme is entirely voluntary but add in the letter:  “I appreciate your concerns and can advise that Tesco have suggested to the Department of Work and Pensions that, to avoid any misunderstanding about the voluntary nature of the scheme, the risk of losing benefits that currently exists should be removed.”

Now unless Tesco are fibbing, if their scheme is outside of the various DWP workfare schemes, then it should be entirely voluntary.  The statement suggests that in order to avoid confusion Tesco would like to see all benefit sanctions removed.  Tesco want free workers without the…

View original post 437 more words

Will the government’s benefit raid turn us all into April Fools?

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

The list of changes to benefits and public services listed below, staying at home and not voting, is not an option.

Will the government’s benefit raid turn us all into April Fools?.

Can Wind, Water and Sunlight Power New York by 2050? – NYTimes.com

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

An interesting article in the New York Times about a report into the possibility of New York being energy efficient without fossil fuels and nuclear energy “Examining the Feasibility of Converting New York State’s All-Purpose Energy Infrastructure to One Using Wind, Water and Sunlight,”: .  The author of the article did call into question

– Does New York State need — for its own sake or the environment’s — to be an energy island? A lot of economists, and environmental analysts, would say no.

Yes it does need to be an energy island, on economic and environmental grounds, something environmentalists have been calling for.  A move away from large centralised power stations, fossil fuelled or nuclear, and to more smaller, localised power sources: Sustainable_community_energy_system.  Case studies of Sustainable Woking can be found at: Sustainable Woking case studies.  It took just one council official to drive this initiative through back in 1991 and yet Manchester – A Certain Future since its fanfare launch in 2009, has achieved exactly, nothing!  It is amazing what can be achieved with some effort and enthusiasm.

Can Wind, Water and Sunlight Power New York by 2050? – NYTimes.com.

Independent Science News | Food, Health and Agriculture Bioscience News » Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops » Print

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

Recent research on Genetically Modified (GMOs) crops, highlighting another issue with their widespread use.  Our regulators have allowed themselves to be convinced by the big corporations, and not taken rigorous independent testing of these crops before allowing their use.

Independent Science News | Food, Health and Agriculture Bioscience News » Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops » Print.

Mehadrin: New evidence of mislabelled settlement produce | Corporate Watch

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

I wrote to a number of our North West MEPs about EU’s trade with Israel, and received in reply, what I consider patronising nonsense.  That the only thing that matters is the economic benefits of trading with Israel and not the continuing criminal acts of  the illegal Sate of Israel.  As the article below, points out, the Israelis are still mislabelling produce, so they can sell it in the EU

Mehadrin: New evidence of mislabelled settlement produce | Corporate Watch.

Here is the response from Robert Sturdy MEP Conservative Spokesman,Vice-Chairman, International Trade Committee:

Thank you for your email regarding this subject. I have received a number of emails relating to this issue and have passed them onto my colleague Robert Sturdy who is the Vice-Chairman of the International Trade Committee and Conservative Spokesman on the same subject, therefore he has a better understanding of these issues, his response is outlined below.

Yours sincerely,

Jacqueline Foster MEP

MEP for North West England

Conservative Spokesman for Transport and Tourism

Response of Robert Sturdy MEP

Thank you for contacting me about the Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part, on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (CAA).

The EU-Israel CAA, until recently known as ACAA, is a technical framework agreement which aims at facilitating the elimination of technical barriers to trade in respect of certain industrial products, through the mutual recognition and harmonisation of technical standards.  The CAA could be hugely beneficial to the EU as it could significantly reduce costs of imported pharmaceutical products into the EU and save time-to-market conditions (saving 1-3 years for every market product) for imported medicinal products both from Israel and the EU.

Although primarily an economic agreement, I think that it has the potential of not only bringing benefits to European consumers and importers of pharmaceutical products but also of helping to foster stability in the region by facilitating further harmonisation between EU and Israeli Law in the relevant areas. 

