Activists who locked themselves to a plane to prevent it deporting people to West Africa have been given community orders and suspended sentences.

The protest took place in 2017. Most of those on board the plane were being deported following failed immigration cases, though some had not yet received a final decision. Two have since been given leave to appeal, which the activists say justifies their actions.

The conviction of the activists in December for endangering the safety of an airport was criticised by human rights campaigners as being excessive.

Immigration system

However, the sentencing judge Christopher Morgan QC, said that although such action would “ordinarily result in custodial sentences”, they “didn’t have a grievous intent as some may do who commit this type of crime”.

In an article for the Guardian, protester Emma Hughes wrote: “We are a group of peaceful protesters, but the state has convicted us of a terror-related offence. This was done without any transparency by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), and neither the CPS nor the attorney general have explained this decision. 

“This is why we have already lodged our appeal. Amnesty International has described our convictions as ‘a crushing blow for human rights’, and we cannot just accept that and walk away.” 

Jonathan Bartley, co-leader of the Green Party, welcomed the ruling. “The actions of the Stansted 15 exposed the brutality of secretive charter flights.

“We need root and branch reform of our immigration system with an end to the use of charter flights for deportations immediately,” he said.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “We only return those with no legal right to remain in the UK, including foreign national offenders and failed asylum seekers.

“We expect people to leave the country voluntarily but, where they do not, the Home Office will seek to enforce their departure.”

A flight deporting 29 Jamaicans left the UK yesterday. Crimes committed by the individuals include murder, rape and serious violence, and had a total combined sentence of over 150 years imprisonment, according to the Home Office. None were British citizens or members of the Windrush generation, it added.

This Author

Catherine Early is a freelance environmental journalist and chief reporter for the Ecologist. She can be found tweeting at @Cat_Early76.

From the 6-14 April 2019, Surfers Against Sewage (SAS) and the Iceland Foods Charitable Foundation, will mobilise more than 30,000 volunteers at 500 beach, river, city and mountain locations across the UK in its Big Spring Beach Clean: Summit to Sea.

SAS is calling for inspired community leaders from all walks of life to help remove and track plastic pollution in their local area.

The Big Spring Beach Clean is the UK’s biggest coordinated beach clean activity, which has brought together over 150,000 volunteers over the last five years, contributing an incredible two million hours of volunteer time to protecting and conserving our beaches for everyone to enjoy.

Plastic pollution

These vital community events not only remove dangerous plastics from our unique and precious coastal environment, but also indicate where action needs to be taken further upstream to reduce the leakage into and impact of plastics on our ocean and beaches.

A recent report showed that plastic makes up 70 per cent of all the litter in the ocean, and if no action is taken to reduce its input, then it is forecast to treble within the next ten years.

Almost a decade ago, SAS pioneered the Plastic Pollution Audit at our beaches to identify which plastics were washing up on our tidelines. This year SAS is conducting the research again to map and monitor plastics, and signpost where urgent action needs to be taken to reduce plastic pollution.

Hugo Tagholm, CEO of Surfers Against Sewage says “The Big Spring Beach Clean is an annual celebration of our beaches, uniting thousands of like-minded volunteers to take action for our ocean.

“We are excited to be working with the Iceland Foods Charitable Foundation to invite anyone, anywhere to lead a community clean-up with us to tackle plastic pollution. We can all be ocean guardians from our summits to the sea, from our river banks to city streets. Register your event today.”

Common passion

Richard Walker, trustee of the Iceland Foods Charitable Foundation, said “Iceland Foods Charitable Foundation and Surfers Against Sewage share a common passion for tackling the scourge of plastic head on, and we know that this is an issue that resonates with an ever-growing number of people.

“Our Iceland stores are at the heart of high streets up and down the country and we recruit our store colleagues locally, making us a true community retailer. We are delighted to be backing SAS in encouraging individuals and organisations throughout the UK to help make a difference to the quality of their local environment through The Big Spring Beach Clean.”

SAS hopes to engage a wide range of people to take part in protecting the ocean from summit to sea.

