ANOTHER FILM AT THE RENOIR - 15 JUNE
Emails have been flying around with information about the UK premiere of 'Gaza Strip' at the Renoir on Sunday 15 June at 10am. For this one it's worth while getting up really early! The screening is followed by a panel discussion up to 12 noon. Tickets are £9.90,including the booking fee, from www.wegottickets.com/event/31300 Jews for Justice for Palestinians, the organisers ofthe event, say that if you are unable to access the internet, please telephone 020-8349 3022 or 07720-398465, but not before 10 June.
3 Jun 2008
Permanent Revolution
i have been debating with Permanent Revolution...
Derek Wall on ecosocialism (PR8)
Helen Ward’s article “A Question of Power” [Permanent Revolution 7] provides an excellent socialist introduction to the threat of climate change. In particular it throws up the central issues of power and political economy. Environmental problems have huge technological implications. However, without being anti-technology, we need to take a critical approach.
Social questions dealing with power are almost always reduced to technical matters within the capitalist society we live in. Yes, we can produce more energy more cleanly; I remember reading that “Scotland could be the Saudi Arabia of renewables” which is a phrase I like.
Helen notes George Monbiot’s discussion of generating huge amounts of energy from deserts using solar, so I guess Saudi Arabia could be the Saudi Arabia of renewables too. However, a wasteful capitalist economy which can only function if we produce and consume at dizzying rates will always challenge the basic biochemical cycles of the planet.
Technological solutions should not become sticking plasters for a system of organised cancer. Equally, technology occurs in a social context. Our context is capitalism, so the solutions most favoured by the status quo are introduced and other alternatives are ignored. An oppressive society introduces oppressive forms of technology like nuclear power. The class struggle extends to the application of science.
Marxists, Greens, all of us need to debate the nature of technology. We also need to debate and refine our ideas about economics. The Green Party supports contraction and convergence and, taken together with Green Party policies on a range of issues from big cuts in regressive taxes like VAT, to investment in public transport, insulation . . . C and C is progress.
Depressingly the whole approach, as Helen recognises, to climate change globally is based on the market. Carbon trading will make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Those with the cash can flaunt their waste and probably will. Over-consumption and waste as perverse ways of showing social status are a reality. Richard Branson is keen to introduce space tourism with biofuels, while poorer economies who want to industrialise, in contrast, will be penalised.
For carbon reduction to work at all we need to change structures and enable people to be green. A tiny example: where I live there is virtually no bus service, the local post office has been shut (a victim of neo-liberal free market deregulation!) and I don’t drive but I risk death if I cycle to and from my nearest town because there is no cycle path. Being too incompetent to pass a driving test, this makes life on occasions inconvenient! This is a trivial and personal example but the point is that the market will not solve climate change.
I am also sceptical about central planning. Planning is necessary and provides an alternative to the market. However we need to debate what this means if it is to a) work and b) work democratically. A central plan for the planet does not look practical and to me does not look like socialism. For me the Marxist solution is the commons. Commons were assaulted to create the market, but the Marxist project is to surely restore them.
Commons is based on usufrucht . . . an ugly word, but it means access to resources as long as those resources are put back in as good a condition as you found them. Commons has an inbuilt environmental aspiration and maintains free access to resources. Local commons have proved very successful in maintaining the environment, but where they still exist are under constant threat.
Workers’ conversion plans are also an approach which is essential. They need to be introduced to create real prosperity without ecological damage. Incidentally one area of struggle is, as we all know, within the trade unions. In the 1970s the Australia building workers’ union introduced green bans and prevented the construction of environmentally damaging buildings. In the 1980s the National Union of Seamen blocked nuclear waste dumping (http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/97/oceandump/radioactive/reports/history.html).
So when I hear the word planning, I wonder if this is a little abstract. I am suspicious of “the central plan”, but commons and workers’ action are vital. Maybe we have to plan at some kind of global level but more local economies that work seem to me to be the key. Workers’ and community control will lead to a world which is less likely to be polluted.
It is probably fair to say that Helen’s last few points were the ones I found closest to my view of political economy beyond the market and top down centralist plans:
“Once people get together there will be endless ingenuity in reducing energy bills and ideas for transforming the way we live and work – and it will doubtless involve taking on the local council, transport chiefs, the bosses and other anti-social members of the community.”
