Climate talks in Durban

Have you been watching the latest David Attenborough series, Frozen Planet? One of the features of the programmes is the discussion of what happens to the wildlife as the ice cover recedes, at both poles. In the new Radio Times (out today, for next week's programmes) Attenborough writes 'a powerful message to the world leaders as they meet in Durban to discuss climate change'.

Accompanied by two of the stunning photographs we have come to expect from this series, he tells us that:

- the north polar ice is thinning from above and from below, and breaking up sooner and for longer each year
- the lack of ice inhibits the polar bears' hunting, so that a mother gives birth when she is in poor condition herself, raising the likelihood that her cubs won't survive
- the loss of south polar ice has been good for the king penguins of St Andrew's bay, South Georgia (they have more beach habitat, which suits them); but disastrous for Adélie penguins on the southern part of the antarctic peninsula (they rely on ice-loving krill for food)
- the loss of ice reduces the reflectivity of the planet, bouncing less of the sun's energy back into space, allowing more heat to warm the climate
- the melting water from the ice caps raises the sea level and affects the circulation of the ocean currents, changing weather patterns all over the world
- the antarctic Wilkins ice shelf (that used to be the size of Jamaica) started to break up in 2008; by the time of filming Frozen Planet it was just a litter of floating icebergs. A likely next break-up is one of the ice-shelves that acts as a 'plug', holding back the huge glaciers esting on the continental land itself . . . once one of these plugs melts, immense quantities of ice will start to flow into the sea, causing major sea-level rises all over the world . . . and half the world's population lives in coastal areas vulnerable to flooding in such a scenario.

For many years, climate campaigners have been urging Attenborough to speak out because he has the 'ear' and the trust of a huge public. But precisely because of that trust, he was reluctant to speak for a long time - he had to be certain, to get past any doubts about the science. He was wary of abusing trust he had. But Frozen Planet is now his platform from which to speak. In the seven episodes he has charted the ice, the oceans, the wildlife, the plants, the people . . . and the rapid changes now ocurring, faster than almost anyone had predicted.

So, in these circumstances, what can we expect from the Durban talks? Not a lot, if news reporting is to be believed. In the middle of last month, John Ashton (the Foreign Office's special representative for climate change), wrote in The Guardian that there is 'no plan B':

The lesson the world is learning the hard way from the financial crisis is that there is only one boat and we are all in it. To stay afloat, we need rules tough enough to stop systemic risks becoming systemic collapses. This lesson is as true for the environment as it is for the economy. A key battle in the campaign to build an effective system of global rules will shortly take place in Durban, where the UN climate negotiations reopen at the end of this month. The International Energy Agency [IEA] has set the scene, with the timely warning in its new World Energy Outlook that we are way off track to avoid dangerous climate change, and that the window for effective action is closing fast.

There really is no plan B for the climate. A voluntary framework will not be enough to keep us within the 2C limit of manageable climate change. Unmanageable climate change will precipitate systemic collapses, including of our food and water security. Success or failure will depend on governments convincing investors that they are determined to enact the policies necessary to drive private capital towards a low-carbon future. In the boardroom a voluntary pledge from a government sounds rather like "maybe".

The IEA report that Ashton refers to is significant - the IEA is a respected organisation, known for its caution and its careful assessment of long-term trends. The point being made in this report is that the infrastructure we are building now will lock us into those fuel consumption patterns for decades to come. Power stations built now will be emitting CO2 for a long time. So, to be building climate-changing power sources at this time is the exact opposite of what we need to be doing. Our infrastructure plans need to be way ahead, not lagging behind, in terms of limiting carbon emissions.

It should be encouraging that Ashton, on behalf of the UK coalition government, wrote (later in the same article):

Success or failure will depend on governments convincing investors that they are determined to enact the policies necessary to drive private capital towards a low-carbon future. In the boardroom a voluntary pledge from a government sounds rather like 'maybe'. That's why in the UK we have set legally binding carbon budgets through the Climate Change Act.