Individuals can find their nearest clean or volunteer to lead their own clean by clicking here or by emailing SAS. All Clean Leaders will receive a Big Spring Beach Clean kit, a limited edition SAS insulated Hydro Flask, a step-by-step guide to organizing their clean, along with support and guidance from the SAS Team in organising their event.

This Article 

This article is based on a press release from Surfers Against Sewage. 

2018 was a particularly grim year for environmentalists. The IPCC special report spelled out that we had just twelve years to avert climate collapse; extreme weather events continued to become more frequent and intense; natural assets and biodiversity continued their decline.  

At the same time, long-term economic restructuring and austerity underpinned an increase in personal precariousness and social fragmentation – creating space for the rise of strongman politicians who stepped their countries back from the hard-won commitments and obligations made just years earlier on the international stage. 

But of course the world did not get to this perilous position over night. For decades, corporations and broader capitalist economic structures have been playing a key role in driving or exacerbating these trends. A relentless focus on profit maximisation for shareholders – at the expense of other stakeholders, such as workers, and the natural world – have consistently depleted human, social and natural systems. 

Distinctive values

As we look ahead to the next decade, it is almost certain these terrifying trends will continue on their current trajectory – unless we change the way we do business. 

Community enterprise shows there is another way. Also known as community business or community-based social enterprise, the term refers to organisations or initiatives that are locally rooted, trade for the benefit of the community, and are owned by or accountable to the local community, leading to broad community impact.

These enterprises are entrenched in distinctive values: participation, self-help, solidarity, transparency, caring, and enjoyment. Diverse in nature, they encompass a range of business models, including co-operatives, social enterprises, and others. They have a long history, too, from mediaeval guilds and friendly societies to philanthropic model communities.

Community enterprises operate across a wide range of subsectors, from community energy to co-operative pubs and shops, and are supported by a range of local and national infrastructure organisations.

Power to Change, an independent charitable trust that seeks to strengthen community enterprise in England, estimates there may be as many as 7,000 such organisations operating in the UK, with a total market income of up to £1.2 billion in 2017. 

Transformative impact

Last year, Power for Change commissioned leading international sustainability non-profit Forum for the Futureto develop a vision and roadmap for community enterprise in 2030, by and for the sector.

Over the course of 2018, we spoke to more than 40 community enterprises, plus another 20 experts who are active in the field or have a perspective on changes impacting it – from government agencies and think tanks to NGOs and regional/sectoral umbrella groups.

Based on the findings of this research, we believe that with a clear focus and the right support, community enterprise has the potential to transform people’s lives and contribute to significant, positive shifts in the economy by 2030.

By becoming much more visible and influential in local economies, community enterprises can come to represent a far greater percentage of economic activity and employment; and through establishing a clearer collective voice and putting local people and accountability at its core, community enterprise will be increasingly followed by – not swallowed by – the mainstream.

Community enterprises can also play a major role in renewing the natural world, by protecting and restoring communities’ local ecologies, and operating in a sustainable way. They can enable greater local self-sufficiency and affordability, too, in areas such as food and housing, through local co-ownership and coproduction. 

Local services

Community enterprises can help drive a renewal in the importance of place, by creating, retaining and distributing wealth locally, building local relationships and improving local services.

By owning assets, sharing power and bringing people together, they can steer away from the individualistic, materialistic, extractive economy of today, to one that nurtures and restores a sense of community and the natural resources upon which we all depend. 

By doing all of this, community enterprises can enable people to impact global issues, locally.

And it’s happening already, albeit on a small scale. Sacred Earth is a biodynamic, community-owned land project that produces and sells biochar – a charcoal made from heating agricultural waste, which sequesters carbon and enhances soil. Having reclaimed the 40-acre site of an abandoned brickworks in East Sussex, its vision is to create a place where soil degradation and species decline are reversed.

Another example is the community-led Food Network in Oldham, which brings together residents, communities and other organisations to work co-operatively to improve access to fresh, affordable and healthy food. With Oldham Council, it has launched a £135,000 Food Enterprise Fund targeted at community groups who want to generate an income through food and growing.