The Latin American ecosocialist Hugo Blanco put it like this:
“At first sight environmentalists or conservationists are nice, slightly crazy guys whose main purpose in life is to prevent the disappearance of blue whales or pandas. The common people have more important things to think about, for instance how to get their daily bread . . . However, there are in Peru a very large number of people who are environmentalists . . . they might reply, ‘ecologist your mother’, or words to that effect . . . Are not the town of Ilo and the surrounding villages which are being polluted by the Southern Peru Copper Corporation truly environmentalist? Is not the village of Tambo Grande in Pirura environmentalist when it rises like a closed fist and is ready to die in order to prevent strip-mining in its valley? Also, the people of the Mantaro Valley who saw their little sheep die, because of the smoke and waste from La Oroya smelter.”
(Hugo Blanco quoted in Guha and Martinez-Alier, 1997: 24)
From the need to fight against imperialist war to the need to prevent rainforests from being gobbled up for biofuel and soya, to ethical debates about the status of future generations and other species, discussion could be extended almost for ever.
However to sum up, we need to get involved in grassroots struggles now. John McDonnell’s support for the climate camp is one example, trade union climate action is another.
We all need to debate ecology in greater depth, in a scientific sense, so our solutions are actually solutions, not like biofuel which adds to the problem. From Marx we should take the essential principle of an economy based on use-values, not ever increasing blind accumulation of exchange-values. We need an economy that is democratic, ecological and for me that means socialism. Marx noted:
“From the standpoint of a higher economic form of society, private ownership of the globe by single individuals will appear quite absurd as private ownership of one man by another. Even a whole society, a nation, or even all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not the owners of the globe. They are only its possessors, its usufructuries, and like boni patres familias, they must hand it down to succeeding generations in an improved condition.”
(K Marx quoted in Kovel 2002: 238)
Derek Wall is male principal speaker for the Green Party
Derek Wall on ecosocialism (PR8)
Helen Ward’s article “A Question of Power” [Permanent Revolution 7] provides an excellent socialist introduction to the threat of climate change. In particular it throws up the central issues of power and political economy. Environmental problems have huge technological implications. However, without being anti-technology, we need to take a critical approach.
Social questions dealing with power are almost always reduced to technical matters within the capitalist society we live in. Yes, we can produce more energy more cleanly; I remember reading that “Scotland could be the Saudi Arabia of renewables” which is a phrase I like.
Helen notes George Monbiot’s discussion of generating huge amounts of energy from deserts using solar, so I guess Saudi Arabia could be the Saudi Arabia of renewables too. However, a wasteful capitalist economy which can only function if we produce and consume at dizzying rates will always challenge the basic biochemical cycles of the planet.
Technological solutions should not become sticking plasters for a system of organised cancer. Equally, technology occurs in a social context. Our context is capitalism, so the solutions most favoured by the status quo are introduced and other alternatives are ignored. An oppressive society introduces oppressive forms of technology like nuclear power. The class struggle extends to the application of science.
Marxists, Greens, all of us need to debate the nature of technology. We also need to debate and refine our ideas about economics. The Green Party supports contraction and convergence and, taken together with Green Party policies on a range of issues from big cuts in regressive taxes like VAT, to investment in public transport, insulation . . . C and C is progress.
Depressingly the whole approach, as Helen recognises, to climate change globally is based on the market. Carbon trading will make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Those with the cash can flaunt their waste and probably will. Over-consumption and waste as perverse ways of showing social status are a reality. Richard Branson is keen to introduce space tourism with biofuels, while poorer economies who want to industrialise, in contrast, will be penalised.
For carbon reduction to work at all we need to change structures and enable people to be green. A tiny example: where I live there is virtually no bus service, the local post office has been shut (a victim of neo-liberal free market deregulation!) and I don’t drive but I risk death if I cycle to and from my nearest town because there is no cycle path. Being too incompetent to pass a driving test, this makes life on occasions inconvenient! This is a trivial and personal example but the point is that the market will not solve climate change.
I am also sceptical about central planning. Planning is necessary and provides an alternative to the market. However we need to debate what this means if it is to a) work and b) work democratically. A central plan for the planet does not look practical and to me does not look like socialism. For me the Marxist solution is the commons. Commons were assaulted to create the market, but the Marxist project is to surely restore them.
Commons is based on usufrucht . . . an ugly word, but it means access to resources as long as those resources are put back in as good a condition as you found them. Commons has an inbuilt environmental aspiration and maintains free access to resources. Local commons have proved very successful in maintaining the environment, but where they still exist are under constant threat.