And similarly, it should be encouraging that Chris Huhne, the government's Energy Secretary, claims that a

'new global climate change treaty is not a luxury'. However, a recent Freedom of Information request has revealed that the UK coalition government is actively supporting the Canadian government to try to head off unfavourable treatment of the oil extracted from the tar sands there. The proposal is that this oil should carry a higher carbon 'tariff' because of the pollution created by its extraction and refinement. This would make it unattractive to other countries not wanting to import such a carbon burden into their own economies. This obviously impacts on the economics of extracting the oil

Nasa scientist James Hansen says if the oil sands were exploited as projected it would be "game over for the climate"

The prognostications for the Durban talks have not been good - reports of major players wanting a 'voluntary' arrangement, of postponing doing anything until 2020, and so on. National politics constrain international action - we all know that Obama can't deliver a ratification of any treaty because the Republican-controlled House of Representatives won't agree. And if the rich industrialised countries won't restrain their emissions, the rest of the world won't offer to restrain its pace of economic growth. And governments around the world, in these times of economic difficulty, see clearly that their electorates don't put climate change at the top of their lists of concerns . . . or indeed anywhere on their lists of concerns. Governments know they won't get re-elected by significantly increasing the costs of petrol, diesel, gas, electricity . . . and hence the costs of all goods manufactured or transported using fossil fuels.

The one glimmer of new positive action has been that developing countries are working together to highlight their situation. John Vidal reported that:

Diplomats from some developing countries may "occupy" the UN climate negotiations that begin on Monday in Durban by staging sit-ins and boycotts over the lack of urgency in the talks.

The move follows a call by the former president of Costa Rica for vulnerable countries to refuse to leave the talks until "substantial" progress has been made.

José María Figueres (Costa Rica) said:

We went to Copenhagen [in 2009] with the illusion we could reach an equitable agreement. We went to Cancún [in 2009] where we saw slight but not sufficient progress. Frustration is now deep and building. Now we hear that we will need more conferences. Sometime we have to get serious. We should be going to Durban with the firm conviction that we do not come back until we have made substantial advances.

The Alliance of Small Island States, which represents some of the countries most at risk from global warming, has called any moves to delay a new treaty "reckless and irresponsible".

James Hansen (mentioned above) was the person who first said that the ice caps would respond quickly to global warming, and he was right. His stark message in his most recent book may be summed up as this: the situation is worse than we are being told, your governments are lying through their teeth, nothing is being done, you can’t compromise with nature and the laws of physics; consequently, civil resistance may soon be the only way forward – it is up to you. It was published before the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Summit, and the outcomes of that event gave us nothing with which to challenge his message.

It was echoed, following the 2010 Cancún Climate Summit, by Gustavo Esteva, a Mexican activist and founder of the Universidad de la Tierra (University of the Earth) in Oaxaca, Mexico. He writes:

In the efforts to protect our planet from ourselves, the high level talks at Cancún were our last chance … and they failed. But we can learn from this sad episode: we must stop asking governments and international organisations for solutions that they don’t want to – and can’t – implement . . . All governments, even the most majestic, are composed of ordinary mortals, trapped in bureaucratic labyrinths and fighting vested interests that tie their hands, heads and wills . . . We must look . . . to the people, and what we can do ourselves . . . The time has come to change the system, not the planet. That depends on us, not on those who gain status and income from the system.

 There are many things we can do before we get to the point of civil disobedience, but the recent wave of 'Occupy' movements around the world show that there are significant numbers of people willing to take that step. We can all take action on our own carbon emissions. We can all set a good example to others. And we all need to take steps in relation to both local and national politics to help ensure that climate and environmental campaigns remain in the forefront of people's and politicians minds.

Quakers support OccupyLSX

At the end of last week, Britain Yearly Meeting put out a press release supporting the OccupyLSX group, best known for their encampment alongside St Paul's Cathedral. The press release follows immediately below, and the full text of the statement to which it refers is below that.

*  *  *  *  *

Dated Thursday 17 November

As the City of London Corporation gives notice to the Occupy London Stock Exchange activists to clear the "public highway" by 6pm this evening, Quakers in Britain have made a public declaration of support for the protesters.

A statement from Quakers in Britain says that they share the concern for global economic justice and sustainability expressed by the Occupy movement. And speaking from their long tradition of nonviolence, praise the peaceful nature of the Occupy movement.

The Quaker statement, signed by Paul Parker, Recording Clerk, goes on to say: “Quakers in Britain agree with the statement of Occupy London Stock Exchange that our current economic system is unsustainable. It is undemocratic and unjust. We need alternatives. We, too, ‘want structural change towards authentic global equality. The world’s resources must go towards caring for people and the planet, not the military, corporate profits or the rich,’ (as in Occupy LSX initial statement).

“The idea that another world is possible is crucial for us too,” the Quaker statement continues. “We cannot accept the injustice and destructiveness of our economic system as it is. At the annual meeting of Quakers in Britain in August 2011 we wrote: ‘We need to ask the question whether this system is so broken that we must urgently work with others of faith and good will to put in its place a different system in which our testimonies can flourish’. We support the process initiated by the Occupy movement to create a path towards a different future, and to develop it democratically.”