Taking action 

To realise the vision for community enterprise in 2030, we identified eight major shifts that need to happen. Chief among them is a greater proportion of income being earned income (i.e. through the sale of goods or provision of services), combined with funding from a wider range of sources – to build financial independence and power. 

Another major shift would be meaningful changes in our underlying economic, social and cultural norms, to create a supportive environment for positive citizen and social action.

We also recommended priorities for different actors and influencers within the system:

• Community enterprises can themselves play a central role in defining and communicating their purpose and impact, leveraging the trust they command in communities.

• Central government can create a more favourable environment for mechanisms like asset transfer, the Community Right to Bid, or setting up community (renewable) energy schemes. Ministers should encourage civil servants to view citizens as active participants in the creation of public services, and make it easier for smaller, more local organisations to play a role in service delivery. 

• Citizens can assist in the development and growth of the movement by participating in it directly – as users of products and services, from groceries to energy; from community media subscriptions to community finance. They can participate as employees or volunteers, by attending events, or by investing in community enterprise, for example through community shares.

But what can you do to enable the growth and development of community business as a means to renewing our society and the natural world? To explore this question, please take a look at our vision and report, or contact Daniel Ford.

This Author

Simon Lee is a sustainable development expert and advisor who worked with Forum for the Future as a principal strategist during the creation of the 2030 vision for community enterprise 

Climate change is having a devastating impact on the planet, despite Trump’s bizarre intimations that the recent cold weather in North America is proof that global warming is welcome to “come back.”

Climate change is not weather from day to day, but a macro-pattern of temperatures – such that the planet will continue to experience winter for some time even if the record high temperatures in the year 2000 had twice as many record highs than lows as compared to fifty years earlier. The reality is that, according to the UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme), the planet is deteriorating more quickly than any counter-measures can undo the damage – despite the world’s recycling programmes, refill-designed packaging (also called “looping”),  and the hazards of dental waste being addressed within the field of dentistry.

One person in Australia responded to Trump’s tweet: “It’s 122 degrees in Australia right now you freaking idiot. Fish are washing up dead on the beaches from the heat.” 

Internet of fungus

The earth’s responses to climate change are heartbreaking. Hundreds of thousands of fish have been killed in New South Wales, and the prolonged dry periods are resulting in poorer water quality Australia, potentially ushering forth a health and sanitation crisis.

While many advances in green energy have been made just to the north in Brisbane, the region’s export economy is still dependent upon coal. Jump further south to Tasmania and the forest fires there are ravaging the island with the recent phenomenon of dry lightning storms in the south-west where the rainforest and grass plains have been steadily vanishing since 2000.

Paradoxically, the very forests which are being destroyed are the very sites where climate change could otherwise be prevented.

For instance, we already know that mycelium underneath the ground – an expansive network of underground threads which is often called the “Internet of fungus” – plays a huge role in maintaining a healthy ecosystem underneath vast tracts of land and forests, balancing and communicating between the roots of various plants.

But what came to like more recently is even more compelling from an ecological standpoint: termites have been discovered to help forests survive climate change.

Ecological insurance

An entomologist at the University of York, Hannah Griffiths, has been working in the Maliau forest in Borneo and maintains  that these termites function as “ecological insurance,” explaining how they protect the forest from the stresses of climate change as these creatures have the ability to chew fallen leaves and dead wood.

By  keeping the fallen flora in check, these creatures are recycling the nutrients of this dead material back into the soil to be used again by other flora and fauna while also preserving certain conditions of moisture on the forest floor, thus mitigating the effects of draught.

In their study, Griffiths and her colleagues compared the forest floor during drought and non-draoght years, using a control space of the forest floor which was entirely rid of termites as opposed to parts where termites proliferated. The results of their study published this month in Science were shocking—the parts of the forest floor with termites were resistant to drought.

This increase resulted in accelerated litter decomposition, elevated soil moisture, greater soil nutrient heterogeneity, and higher seedling survival rates during the extreme El Niño drought of 2015-2016.

