Top 10 Tips for Saturday's March

The TUC's top ten tips for first-time marchers – old hands may also find useful - are:

Ø Tell everyone about it! Bring along your family, friends and colleagues to share the day. Having good company along always makes for a fun day out, and spreading the word will really boost the size of the march. How many people can you bring with you?

Ø Wear comfortable shoes. The route from Embankment to Hyde Park is nearly three miles long - and if it's been raining, Hyde Park can get very muddy - so wear flat shoes, trainers or boots.

Ø Be prepared for the weather. It will be quite a long day and March weather can be unpredictable. You might need a coat, jumper, hat, gloves, umbrella -or even sunscreen and sunglasses! If you are a public servant and normally wear a uniform wear that on the day, unless that will get you into trouble!

Ø Keep hydrated. You might not always be near a shop or newsagents, so bring a bottle of water and other soft drinks to keep you refreshed. Cafes and kiosks in Hyde Park will be open as usual but with thousands expected to attend, it may be some time before you see the Park gates.

Ø Don't go hungry. Bring a packed lunch and snacks as the march and rally take place over lunch time - and if you're marching near towards the back, it may be nearer tea time before you get to the rally.

Ø Bring a rucksack. A rucksack or a bag you can wear across your body are useful for carrying things easily - and leave your hands free for flags! Don't forget to pack any inhalers or medicine you usually take.

Ø Enjoy the sights. The route will take you from the Embankment, up Whitehall and past Trafalgar Square, along Piccadilly and into Hyde Park. It's an opportunity to see London in a different way without the traffic. Don't worry about getting lost if you don't know London. It'll be very obvious where the march is going, and there will be stewards every few hundred metres to help out.

Ø Share the moment.If you have a camera, why not take some pictures of the day that you can send to your local paper? If you've a smartphone, why not share pictures and updates online as it happens? Twitter users can follow @March26March, and there's even a special phone App for the march, that you can get from the march website www.marchforthealternative.org.uk

Ø Look after other people. Treat everyone with respect and look out for anyone who needs help or assistance on the way round. If you want to help others even more, why not volunteer to be a steward?

Ø Arrive on time and know your way home. Be patient - with more than 100,000 marchers the march will be leaving the assembly point from 12noon to well after 2 pm and possibly later. If you're coming by public transport think about coming later rather than early, and try to join the march from the rear - think of tube stations like Mansion House and Southwark. If you're coming on a coach make sure you know where the pick-up point is and what time the coach will be leaving. Check your route back to underground and overground train stations from Hyde Park. Ask the police or march stewards if you're unsure.

Park Royal: West London's Waste Land

Consultation closes on Friday on the draft Waste London Waste Plan. The consultation has hardly caused a ripple in Brent with only a handful of members of the public, as distinct from potential contractors, turning up at the consultation at Bridge Park.  However the Plan may have big consequences for Brent with unknown new processes taking place in the borough and a potential increase in heavy lorries transporting waste through the borough from the other boroughs as you can see from the map above.

Brent already has waste sites at Abbey Road and Veolia's transfer station in Marsh Road but additional sites are being considered in Park Royal in both the Brent and Ealing sectors. Additional facilities in Marsh Road seemed to be a favoured option in conversation with officials at the consultation meeting.

The most troubling aspect of the plan is that the choosing of sites has been separated from the processes that will take place on them.  The processes will form part of later planning applications so we are being asked to comment about sites without knowing the repercussions in terms of emissions, health and safety and traffic.

A member of Richmond Green Party comments:

When I asked the consultants about a missing table, describing possible waste technologies that could be deployed at the sites in question (a lot around Park Royal and none in Richmond, in fact) they repeated the mantra about the consultation being technology neutral, and have removed the reference to the table altogether in the online version now.

But they didn't deny that incineration could be deployed at these sites.