The statement also says that Quakers greatly value the movement’s peaceful quality. “We pray that this can be actively supported by all, including the civil and ecclesiastical authorities who have the difficult task of maintaining simultaneously both public order and the right of peaceful protest.”

*  *  *  *  *

The full text of the statement reads:

“Quakers in Britain share the concern for global economic justice and sustainability expressed by the Occupy movement. We agree with the statement of Occupy London Stock Exchange that our current economic system is unsustainable. It is undemocratic and unjust. We need alternatives. We, too, “want structural change towards authentic global equality. The world’s resources must go towards caring for people and the planet, not the military, corporate profits or the rich,” (as stated in Occupy LSX initial statement). We are grateful to the various Occupy groups for raising these issues so passionately and respond to the deep spiritual significance that we recognise in the movement.

“Those of us who have visited have been welcomed, and found the Occupy sites an exceptional learning experience. We honour the values and positive ways of working within Occupy communities: without hierarchy, based on care for others, open to the contributions of all and searching for the truth. These are in harmony with our Quaker practice and business methods.

“The idea that another world is possible is crucial for us too. We cannot accept the injustice and destructiveness of our economic system as it is. At the annual meeting of Quakers in Britain in August 2011 we wrote: “We need to ask the question whether this system is so broken that we must urgently work with others of faith and good will to put in its place a different system in which our testimonies can flourish”. We support the process initiated by the Occupy movement to create a path towards a different future, and to develop it democratically.

“We hope that individual Quakers will continue to provide support, both moral and practical, to the movement. We greatly value its peaceful quality and we pray that this can be actively supported by all, including the civil and ecclesiastical authorities who have the difficult task of maintaining simultaneously both public order and the right of peaceful protest.”

Signed Paul Parker, Recording Clerk for Quakers in Britain

*  *  *  *  *

See also: Facebook.com/occupylondon and Twitter.com/occupylsx

No peace without justice

'No peace without justice' is a slogan that's been around for a very long time. It's not a 'command' so much as a statement of truth - that peace cannot be established where there is no justice. It's now also the name of an international non‑profit organisation that works for the protection and promotion of human rights, democracy, the rule of law and international justice.

The Good Lives Project's concerns are about sustainability, and there is already inequity of climate impacts around the world, and these will become even more stark as global termperatures and sea levels both rise. So the wider field of peace and justice work should be of concern to all of us whose primary focus may be climate change.

For 20 years Woodbrooke has shared its campus with an organisation called Responding to Conflict (RTC). RTC is a non-governmental organisation that works to transform conflict and build peace.

It was founded in 1991 by Simon Fisher, whose 2004 Swarthmore Lecture (Spirited Living: waging conflict, building peace) set out his passion, vision, strategies and hopes for this kind of work.

RTC has its offices at Woodbrooke and uses our residential and conference facilities to run training courses. It has established itself as a leader in the field of conflict transformation and its handbook Working with Conflict: Skills and Strategies for Action is acknowledged as a key resource for practitioners, trainers and academics throughout the world.


RTC has trained practitioners from more than 70 countries, including those where some of the world's most violent conflicts are. It has provided specialist advice and consultancy services to governments, the United Nations Development Programme, and leading international NGOs and charities. It has designed and managed long-term programmes in the Middle East, the Balkans, East Africa and South East Asia, and is currently facilitating and working with partners on programmes in Nepal, as well as providing long-term support to programmes and projects in Kenya and the Middle East.

And my reason for writing about this just now is that last Saturday (12 November) RTC was awarded the Coventry International Prize for Peace and Reconciliation. The Prize aims to recognise groups and individuals who have made a major contribution to grassroots peace-building in situations of conflict around the world. This prize is awarded jointly by the Lord Mayor's Office, Coventry University, Coventry Cathedral and the Diocese of Coventry.

The City of Coventry, along with the Cathedral, has taken a corporate lead on issues of international reconciliation since the bombing of the Cathedral in World War 2. Out of the charred ruins, two symbolic crosses were created (one of wood, one of nails). Crosses of Nails were given to organisations, particularly in Germany, as post-war reconciliation work startedm, and in 1970 the Community of the Cross of Nails was formed, attached to the cathedral, to work for peace, justice and reconcilation.