Their work shows how an invertebrate group enhances ecosystem resistance to drought, providing evidence that the dual stressors of climate change and anthropogenic shifts in biotic communities will have various negative consequences for the maintenance of rainforest ecosystems.

Floor decomposers

This study shows how termites effectively attenuate climate change. Still, termites are not the only insurance plan against global warming and are joined by any number of invertebrate decomposers such as beetles and their larvae, flies and maggots (the larvae of flies), woodlice, fungi, slime moulds, bacteria, slugs, snails, millipedes, springtails, and earthworms, among many other small insects which populate forest floors around the planet.

The banana slug of the Pacific Northwest also breaks down complex plant matter into basic components in the forest floor that can further advance within the ecosystem while keeping.

Similar to the termites of Borneo, the banana slug decomposes the forest detritus that falls and recycles it back into the forest floor, adding nutrients and moisture into the forest floor as they break down plant matter into basic components that further advance the ecosystem while feeding the plants and fungi of the forest floor.

In the Amazon rainforest the numbers of forest floor decomposers are many:  ants, earthworms, millipedes, and many species of termites, with many species still left to be documented.

There is good reason to be worried about the planet today—from politicians who obliquely refuse to accept the science on climate change to the albedo effect, whereby the effect of melting glaciers means that less sunlight is reflected from the planet, resulting in more absorbed sunlight, thus increased warming of the planet.

The fact that the invertebrates of the forest floors are saving the planet one crunchy leaf at a time might mean that the age-old insult of calling another person “spineless,” might soon become a compliment. Let’s celebrate these tiny creatures and figure out ways we can learn from them in combatting the planet’s ecological demise.

This Author 

Julian Vigo is an independent scholar, filmmaker and activist who specialises in anthropology, technology, and political philosophy. Her latest book is Earthquake in Haiti: The Pornography of Poverty and the Politics of Development (2015). You can follow her on Twitter at @lubelluledotcom. 

ClientEarth’s free online hub will offer open access to unbiased legal information regarding the forestry sector, with information on forest governance and measures affecting commodities that currently rely on forest clearing, such as palm oil and soy.

Each year deforestation results in a loss of around 18 million acres of forests annually, the equivalent of 27 football fields every minute, and forest protection and management is vital to avoid catastrophic climate breakdown.

In response, the environmental law charity has built the ‘Forest Logbook’ for all users – from lawyers, communities and NGOs to importers, logging operators and regulators – to have access to the most up to date legal information available.

Centralising information

ClientEarth climate and forest programme officer Heather Kingsley said: “With so many laws across different jurisdictions, and different organisations providing resources on forest legality, we saw a need to build a database that centralises everything in one place.

“Forests are under such pressure everywhere, so providing easy, instant access to the most up to date information about vital forestry laws will help to empower anyone working to protect forests.

“From our experience working in west and central Africa with the communities that rely on forests for survival and the lawyers defending them, as well as lawmakers themselves, we’ve found that forest protection and management is most effective where the rule of law is strongest.

“We envisage the Logbook will be a dynamic resource, designed to evolve over time. We encourage users to send us new or updated information that could be added to the logbook, to expand on the information available.”

The Logbook works by linking to resources published by organisations and institutions. These resources are selected based on their impartiality or on their official status.

The online hub currently focuses on resources related to timber legality. In the future, it will be expanded to include more information on non-timber forest-risk commodities, such as palm oil and soy.

This Author

Marianne Brooker is a commissioning editor for The Ecologist. This article is based on a press release from ClientEarth. Visit the Forest Logbook here.

Rewilding may have the potential to drastically improve biodiversity – but remains a highly controversial and divisive topic.

A new book edited by scientists from the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) and Utah State University aims to build common ground and show how rewilding can foster human coexistence with wildlife.

Rewilding brings together, for the first time, experts from around the world to discuss the benefits and dangers of rewilding approaches and is published by the British Ecological Society and Cambridge University Press.