In contrast with Brent there was a well attended meeting in Ealing (Park Royal) where residents were horrified by the concentration of sites in the area.  Some residents were already upset about the 'stink' on the border with Hammersmith and Fulham from the Powerday facility.

Consultation ends on Friday March 25th at 5pm: To comment follow this LINK
Follow this LINK for an independent blog about the West London Waste Authority

Sign the Petition for One Million Climate Jobs

 The national petition for "One Million Climate Jobs" has now been launched ahead of Saturday's TUC demonstration.

The petition is endorsed by John McDonnell MP, Caroline Lucas MP, Linda Riordan MP, Kelvin Hopkins MP and Sally Hunt, General Secretary UCU.

We aim to increase the pressure on the government to solve the economic and environmental crises through the urgent creation of One Million Climate Jobs.

Please sign the petition and encourage your friends, colleagues, fellow trade unionists and other campaigners to add their name. There is a PDF version available for download from the site which you can use on transport to the demonstration on Saturday.

This is what the petition says:

We the undersigned call on the Government to give urgent and serious consideration to the recommendations of the One Million Climate Jobs report including:

1. We face a global climate crisis. If we do not halt the increase in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 the “prospects for the people on the planet are looking pretty bleak” (The Secretary of State for the Environment, reported 24.11.10)
2. Britain faces a global economic crisis, with rising youth unemployment and the predicted loss of over a million jobs due to austerity measures.
3. We need the Government to take urgent steps to address both these crises through the creation of a million climate jobs aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, enhancing energy efficiency, developing renewable and environmentally friendly sources of energy, and training workers in the “green skills” necessary for a sustainable low carbon economy.
4. Given the urgency and enormity of this task, we want the Government to employ staff directly in secure jobs, to do the necessary work through a National Climate Service.
5. We call for an immediate, fully government-funded programme to promote energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy in existing and new buildings.
6. We call for Government funding for free or low fare public transport services and the expansion and integration of public transport networks to reduce the use of private cars; for major investment in extending the rail network and introducing faster and more efficient trains; and the phasing-out of domestic airline flights as soon as practicable
7. We call for direct intervention by the proposed Climate Service to create new industries, and convert existing and declining industries, to conduct the research, development, manufacture and installation of alternative technologies for generating electricity from renewable sources.
8. We call on the Government to finance free programmes of “Green Skills” training through Further Education.
9. Such proposals can be met at a net cost well within the scale of recent Government spending on the financial sector and would be far less costly than the possible alternative – catastrophic climate change.
10. By adopting such a programme Britain would set a standard for the rest of the world, especially the developed world responsible for the crisis, in taking the decisive action necessary to limit global warming and ensure that future generations are left an inhabitable planet.

You can sign the petition HERE

Gardiner: Those made redundant will ask, 'What has this (Libyan intervention) got to do with Britain?'

With reporting of parliamentary debates often reduced to 'sketch writing' it is often hard to know exactly what our MPs have said without resorting to Hansard. For the record here is what Barry Gardiner MP for Brent North said in yesterday's debate on the Libya intervention:

I hope that, in a few weeks, the House will be able to rejoice that Gaddafi has gone. Few dictators have committed so many acts of psychopathic wickedness over such a long period of time. Many hon. Members will know of his atrocity at Abu Salim prison in Tripoli, where he marched 1,270 prisoners into a compound, locked the gate and instructed his soldiers to open fire from the courtyard rooftops. The gunfire and grenades rained down for more than two hours until all 1,270 people were dead. But that was in the dying days of John Major's Government in June 1996, and Britain took no action.

I welcome resolution 1973. To take action now is right, but it would be disingenuous to claim that action was not possible without Britain's military participation, involving just three planes. The question is not whether action against Gaddafi is right but whether it is we who have the primary duty and responsibility to take it. It is the families of many of those slain 15 years ago at Abu Salim who began this revolution in Libya, inspired by others across the region who had dared to rise up and demand justice and dignity from their leaders. I praise their courage, but I recognise that this is a civil war in Libya. In that respect, it is categorically different from other conflicts involving ethnic cleansing and religious domination by one faith over another. This is neither Bosnia nor Rwanda. UN resolution 1973 has authorised international interference in a civil war in which there has been no genocide and no ethnic cleansing: no Halabja there.