Workers’ conversion plans are also an approach which is essential. They need to be introduced to create real prosperity without ecological damage. Incidentally one area of struggle is, as we all know, within the trade unions. In the 1970s the Australia building workers’ union introduced green bans and prevented the construction of environmentally damaging buildings. In the 1980s the National Union of Seamen blocked nuclear waste dumping (http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/97/oceandump/radioactive/reports/history.html).
So when I hear the word planning, I wonder if this is a little abstract. I am suspicious of “the central plan”, but commons and workers’ action are vital. Maybe we have to plan at some kind of global level but more local economies that work seem to me to be the key. Workers’ and community control will lead to a world which is less likely to be polluted.
It is probably fair to say that Helen’s last few points were the ones I found closest to my view of political economy beyond the market and top down centralist plans:
“Once people get together there will be endless ingenuity in reducing energy bills and ideas for transforming the way we live and work – and it will doubtless involve taking on the local council, transport chiefs, the bosses and other anti-social members of the community.”
The Latin American ecosocialist Hugo Blanco put it like this:
“At first sight environmentalists or conservationists are nice, slightly crazy guys whose main purpose in life is to prevent the disappearance of blue whales or pandas. The common people have more important things to think about, for instance how to get their daily bread . . . However, there are in Peru a very large number of people who are environmentalists . . . they might reply, ‘ecologist your mother’, or words to that effect . . . Are not the town of Ilo and the surrounding villages which are being polluted by the Southern Peru Copper Corporation truly environmentalist? Is not the village of Tambo Grande in Pirura environmentalist when it rises like a closed fist and is ready to die in order to prevent strip-mining in its valley? Also, the people of the Mantaro Valley who saw their little sheep die, because of the smoke and waste from La Oroya smelter.”
(Hugo Blanco quoted in Guha and Martinez-Alier, 1997: 24)
From the need to fight against imperialist war to the need to prevent rainforests from being gobbled up for biofuel and soya, to ethical debates about the status of future generations and other species, discussion could be extended almost for ever.
However to sum up, we need to get involved in grassroots struggles now. John McDonnell’s support for the climate camp is one example, trade union climate action is another.
We all need to debate ecology in greater depth, in a scientific sense, so our solutions are actually solutions, not like biofuel which adds to the problem. From Marx we should take the essential principle of an economy based on use-values, not ever increasing blind accumulation of exchange-values. We need an economy that is democratic, ecological and for me that means socialism. Marx noted:
“From the standpoint of a higher economic form of society, private ownership of the globe by single individuals will appear quite absurd as private ownership of one man by another. Even a whole society, a nation, or even all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not the owners of the globe. They are only its possessors, its usufructuries, and like boni patres familias, they must hand it down to succeeding generations in an improved condition.”
(K Marx quoted in Kovel 2002: 238)
Derek Wall is male principal speaker for the Green Party
2 Jun 2008
Good news from Moscow Pride
Some good news from Moscow where the heroic Nikolai Alexeyev has managed
to hold Moscow Pride despite the opposition of the Mayor, Fascists and
Orthodox zealots. There is a case pending on the issue in the European
Court of Human Rights. Hopefully Moscow Pride will soon be legalised.
Joseph Healy
International Coordinator
Comment: We outfoxed the Moscow authorities
By Comment • June 2, 2008 - 12:46
Authorities attempted to arrest Moscow Pride's most prominent organiser
Nicolas Alexeyev
No Comments Yet on Comment: We outfoxed the Moscow authorities
By: The Liberation Network
Despite the banning of their protest for the third year in row and
attempted pre-emptive arrests by the authorities, Moscow Lesbians and Gays
today successfully held Pride with widespread coverage by alternative,
prominent international and some mainstream Russian media.
A few hours before the protest, authorities attempted to arrest Moscow
Pride's most prominent organiser, Nicolas Alexeyev, who successfully
evaded them in a car.
A little later, the authorities, neo-fascists and religious zealots took
the bait that Pride was going to take place as a picket in front of
notoriously anti-gay Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov's City Hall.
While riot police were busy blockading City Hall and arresting some of the
fascists and religious fanatics who showed up to physically stop Pride,
Alexeyev had secretly spirited the media to a nearby monument to the great
19th Century Russian gay composer Pyotr Il'yich Tchaikovsky, where Pride
was successfully held with widespread coverage.
To add icing to the cake, Moscow Pride organisers then pulled off a
dramatic banner drop right across the street from City Hall while the
fascists and riot cops fumed below.
The banner read "Rights to gays and lesbians - homophobia of Mayor Luzhkov
to be prosecuted."