Protecting biodiversity 

Dr Nathalie Pettorelli from ZSL’s Institute of Zoology, one of the new book’s editors, said: “Whoever is concerned with the conservation of nature cannot afford to ignore discussions on rewilding and miss potential opportunities to improve biodiversity levels.”

The volume introduces key definitions and approaches to rewilding, highlighting similarities and differences between them and discussing how they may work in practice. 

The editors hope the book will help readers appreciate how rewilding can be more than a purely ecological concept. Socioeconomic, cultural, psychological and political dimensions will all affect the ultimate success of any rewilding intervention.

Pettorelli continued: “Previous approaches to conservation have been dominated by the establishment and maintenance of wilderness, a western concept that can ultimately separate nature from people.”

“Rewilding has the potential to deliver a progressive and resilient approach to wildlife management, connecting people with, rather than separating them from, nature.

“It directly feeds into discussions relating to coexistence, societal values and tolerance for wildlife, and inviting nature right back to our doorstep.”

Interdisciplinary approach

Covering issues such as the benefits to human wellbeing, rewilding cities and the translocation of species, one chapter explores what rewilding means in a British context.

Britain – with its dense population, few forests, and none of the large carnivores commonly associated with rewilding – might not seem the most obvious place for rewilding. Yet rewilding is increasingly attracting the attention of the public and professionals, not only in connection with Brexit, which has been noted as a window of opportunity to manage land differently.

The book describes how moving forward on rewilding will require consensus building and understanding of different opinions to foster human-wildlife coexistence.

Professor Johan du Toit, another editor of the book, has commented from his lab at Utah State University in the USA, said: “Rewilding currently means different things to different people, but the book clarifies it as the process of reorganising, retooling, or regenerating wildness in a degraded ecosystem. That is not the same as restoring an ecosystem to its former condition, which is an increasingly challenging and tenuous goal under the rapidly-changing conditions of our human-influenced planet.

“Rewilding is an adaptive and pragmatic approach for regaining and maintaining the provision of ecosystem services, which are essential for humanity.”

The book’s interdisciplinary nature will appeal to a broad range of readers, from ecologists and conservation biologists to land managers, policymakers and practitioners in NGOs and government departments. Written for a scientifically literate readership, it also acts as a key resource for advanced undergraduate and graduate courses. 

This Article 

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist. This article is based on a press release from the British Ecological Society. 

The UK’s use of export finance to fund overseas fossil fuel projects is “flatly inconsistent” with both domestic climate policy and efforts to meet the 1.5C warming limit, according to academics at a hearing in Westminster yesterday.

UK export finance (UKEF) provides guarantees, insurance and reinsurance to shore up British investments overseas. Yet instead of supporting much-needed renewables infrastructure, some 99 percent of all energy-related support went to fossil fuels. Between 2014 and 2016, the UK spent £551 million per year to support fossil fuel production.

In December 2018, the government’s Environmental Audit Committee launched an enquiry into the state of UKEF. The first hearing took place today.

Oil refineries

“If we’re going to hit 1.5C or anything close to it, all of the pathways say that we need very rapid decarbonisation, to demand side mitigation, electrification, emissions reductions now,” said Navraj Ghaleigh, senior lecturer in climate law at the University of Edinburgh.

“If that’s correct and if that’s what we want to do, the current pattern of UK export finance is simply flatly inconsistent with that.”

Ghaleigh described the UK’s export finance as “just odd”, given efforts to cut carbon emissions on home soil.

“I think the Climate Change Act, and the implementation of the Climate Change Act, and the institutions that have been established, such as the Climate Change Committee (sic), continue to be world leading,” he said.

“UKEF, which [contributes] £5 billion per year every year for building oil refineries in Saudi and coal infrastructure in Ghana and fleets of aircraft all over the world, those are locked-in emissions that will not be reversed.

Discouraging renewables

“That’s really significant, and that I think is a very sharp indication of a policy dissonance that needs to be addressed.”