From the perspectives of the Conservative members of the International Trade Committee (INTA), we believe that this particular agreement to be purely technical issue that should be judged on its trade merits alone. Furthermore it is simply a protocol to an already existing agreement between the EU and Israel. 

However, this is not to say that the wider issues surrounding the Agreement are not valid. The Conservatives in the European are acutely aware of the ongoing situation in the Middle East and are supportive of peace efforts based on the Oslo Peace accords, the road map for peace and the quartet with a viable two state solution based roughly upon the 1967 borders, with land for peace exchanges taking place. Both sides need to realise their commitments to Human Rights and International Law. The EU can play a major role in bringing peace to the Middle East but it must be seen as fair and impartial. A similar agreement with the Palestinian Authority was agreed a number of months ago and I believe it would be hypocritical of the EU if it rejects this agreement.

Having said this, the Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee (AFET), which has the experience and expertise to give this issue the attention it deserves, has provided an Opinion on the ramifications vis-à-vis the situation in the Middle East which was passed on to all INTA members. Both the AFET and INTA Committees decided to submit a question to the Commission in a bid to address some of their concerns with regards to this agreement. The Commission has offered concrete assurances that the agreement is in conformity with EU legal commitments. 

With regards, to the production of goods in the Occupied Territories, the EU has been clear it will not accept products originating from the Israeli Occupied Territories. This is prohibited under Community law which means that products coming from places (city, village or industrial zone) brought under Israeli Administration since 1967 are not entitled to benefit from preferential tariff treatment under the EU-Israel Association Agreement. This issue has been addressed in the INTA Committee in order to make sure that the CAA is in compliance with existing legislation.

The European Parliament voted in favour of the consent procedure concerning the additional protocol on conformity assessment on the 18th October 2012, with 379 votes in favour. 

We will continue to correspond with civil society from both sides of the dispute and we will continue to monitor developments. Rest assured that the wider political situation, alongside the economic benefits, will not be ignored by the INTA Committee or by the Parliament at large.

Yours sincerely,

Robert Sturdy MEP

MEP for East of England

Vice-Chairman of the International Trade committee

 

stickman’s corral: Review – Extreme Environment (Ivo Vegter)

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

Though I disagree with some of the points the reviewer makes during his review of Extreme Environment.  I think, he has highlighted the repeated nonsense of those who think ‘business-as-usual’ scenario is the one we should follow and environmentalist are just a bunch of ‘Nazis’.  The fact that Ivo Vegter uses Monckton as a source of knowledge to attack environmentalist, should give a clue to the his mindset.  There are points environmentalist can learn both from the book and the reviewer’s blog, for them to develop their case more hard-cast and understandable to all.

stickman’s corral: Review – Extreme Environment (Ivo Vegter).

Frontline Online: Where should we be looking for waste we can turn to energy? – The Ecologist

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

Another article which follows on from an earlier reblog I posted on the 12th January:Video: The Dark Side of the Green Economy
Inappropriate biofuel and biomass development can exasperate the pollution, poverty and starvation we already suffer from.  I cringe, every time I hear of a ‘ecohouse’ which has wood burners install as a ‘green’ answer to their space heating.  It is not, especially on our already overcrowded and polluted Island.  The CAT (Centre of Alternative Technology) has a lot to answer for, they have not really moved on since the 70s with regards to alternative technologies.  Wood used to be the main source of energy on these Islands, but it was becoming scarce by the 1700s and the Islands nearly deforested.  This changed with the onset of steam technology which allowed the exploitation of the ancient fossil fuel beneath our feet.  As the Ecologist article mentions, using waste organic waste is a way forward.  I have been pushing AD biogesters to turn organic waste to energy (Methane) which is happening all over the world.  But is still in its infancy in the UK, just as wave and tidal technologies are.  We should be looking at the Best Available Technology (BAT), instead of relying on 18th Century technologies which may be cheaper to build.

Frontline Online: Where should we be looking for waste we can turn to energy? – The Ecologist.