Russian authorities later arrested some of the activists who pulled off
the banner drop, and for several hours put an activist's apartment under
siege before apparently getting a court order to kick in the door and
arrest the four activists inside – but not before they conducted a series
of media interviews through the locked door, including with Interfax and
RTR (the main TV channel in Russia).
Despite the arrests, the day was a resounding success for Russian gays and
lesbians, who through clever organising and hard work hoodwinked the
authorities at just about every turn. As Alexeyev commented in an email
posted after the actions:
"No human rights group or opposition [has] ever humiliated the Moscow
authorities so much.
"We wanted to defy the Mayor in front of his office. Not only [has the]
homophobia of Mayor Luzhkov been advertised today, but also the full
collapse of his administration to prevent gays and lesbians [from]
realis[ing] their constitutional rights to march.
"Today, we showed that our group is powerful not only in gay and lesbian
aspects, but in general. Our fight is only at its beginning."
Even during the siege of their apartment, the activists inside managed to
keep good humour about the situation.
When a journalist asked one of the besieged, Kirill Nepomnjaschij, if the
four had enough food and other supplies to last very long, Nepomnjaschij
replied, "Well, we are not going to beat the record of the blockade of
Leningrad, but we will stay. We have food here and everything."
In the longest siege in the history of modern warfare, during World War
Two, Nazi armies besieged the City of Leningrad for more than 900 days,
before the blockade was defeated.
Shortly after the arrests of the activists in the apartment, all major
Russian gay websites went down, in an apparent attempt to squelch news
about the successful Pride events.
In spite of the censorship, as of this writing, Russian gays were still
able to keep news flowing through their blog, which is by far the best and
most complete account of the day's events.
This is the third year in a row that Moscow Lesbians and Gays have
attempted to commemorate the 1993 decriminalisation of homosexuality in
Russia.
Before the previous two years' events, Russian gays filed for permits to
hold Pride events, only to be rejected by Moscow authorities. This year
the authorities banned the event even before GayRussia.ru applied for the
permit.
Previous years' Pride events have seen physical attacks by Russian
fascists on Pride participants, infamously bloodying German MP Volker
Beck, British gay activist Peter Tatchell, and Austrian gay activist Kurt
Krickler last year.
They, along with many other international LGBT supporters, had attended
Moscow Pride in solidarity.
Despite the "pre-emptive" ban on this year's Pride, there were
contradictory signals from the authorities that indicated that this year's
event might not face the same degree of repression that previous year's
events had endured.
A few weeks ago, in response to active campaigning by GayRussia.ru,
Russian authorities finally dropped the ban on gays donating blood – a
gain that many western countries, including the United States, have yet to
achieve.
A few days ago Russian federal authorities reported that they had
"suggested" that the city authorities allow Pride to proceed unmolested
this year.
Given the near-total control of Russian political affairs by the
increasingly autocratic government of President Dmitry Medvedev (and power
behind the throne, Prime Minister Vladmir Putin), such a "suggestion," if
it were genuine, should have meant clear sailing for this year's Pride.
Fortunately, Russian lesbians and gays were not so gullible as to believe
this subterfuge by the Medvedev/Putin government, and carefully prepared
some subterfuges of their own so as to successfully carry out today's
Pride activities.
Activists around the world are strongly encouraged to contact the Russian
embassies in their countries and to demand that the Russian authorities
immediately release all Pride participants who have been arrested, and
drop all of the charges that they are facing.
to hold Moscow Pride despite the opposition of the Mayor, Fascists and
Orthodox zealots. There is a case pending on the issue in the European
Court of Human Rights. Hopefully Moscow Pride will soon be legalised.
Joseph Healy
International Coordinator
Comment: We outfoxed the Moscow authorities
By Comment • June 2, 2008 - 12:46
Authorities attempted to arrest Moscow Pride's most prominent organiser
Nicolas Alexeyev
No Comments Yet on Comment: We outfoxed the Moscow authorities
By: The Liberation Network
Despite the banning of their protest for the third year in row and
attempted pre-emptive arrests by the authorities, Moscow Lesbians and Gays
today successfully held Pride with widespread coverage by alternative,
prominent international and some mainstream Russian media.
A few hours before the protest, authorities attempted to arrest Moscow
Pride's most prominent organiser, Nicolas Alexeyev, who successfully
evaded them in a car.
A little later, the authorities, neo-fascists and religious zealots took
the bait that Pride was going to take place as a picket in front of
notoriously anti-gay Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov's City Hall.