Last year, DeSmog reported on the UK’s support of a £5 billion oil refinery in Oman, by opening a line of credit to boost British exports.

The credit agency was also considering supporting the expansion of an oil refinery in Bahrain, despite acknowledging its potential for “significant adverse environmental and/or social impacts”.

A further DeSmog investigation found that half of all projects to receive export credits during the 2016-17 financial year were related to the fossil fuel industry, amounting to more than a billion pounds.

According to Professor Jim Skea, who was co-chair of a major climate science report for the UN, the UK’s failure to fund renewable energy projects abroad could result from an undeveloped domestic industry, potentially discouraging renewables companies from applying for financial support – a question that he suggested MPs put to ministers themselves when they provided evidence to the committee.

Export finance

“The UK has, historically, whether we like it or not, been very good at oil and gas, and the skills and competencies needed to extract it, and for that reason I wouldn’t be that surprised if a lot of the applications were coming from that sector,” Skea said.

“The UK has not so far exploited all the opportunities associated with renewable energy around wind and solar. Although we’ve got lots of deployment of wind, the turbines themselves are coming from Vestas, Siemens etc [Danish and German companies respectively].

“I don’t think we can do well in export markets unless we have a home market to build from.”

To clean up UK export finance, Ghaleigh suggested that it may be necessary to implement a new policy that puts climate change considerations at the heart of its decision making.

This Article

This article first appeared at Desmog.uk.

International wildlife conservation charity World Land Trust (WLT) has launched an urgent appeal to raise £30,000 and save the hillstar’s habitat from being destroyed by mining.

The metal-rich landscapes of Ecuador have seen an increase in industrial mining over the past thirty years. Swathes of Ecuador’s tropical forests have been cleared so that metals such as copper, gold and lead can extracted from large open pits, a disaster for local wildlife. 

WLT has launched the Save the Blue-throated Hillstar appeal to enable its partner Naturaleza y Cultura Ecuador (NCE) to extend a Water Protection Area to include the hillstar’s 70,000 acre range. By incorporating the hillstar’s habitat in the Water Protection Area it will have government-level protection and will eliminate the threat of mining. 

Ecological damage

Richard Cuthbert, director of conservation at WLT, said: “This is a unique opportunity to save a critically endangered species from extinction. If we do not act now, mining corporations can move in on the habitat and create a mine which would most likely wipe out the hillstar population.

“This situation is the perfect example of why habitat conservation is so important. Habitat loss is one of the greatest causes of species extinction worldwide, and for every habitat we lose, we eliminate a stronghold for numerous plant and animal species.

“For species such as the Blue-throated Hillstar, with such a small range, this can mean extinction. The fact that we are continuing to discover new species in habitats facing threats like mining shows that we may not even be aware of the ecological damage these activities are causing.”

The land is owned by local communities, who want to ensure it is protected because they rely on the clean freshwater collected in the mountain ecosystem.

With the funds from this appeal, NCE will extend the proposed Water Protection Area so the total area protected will be almost 200,000 acres (79,000 hectares) and also provide water for at least 470,000 Ecuadorian people.

Government protection

Bruno Paladines Puertas, head of community development at NCE, said: “Mining is happening in lots of areas in Ecuador. We are lucky that this area is in an early stage of the process before any construction has begun, so there is still time to act.

“The support of the communities and the Water National Secretariat (SENAGUA) mean that, if we act quickly, we can place this habitat under the highest level of government protection in Ecuador and the mining concessions will be lifted.”

As well as the Blue-throated Hillstar, a new species of frog, the Tik Tik Rain Frog, was also discovered in August, found very close to the eastern border of the proposed protected area. This unique páramo habitat is also home to Spectacled Bear, Mountain Tapir and the magnificent Andean Condor.

These mountains are still relatively unexplored by naturalists, and by protecting them, many more species new to science may be discovered.

By donating to help save the Blue-throated Hillstar’s habitat today, you will be securing a future for this species and perhaps some that have not yet been discovered. You can find more information and donate to save the Blue-throated Hillstar online or call the WLT office at 01986 874422.