Growing out of this history are a number of related initiatives. There is an annual Lord Mayor's Peace Festival, supported by the City Council, which has been running for many years under various guises. Coventry University has a Centre for Peace and Reconciliation Studies. The joint working of the City, the University, the Diocese and the Cathedral has led to the current version of the Peace Prize, awarded annually during the Festival.

The physical Prize that's awarded was designed by Coventry artist and jeweller Rachel Sutton.





Professor Alan Hunter, Director of Coventry University's Centre for Peace and Reconciliation Studies, said:

This inspiring choice comes at a time of violence and protest around the world. It is therefore critical to identify and train effective peace-builders, who can return to areas of conflict and place themselves in positions of influence in their own communities. Responding to Conflict does this extremely well, and is therefore a worthy winner.

Chair of RTC's Trustees, Cliff Allum sees the award as recognition of the energy, optimism and bravery of the people associated with RTC over the years. He believes the organisation has never been afraid to take up the challenges of addressing conflict, even in areas where many could not see that change was possible. RTC Programme Director, Simon Weatherbed said:

It is a great honour to receive this Prize. Building and sustaining peace is not an easy task and requires long-term commitment. Many of the people we have worked with have continued to transform violent conflicts and countless people’s lives, and in honour of these remarkable people and all who have worked with or supported Responding to Conflict, I am proud to accept this prestigious award.

RTC's work will continue and Woodbrooke will continue to support them.

The winter 'flu jab - a parable of experience

I went this morning to get my winter 'flu jab. I'm not yet in a priority category (four years to go for that!) and I've never taken the step of having one before. But earlier this autumn I had a seriously nasty and prolonged chest infection and decided that I didn't want to risk another respiratory infection this winter.

The procedure at my GP surgery was that the Saturday morning clinic on 5 November would use up whatever vaccine they had left after priority cases had been done.

There's been quite a lot in the news about low vaccine uptake - repeated reminders to people in the vulnerable categories to go and get the jab. I had no idea how much vaccine they would have left at the surgery, so I arrived early to be near the front of the queue . . . and found the line already out of the door and into the street. And many in the queue were actually in the priority categories and were late responding to the letter they'd received.

So, no shortage of take-up here . . . but this is a nice middle-class little town, a lot university staff live here, and it's the sort of place full of the sort of people who know how to get the best out of public services.

While I was in the queue I was reading today's paper reporting on the 'new Jarrow marchers' arriving in London. They've walked 400 miles from Jarrow to Tottenham to protest against youth unemployment, as the figures get worse by the day. The original Jarrow March was in October 1936, a protest march against unemployment and extreme poverty suffered in North East England. The 207 marchers travelled from the town of Jarrow to the Palace of Westminster in London, a distance of almost 300 miles (480 km), to lobby Parliament. This new march left on the exact anniversary (1 October), but while the original march arrived in London on 31 October, the young people arrive today, 5 November, for a rally in Trafalgar Square and people are urged to support them by joining the for the last mile and the rally.

Since they started the march, the Occupy LSX protest ('LSX' stands for London Stock Exchange) has been at St Paul's Cathedral and widely in the news - another protest concerned with inequity. Today at 2pm they will be hosting a rally at St Paul’s Churchyard calling for a fairer, more just society and afterwards they will go to join the Jarrow marchers in Trafalgar Square. The only MP speaking at the rally will be Caroline Lucas from the Green Party - no Labour politican is standing up to support them; shame on them.

And what's this got to do with my 'flu jab? Well, it's too easy to point the finger - it's the bankers, it's the government, it's "them" . . . while ignoring the fact that we're all of  us deeply in hock to this unjust, and now unstable, system. While all this protest is going on, in the past few days the world leaders at the G20 summit in Cannes have failed to put in place measures to stabilise the Eurozone. It all seems rather remote, but our savings, pensions, and overall economic well-being are implicated. Those on the new Jarrow march, already disadvantaged, will be diproportionately further affected by the fallout from the problems of the Euro.

Politicians who want to court middle-class support by appealing to the 'squeezed middle' fail to be honest about the fact that the educated middle classes will still come out of the wreckage in a better position than the people taking part in - and represented by - the new Jarrow March. None of has clean hands - the Occupy movement's appeal to 'the 99%' must not be allowed to obscure the deep and significant differences among that 99% - as George Orwell pointed out (in Animal Farm, published in 1945): some of us are more equal than others.

And Quaker John Woolman, writing his Plea for the poor in the mid eighteenth century, said:

May we look upon our treasures, and the furniture of our houses, and the garments in which we array ourselves, and try whether the seeds of war have nourishment in these our possessions.