While riot police were busy blockading City Hall and arresting some of the
fascists and religious fanatics who showed up to physically stop Pride,
Alexeyev had secretly spirited the media to a nearby monument to the great
19th Century Russian gay composer Pyotr Il'yich Tchaikovsky, where Pride
was successfully held with widespread coverage.
To add icing to the cake, Moscow Pride organisers then pulled off a
dramatic banner drop right across the street from City Hall while the
fascists and riot cops fumed below.
The banner read "Rights to gays and lesbians - homophobia of Mayor Luzhkov
to be prosecuted."
Russian authorities later arrested some of the activists who pulled off
the banner drop, and for several hours put an activist's apartment under
siege before apparently getting a court order to kick in the door and
arrest the four activists inside – but not before they conducted a series
of media interviews through the locked door, including with Interfax and
RTR (the main TV channel in Russia).
Despite the arrests, the day was a resounding success for Russian gays and
lesbians, who through clever organising and hard work hoodwinked the
authorities at just about every turn. As Alexeyev commented in an email
posted after the actions:
"No human rights group or opposition [has] ever humiliated the Moscow
authorities so much.
"We wanted to defy the Mayor in front of his office. Not only [has the]
homophobia of Mayor Luzhkov been advertised today, but also the full
collapse of his administration to prevent gays and lesbians [from]
realis[ing] their constitutional rights to march.
"Today, we showed that our group is powerful not only in gay and lesbian
aspects, but in general. Our fight is only at its beginning."
Even during the siege of their apartment, the activists inside managed to
keep good humour about the situation.
When a journalist asked one of the besieged, Kirill Nepomnjaschij, if the
four had enough food and other supplies to last very long, Nepomnjaschij
replied, "Well, we are not going to beat the record of the blockade of
Leningrad, but we will stay. We have food here and everything."
In the longest siege in the history of modern warfare, during World War
Two, Nazi armies besieged the City of Leningrad for more than 900 days,
before the blockade was defeated.
Shortly after the arrests of the activists in the apartment, all major
Russian gay websites went down, in an apparent attempt to squelch news
about the successful Pride events.
In spite of the censorship, as of this writing, Russian gays were still
able to keep news flowing through their blog, which is by far the best and
most complete account of the day's events.
This is the third year in a row that Moscow Lesbians and Gays have
attempted to commemorate the 1993 decriminalisation of homosexuality in
Russia.
Before the previous two years' events, Russian gays filed for permits to
hold Pride events, only to be rejected by Moscow authorities. This year
the authorities banned the event even before GayRussia.ru applied for the
permit.
Previous years' Pride events have seen physical attacks by Russian
fascists on Pride participants, infamously bloodying German MP Volker
Beck, British gay activist Peter Tatchell, and Austrian gay activist Kurt
Krickler last year.
They, along with many other international LGBT supporters, had attended
Moscow Pride in solidarity.
Despite the "pre-emptive" ban on this year's Pride, there were
contradictory signals from the authorities that indicated that this year's
event might not face the same degree of repression that previous year's
events had endured.
A few weeks ago, in response to active campaigning by GayRussia.ru,
Russian authorities finally dropped the ban on gays donating blood – a
gain that many western countries, including the United States, have yet to
achieve.
A few days ago Russian federal authorities reported that they had
"suggested" that the city authorities allow Pride to proceed unmolested
this year.
Given the near-total control of Russian political affairs by the
increasingly autocratic government of President Dmitry Medvedev (and power
behind the throne, Prime Minister Vladmir Putin), such a "suggestion," if
it were genuine, should have meant clear sailing for this year's Pride.
Fortunately, Russian lesbians and gays were not so gullible as to believe
this subterfuge by the Medvedev/Putin government, and carefully prepared
some subterfuges of their own so as to successfully carry out today's
Pride activities.
Activists around the world are strongly encouraged to contact the Russian
embassies in their countries and to demand that the Russian authorities
immediately release all Pride participants who have been arrested, and
drop all of the charges that they are facing.
No compassion from Boris
Dear Colleagues,
Boris Johnson last week announced he had cancelled the London-Venezuela co-operation agreement.
He falsely claimed that this was out of concern for Venezuelans. However, the deal was mutually beneficial to the citizens of London and Venezuela.
We outline below these benefits and the progress that was being made thanks to London's assistance.
All the best.
Gordon Hutchison
Secretary
Venezuela Information Centre
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The London-Venezuela Co-operation Agreement: The Facts
by the Venezuela Information Centre
The Co-operation Agreement signed between London and Venezuela came into effect on August 20, 2007. It was of potential great benefit to both sides. 133,000 of the poorest Londoners have so far benefited from half price travel under the scheme
and will now suffer from a doubling of their bus and tram fares once the agreement is cancelled.