The resolution purports to allow no more than the humanitarian protection of civilians, but all acknowledge that the Libyan population will not be secure from harm until the country is rid of Gaddafi. Coalition leaders, when asked whether Gaddafi was a legitimate target, have been equivocal in their response. In such circumstances, the rose of humanitarian protection begins to smell of regime change, and by that name it is not so sweet. This became apparent to Amr Moussa over the weekend when he said:

"What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone, and what we want is the protection of civilians and not the bombardment of more civilians".

Perhaps the Arab League was too optimistic, because that is precisely what is likely to happen, if not by British and coalition missiles then by the rebels. It is naive to think that we can stop one side fighting in a civil war and not expect the other to take advantage. In a civil war, the tragedy is precisely that civilians are killed, if not by one side, then by the other. I do not believe that the international coalition will be even-handed in stopping rebel forces advancing in the same way.

The Prime Minister said in his statement on Friday that if we will the ends, we must also will the means. To will the means, however, does not entail the proposition that we must be the means. Many people in the UK are asking, "Why does Britain always have to get involved?" In two days, we will hear the Budget and the Chancellor will explain to the country why it is necessary to cut thousands of jobs to tackle the deficit. Those men and women who have been made redundant will no doubt sympathise with the Libyan people, but they will ask, "What has this got to do with Britain?" North Africa is not on our borders. It is not in our direct sphere of influence. Libya poses no direct threat to the UK, and we have no historical responsibility as the former colonial power, so why are we spending millions of pounds on cruise missiles, and endangering the lives of British soldiers to implement the resolution. It is ironic that many people asking these questions will be among the 17,000 military personnel who were judged to be surplus to requirements in last October's defence review, when the Government cut £4 billion from the defence budget.

There is no contradiction in welcoming the enabling authority given by UN resolution 1973, which allows those who have a direct interest or who have historical responsibilities as the former colonial power to act in Libya and, at the same time, to insist that we have no such direct interest or responsibility. Today, we are debating this after the event-we have taken that responsibility before a vote in the House, yet no one in government has sought to explain the policy of the rebels, on whose side we now find ourselves. We know that they are against Gaddafi, and that is a good start, but we certainly have no knowledge that they intend to replace him with an open, tolerant, liberal democracy. The whole of north Africa and the middle east are changing more rapidly than at any time since Suez. Shi'a minorities in Yemen and Bahrain have been shot or silenced by an invasion from Saudi Arabia. Iran is known to be eager to get involved. Egypt and Tunisia have effected home-grown revolutions and even Syria is experiencing serious internal tension.

In that extraordinary context, the Government have judged it right and in Britain's interest to involve our forces in military action. I pray that in a week's time Gaddafi is gone, and I pay tribute to the valour of our armed forces, but I believe that the Government were wrong to ask this-

The speaker interrupted at this point to enable another MP to speak.

Caroline Lucas Reveals 'Green Budget' Wish List

On the eve of the Budget, and after the announcement of further diminution of the Green Investment Bank, Caroline Lucas discusses what a Green budget would look like. Follow this LINK

Barry Gardiner votes against UN backed Libya intervention

Barry Gardiner MP (Labour, Brent North) joined Caroline Lucas (Green Party, Brighton Pavilion) and 11 other MPs  including Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell and Dennis Skinner in voting against the Government in yesterday's vote giving support to the UK's involvement in the intervention in Libya.

The vote was 557 for and 13 against. Sarah Teather MP (Brent Central) voted for the Government and Glenda Jackson MP (Hampstead and Kilburn) did not vote.