This article

This article is based on a press release from the World Land Trust. 

A row has broken out over the apparent lack of disclosure of a conflict of interest by Tory politician John Gummer, also known as Lord Deben, who heads government scientific advisory body, the Committee on Climate Change (CCC).

The Mail on Sunday fulminates: “Tory peer John Selwyn Gummer’s private company has been paid more than £600,000 from ‘green’ businesses that stand to make millions from his advice to Ministers.”

It then lists a number of alleged payments received by Gummer’s consultancy, Sancroft, by green-tinged companies. This is a huge conflict of interest, the article roars.

Greenhouse gas

The issue will no doubt be investigated – and it’s not up to anyone other than Gummer (who denies the allegations) to defend himself – but what’s behind this story is a climate science denial media network in action, and that’s the bigger story not being told.

As one high profile member of the climate science denier mob put it: “Christmas has come unusually early this year for British climate sceptics.”

What’s behind an array of co-ordinated and similarly apoplectic editorials is not necessarily concern for public fiscal regulation and lobbying transparency but a deep hatred of environmental regulation. This is seen in the disdain shown by the reporter that broke the story, David Rose, towards the CCC’s goals.

In the Mail on Sunday, he writes: “Under Gummer, the CCC has said the country must cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 60 per cent by 2030.”

“The Committee on Climate Change, established by the 2008 Climate Change Act, is a supposedly independent quango which advises the Government on how to achieve Britain’s target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80 per cent by 2050.”

Science denier

“Chaired by Gummer since 2012, it has urged Ministers to fund vast subsidies paid to ‘renewable’ energy companies.”

Gummer was also a key part of John Major’s government, which led the UK’s initial foray into climate leadership.

Rose’s initial blast was followed up by Dominic Lawson in the Daily Mail. “Oh look, another member of the great and the good is in the soup. And, not for the first time, it’s one of those who preaches to us about our duty to ‘save the planet’.”

It’s worth remembering that Dominic Lawson is the son of Nigel Lawson, chancellor of the exchequer under Margaret Thatcher and – until very recently – chair of the UK’s principal climate science denial campaign group, the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF).

Next up was infamous climate science denier James Delingpole over at far-right website Breitbart who got very excited: “The Climate Industrial Complex is a $1.5 trillion per year scam industry of no value to mankind — or indeed the planet — whatsoever.”

Chastised

But Delingpole lets slip the group’s real concerns: “Barely a wind turbine would be erected, barely a shimmery solar panel allowed to disfigure the landscape, barely a palm oil plantation planted, barely a bushel of biomass burned, barely a dubious university climate science department funded, barely a first-class airfare to the next COP shindig subsidised, were it not for the government subsidies and regulation which make these fringe, non-commercial and unnecessary activities temporarily viable.”

To complete the set, here comes Viscount Matt Ridley, with a twitter tirade and Times column calling on Gummer – a long-standing thorn in Ridley’s side – to “come clean”.

Ridley, lest you forget, is the owner of a coal mine site and was censured by the House of Lords’ Committee for Privileges and Conduct in January 2014 for failing to declare his coal interests while speaking in debates on the Energy Bill.

This network of co-ordinated climate science denial isn’t just an oddball collection of angry Tories turning on the perceived traitordom of own of their own.

This is a group of people who are regularly (and ineffectively) chastised by IPSO the media regulator, who attempt to control the steady stream of climate disinformation that this group pumps out.

Stepped down

David Rose has a track record of spreading erroneous information about climate science and policy, as his astonishing record of IPSO complaints attests.

There may be a case against Gummer, but for the sake of consistency and balance it’s only fair to point out that this frothing-at-the-mouth coterie gravitates around the climate science denying GWPF.

Rose’s article quotes Labour MP Graham Stringer, who is a GWPF trustee. Matt Ridley likewise is sits on the GWPF’s advisory board. Dominic Lawson is the GWPF’s founder’s son. Rose himself has described the GWPF as a “friend”.

It’s a tightknit group. And they’re not exactly faultless when it comes to declaring their interests.