From the outset, both parties agreed that London should focus on assisting Venezuela in developing plans to bring about long-term improvements in areas such as transport, city planning and the environment. It was recognised that these issues were of the highest priority to improve the lives of Caracas' citizens and that it would cost many millions of dollars to buy London's enormous experience and expertise in these areas at commercial rates. Depriving countries such as Venezuela of expertise and accumulated knowledge from the most advanced economies is one of the ways of putting pressure on them and depriving their citizens of the highest possible standard of living.
London, therefore, agreed to help in long-term strategic areas in which it had a proven track record of success, drawing on the world class expertise of its planners at Transport for London (TfL) and the Greater London Authority (GLA).
The long-term projects developed jointly by teams of experts from Venezuela and London included the reform of Caracas' transport system, the development of a transport strategy for the city, the designing of an urban development plan for Caracas and the elaboration of an air quality strategy for Venezuela.
Even though these are highly complex projects which take time to implement, significant momentum had been reached over the past months and all those involved were highly confident that tangible progress would be achieved by the time of the renewal date for the agreement at the end of August.
There were also a series of important short-term co-operation plans that were underway and scheduled for completion before the end of August.
In the area of transport planning these included an important pilot scheme to improve traffic congestion for a major urban transport corridor in Caracas, assistance with the designing of bus-metro interchanges along a new city metro line and a national road safety education campaign. TfL's top experts in traffic signals engineering, the planning of interchanges, marketing communications and traffic enforcement were directly assisting Venezuelan transport authorities and were scheduled to visit Caracas in the course of the month of May.
In the area of environmental planning there were also important short-term plans underway. Specifically, a delegation of Venezuelan environmental specialists had travelled to London in March and, together with their counterparts in the GLA, had drawn out a co-operation agenda for developing more efficient air quality monitoring and modelling methods in Venezuela. This would have been a crucial first step towards designing an air quality strategy that would have helped create healthier environmental conditions for Venezuelans. This agenda of short-term co-operation was also scheduled to reach completion before the end of August.
Unfortunately for Venezuela the new Conservative mayor of London, Boris Johnson, has chosen to disregard the terms of the London-Venezuela co-operation agreement which requires that London provide technical assistance as long as the agreement is still in force. Even if the new mayor has decided not to renew the agreement, the agreement stipulates that he should allow technical assistance plans to proceed until August 20th, when the agreement reaches its term.
Nevertheless, Johnson, as soon as he took over at the GLA, decided to cancel the scheduled visits of London experts to Caracas and, indeed, all of the assistance plans underway with Venezuela.
This clearly shows that his claims to have any concerns for the people of Venezuela are simply not true. The agreement was in the mutual interest of the people of Venezuela and London, its cancellation by Boris Johnson is against the interests of both.
Boris Johnson last week announced he had cancelled the London-Venezuela co-operation agreement.
He falsely claimed that this was out of concern for Venezuelans. However, the deal was mutually beneficial to the citizens of London and Venezuela.
We outline below these benefits and the progress that was being made thanks to London's assistance.
All the best.
Gordon Hutchison
Secretary
Venezuela Information Centre
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The London-Venezuela Co-operation Agreement: The Facts
by the Venezuela Information Centre
The Co-operation Agreement signed between London and Venezuela came into effect on August 20, 2007. It was of potential great benefit to both sides. 133,000 of the poorest Londoners have so far benefited from half price travel under the scheme
and will now suffer from a doubling of their bus and tram fares once the agreement is cancelled.
From the outset, both parties agreed that London should focus on assisting Venezuela in developing plans to bring about long-term improvements in areas such as transport, city planning and the environment. It was recognised that these issues were of the highest priority to improve the lives of Caracas' citizens and that it would cost many millions of dollars to buy London's enormous experience and expertise in these areas at commercial rates. Depriving countries such as Venezuela of expertise and accumulated knowledge from the most advanced economies is one of the ways of putting pressure on them and depriving their citizens of the highest possible standard of living.
London, therefore, agreed to help in long-term strategic areas in which it had a proven track record of success, drawing on the world class expertise of its planners at Transport for London (TfL) and the Greater London Authority (GLA).
The long-term projects developed jointly by teams of experts from Venezuela and London included the reform of Caracas' transport system, the development of a transport strategy for the city, the designing of an urban development plan for Caracas and the elaboration of an air quality strategy for Venezuela.