Government urged to rise to green investment challenge

A new report released today reveals the scale of the green investment challenge facing the UK.

The Green Investment Gap report, released by environmental think tank Public Interest Research Centre (PIRC), finds that the UK devoted just £12.6bn towards green investment in 2009-10.This figure amounts to less than 1% of UK GDP; less than what Britain spends on furniture annually; and less than half the annual green investment needed over the next decade to build the green economy.

“These figures reveal, for the first time, the size of the green investment challenge facing the UK,” said PIRC’s Director, Guy Shrubsole. “But they also show the size of the opportunity awaiting the country. At a time when the future of our national energy system is being reconsidered, in the wake of record oil prices and the Japanese nuclear accident, we would be foolish not to invest more in clean energy options.

“We don’t invest enough currently, but if we are serious about creating green jobs, insulating the country against oil shocks, and tackling climate change, we need to invest more. Green investment should be central to the government’s strategy for a sustainable economic recovery. To ensure that happens, the Chancellor needs to announce a strong Green Investment Bank
in tomorrow’s Budget.”

The report recommends that government, industry and the third sector work

together to:

• produce an annual audit of green investment;

• commit to closing the green investment gap facing the UK;

• legislate for a strong, public Green Investment Bank with the ability to

borrow and lend.

Investing sufficiently to meet our 2020 targets for emissions reduction, renewable energy and energy efficiency would result in:

• Greenhouse gas emissions declining by 34% on 1990 levels.

• The creation of hundreds of thousands of new green jobs. The Department of Energy and Climate Change estimate 250,000 green jobs will be created in energy efficiency industries over the next 20 years, whilst the Offshore Valuation Group estimates  the potential for 145,000 jobs in the offshore wind industry over the next four decades.

• Insulation against oil and gas price shocks. The government estimates that a doubling of the oil price (from $90/bl to $180/bl) would result in a cumulative loss of GDP of £45bn over 2 years.

The Green Investment Gap also shows that:

• Public sector green investment was £6.7bn in 2009-10, whilst private sector green investment was £5.9bn.

• Green spending by the private sector, third sector and households all show positive trends in recent decades, but the public sector is making up for lost investment following privatisation of the energy utilities in the 1980s and 1990s.

• Other investment decisions show up the small scale of UK green investment. For example, the UK spends £35.3bn on defence, and is likely to spend £100bn on decommissioning old nuclear power stations and oil and gas infrastructure.

• The UK lags behind other countries in green investment: South  Korea, for instance, is devoting 2% of its GDP to financing clean technologies.

Public Interest Research Centre (PIRC) is an environmental think tank, dedicated to producing research and advocacy on climate change, energy and sustainability issues.

The full report is available HERE

Barry Gardiner Questions UK Libya Involvement

Brent North MP, Barry Gardiner, had the following exchange with the Prime Minister in the House of Commons on Friday:

Barry Gardiner (Brent North, Labour)

I welcome the UN resolution, but I oppose Britain's military involvement in implementing it. The UN resolution is not to secure a no-fly zone for humanitarian protection, but an extraordinary authorisation of regime change. Unless the Prime Minister believes that Libya's Arab and African neighbours lack the capacity or the compassion for their Libyan brothers and sisters to act independently, why does he insist on putting British military personnel at risk?

David Cameron (Prime Minister; Witney, Conservative)

Obviously I respect the hon. Gentleman's view, but it seems to me that if we will the end, we should also will the means to that end. We should never overestimate Britain's size or capabilities, but neither should we underestimate them. We have one of the finest armed services in the world. We are one of the world's leading military powers, and we also have huge strength in diplomacy, soft power and development. We should not play a disproportionate part, but I think that we should play a proportionate part alongside allies such as France, America and the Arab world. To say that we should pass such a resolution but then just stand back and hope that someone, somewhere in the Arab world will bring it about is profoundly wrong.