After Nigel Lawson stepped down earlier this month he was replaced by Labour peer Bernard Donoghue.

Squeaky-clean

As DeSmog UK reported recently: “The new chairman of the UK’s principal climate science denier campaign group holds investments in a number of fossil fuel companies”. He also has shareholdings that are invested in the controversial Kinder Morgan and Keystone XL pipelines.

Donoughue has repeatedly cast doubt on the importance of tackling climate change, calling efforts to reduce emissions “virtue signalling” and the climate change movement “evangelical.” He is, it’s fair to say, a fan of fossil fuels.

What this controversy really shows is a network of people defending their political commitment to the fossil-fuelled status quo (and in some cases, their economic interests) through a hit job.

This is yet another example of what happens when the media is driven by an undeclared agenda, as we exposed when revealing the clandestine funding of Spiked and the LM network that spreads climate disinfomration and is backed by champion climate science deniers and fossil fuel magnates, the Koch brothers.

In this context, the howl of moral outrage accompanying the Gummer revelations is somewhat undermined by this network’s own commitment to disinformation and far from squeaky-clean declarations of interests, all with the aim of slowing or stopping efforts to avert climate catastrophe.

This Article

This article first appeared at Desmog.uk.

Canadian company Gabriel Resources wanted to created Europe’s largest open pit gold mine and use cyanide to extract the gold.

Two beautiful valleys and some 2,000 inhabitants living in or next to an almost 2000-year old Roman settlement were to be sacrificed because an $8 billion profit was in sight. Today, the village of Rosia Montana is 1888 years old. A mass movement with more than 100, 000 active supporters fought back.

The conflict came to a head in 2013 when parliament had to decide on a new law that would allow the mine. The protests in the streets of Romania were so massive that Parliament could do little else than block the mine.

Grassroots activism

Romanians managed to keep mayhem for the Rosia Montana region at bay. They’ve done this with grassroots activism at national and international level and mass direct participation.

While doing this they were able to transform the area from a doomed mono-industrial isolated space into a dynamic, lively and attractive region of farming, eco-tourism and socio-political debates about alternative futures.

Stephanie Simon, legal adviser of the Alburnus Maior NGO that was part of the struggle against the line said: “Gabriel’s mine was irrevocably rejected by Romania’s civil society despite the company’s attempts to conduct costly cosmetic surgery to hide its ugly mine together with its disastrous effects to the environment, cultural heritage and human health.”

But Gabriel Resources is like a scorpion.  It stung with a tale full of poison in 2015. Ever since, Romania is facing a whopping 4,4 billion claim, 2 percent of its GDP.

Gabriel Resources used an investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism to claim billions from Romanian people because of a loss in expected profits. This ISDS mechanism works with secretive corporate courts that stand above national judicial systems.

The case of Rosia Montana is just one example why the European Environmental Bureau decided to join a massive pan-European campaign against these ISDS systems.

Corporations basically have their own global private court system – called ISDS – which they use to bully governments. The bullying all too often happens to push an environmentally destructive project through – with Vattenfall suing Germany for closing nuclear power stations as another example.

The campaign coalition – which unites almost the same groups that collected 3,3 million signatures to kill TTIP in the Stop TTIP campaign – argues that we need to get rid of ISDS mechanisms and instead need a tough global system that can punish multinationals for their crimes.

In fact, such a mechanism is being debated at UN level on the initiative of countries that are hurt by multinational mining companies, like Ecuador.

This binding UN treaty on business and human rights is the second big ask of the campaign. Since the “Rights for People, Rules for Corporations – Stop ISDS” campaign launch on 22 January, the coalition gathered already 300.000 signatures.
 

This Author 

Nick Meynen is policy officer for Environmental and Economic Justice at the European Environmental Bureau. He authored several books on the environment and he comments on global environmental and economic issues on Facebook and Twitter. For more details, visit the Atlas of Environmental Justice.

More information about the Rosia Montana case can be found in the Atlas of Environmental Justice.