Even though these are highly complex projects which take time to implement, significant momentum had been reached over the past months and all those involved were highly confident that tangible progress would be achieved by the time of the renewal date for the agreement at the end of August.
There were also a series of important short-term co-operation plans that were underway and scheduled for completion before the end of August.
In the area of transport planning these included an important pilot scheme to improve traffic congestion for a major urban transport corridor in Caracas, assistance with the designing of bus-metro interchanges along a new city metro line and a national road safety education campaign. TfL's top experts in traffic signals engineering, the planning of interchanges, marketing communications and traffic enforcement were directly assisting Venezuelan transport authorities and were scheduled to visit Caracas in the course of the month of May.
In the area of environmental planning there were also important short-term plans underway. Specifically, a delegation of Venezuelan environmental specialists had travelled to London in March and, together with their counterparts in the GLA, had drawn out a co-operation agenda for developing more efficient air quality monitoring and modelling methods in Venezuela. This would have been a crucial first step towards designing an air quality strategy that would have helped create healthier environmental conditions for Venezuelans. This agenda of short-term co-operation was also scheduled to reach completion before the end of August.
Unfortunately for Venezuela the new Conservative mayor of London, Boris Johnson, has chosen to disregard the terms of the London-Venezuela co-operation agreement which requires that London provide technical assistance as long as the agreement is still in force. Even if the new mayor has decided not to renew the agreement, the agreement stipulates that he should allow technical assistance plans to proceed until August 20th, when the agreement reaches its term.
Nevertheless, Johnson, as soon as he took over at the GLA, decided to cancel the scheduled visits of London experts to Caracas and, indeed, all of the assistance plans underway with Venezuela.
This clearly shows that his claims to have any concerns for the people of Venezuela are simply not true. The agreement was in the mutual interest of the people of Venezuela and London, its cancellation by Boris Johnson is against the interests of both.
1 Jun 2008
Thanks Moth...Climate Actionin Copenhagen
Dear All, I thought you might be interested to know about this.
Towards climate action in Copenhagen 2009
Climate Network 09 | 23.05.2008 23:39 | Climate Chaos | Ecology
We invite you to join the 1st international planning meeting in Copenhagen from
the 13-14th of September 2008. The meeting aims at preparing a large
mobilisation for direct action against the root causes of climate change in
Copenhagen and throughout the world during the UN Climate Conference (30 Nov-11
Dec 2009).
Towards climate action in Copenhagen 2009
First international planning meeting
We stand at a crossroads in history. The facts are undeniable. Global climate
change, caused by human activities, is happening. We all know that, world over,
we're facing a manifold and deepening crisis: of the climate, energy, food,
livelihoods, and of political and human rights. Scientific, environmental,
social and civil society movements from all over the world are calling for
action against climate change.
Massive consumption of fossil fuel is one of the major causes of global
warming, a problem that threatens the lives of hundreds of millions of people
around the world. Instead of leading the way, governments are prioritizing
economic growth and corporate interests while ignoring the speeding train of
climate change hurtling towards the abyss. The corporate exploitation of the
planet's resources cannot be allowed to continue any longer. We have
precious little time to react to this threat. We need action NOW to stop
climate change, and if the so-called 'leaders' won't lead the way,
we must.
On the 30th November 2009, world leaders will come to Copenhagen for the UN
Climate Conference (COP15). This will be the most important summit on climate
change ever to have taken place, and it will determine how the countries of the
world are going to respond to the climate threat. The decisions taken there will
define the future for all the people of the world. The previous meetings give no
indication that this meeting will produce anything more than empty rhetoric and
a green washed blueprint for business-as-usual.
There is an alternative to the current course and it’s not some far-off
dream. If we put reason before profit, we can live amazing lives without
destroying our planet. But this will not happen by itself. We have to take
direct action, both against the root causes of climate change and to help
create a new, just and joyous world in the shell of the old. And so, we call on
all responsible people of the planet to take direct action against the root
causes of climate change during the COP15 summit in Copenhagen 2009.
The exact plans for our mobilization are not yet finalized. We have time to
collectively decide what our best course of action may be. We encourage
everyone to start mobilizing in your own countries. It is time to take the
power back from the leaders not responsible enough to hold it. The power is in
our hands!
Practical information
The meeting is free for everyone, accommodation and food will be provided by
local activists. Note also that the meeting will be held the weekend prior to
the European Social Forum (ESF) in Malmö, September 17-21. People are welcome
to stay in Copenhagen in the intermediate days.
Please announce your arrival to sept08@klimax2009.org. We're happy to
respond to any questions you might have. You can also subscribe to the
international mobilization mailing list.
Please circulate, translate and distribute this call widely.
Climate Network 09
e-mail: sept08@klimax2009.org
Homepage: http://www.klimax2009.org
Towards climate action in Copenhagen 2009
Climate Network 09 | 23.05.2008 23:39 | Climate Chaos | Ecology
We invite you to join the 1st international planning meeting in Copenhagen from
the 13-14th of September 2008. The meeting aims at preparing a large
mobilisation for direct action against the root causes of climate change in
Copenhagen and throughout the world during the UN Climate Conference (30 Nov-11
Dec 2009).
Towards climate action in Copenhagen 2009
First international planning meeting
We stand at a crossroads in history. The facts are undeniable. Global climate
change, caused by human activities, is happening. We all know that, world over,
we're facing a manifold and deepening crisis: of the climate, energy, food,
livelihoods, and of political and human rights. Scientific, environmental,
social and civil society movements from all over the world are calling for
action against climate change.
Massive consumption of fossil fuel is one of the major causes of global
warming, a problem that threatens the lives of hundreds of millions of people
around the world. Instead of leading the way, governments are prioritizing
economic growth and corporate interests while ignoring the speeding train of
climate change hurtling towards the abyss. The corporate exploitation of the
planet's resources cannot be allowed to continue any longer. We have
precious little time to react to this threat. We need action NOW to stop
climate change, and if the so-called 'leaders' won't lead the way,
we must.
On the 30th November 2009, world leaders will come to Copenhagen for the UN
Climate Conference (COP15). This will be the most important summit on climate
change ever to have taken place, and it will determine how the countries of the
world are going to respond to the climate threat. The decisions taken there will
define the future for all the people of the world. The previous meetings give no
indication that this meeting will produce anything more than empty rhetoric and
a green washed blueprint for business-as-usual.
There is an alternative to the current course and it’s not some far-off
dream. If we put reason before profit, we can live amazing lives without
destroying our planet. But this will not happen by itself. We have to take
direct action, both against the root causes of climate change and to help
create a new, just and joyous world in the shell of the old. And so, we call on
all responsible people of the planet to take direct action against the root
causes of climate change during the COP15 summit in Copenhagen 2009.
The exact plans for our mobilization are not yet finalized. We have time to
collectively decide what our best course of action may be. We encourage
everyone to start mobilizing in your own countries. It is time to take the
power back from the leaders not responsible enough to hold it. The power is in
our hands!
Practical information
The meeting is free for everyone, accommodation and food will be provided by
local activists. Note also that the meeting will be held the weekend prior to
the European Social Forum (ESF) in Malmö, September 17-21. People are welcome
to stay in Copenhagen in the intermediate days.
Please announce your arrival to sept08@klimax2009.org. We're happy to
respond to any questions you might have. You can also subscribe to the
international mobilization mailing list.
Please circulate, translate and distribute this call widely.
Climate Network 09
e-mail: sept08@klimax2009.org
Homepage: http://www.klimax2009.org
IT staff seen as more dangerous than hackers
More thoughts from Alan Wheatley:
The content of the linked news item 'Staff more dangerous than hackers'
does not surprise me.
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2217761/staff-dangerous-hackers
As an example, I have read or heard it said that the banks that go in
for 'off-shoring' of their data processing -- -- are going
in for false savings; the poorly paid staff overseas are not exactly
paid for their loyalty and may more readily succumb to selling
customers' account details.
Perhaps it should be pointed out to IT security managers that better pay
terms and conditions promotes mutual goodwill?
Alan Wheatley
New alternative to Conservapedia
Heard of Conservapedia set up to provide an alternative to wikipedia's liberal bias...well there is now a libertarian alternative to wikipedia...click here and take a look.
Will this new on line right of centre on line wiki split, spawning yet another encyclopedia from the political right...who knows but take a look if you want an alternative to the perceived biases of wiki world.
The problem isn't that Conservapedia is pro-gun and pro-Jesus. It is. The problem is that Conservapedia isn't pro-gun and pro-Jesus enough. note their critics on the right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Just had this via Roger Hallam of Vote No Heathrow, please spread the word. Things are rapidly taking off for the campaign now the hung... -
Canvassing in Brighton back in 2017 to support Green Party MP Caroline Lucas’s re-election efforts, I knocked on a door and came acros... -
Wrote this back in 1993, I think my thoughts and style have changed, as the official party history, now I am going to make it open source, s...
