The Big Crunch on Climate Targets

As the government's position on climate change targets remained confused after differing reports over the weekend, protesters gathered outsiide Lib Dem Head Quarters at 8am this morning to deliver the following letter to Nick Clegg:

We in the Campaign against Climate Change organised a demonstration outside your party headquarters on hearing the news that there could be a risk that recommendations of the Committee on Climate Change might not be accepted. We are still dismayed at the position reportedly taken by Vince Cable on this issue.

However we are relieved to hear that the government has now decided to accept the recommendations of the independent committee for the 2023-27 carbon budget – because to allow short term economic considerations to take precedence over the Committee’s recommendations at this stage, would have set a precedent that could have effectively undermined the whole of the UK’s emissions reduction program.

Nevertheless we feel it will be a big mistake to disregard or delay acceptance of the Committee’s recommendation for a cut of 60% by 2030 (we would say at least) and even more important the recommendation to tighten up the nearer term targets (2013 to 2023) because above all we need strong action as soon as possible.

Further to that we would like to take this opportunity to warn you that the recommendations of the Committee are still in themselves insufficient, and to demand yet more robust action on climate. We appreciate how difficult this is to achieve politically but we believe there can be nothing more compelling than the spectre of a climate catastrophe that could kill billions. Our reasons for believing that the recommendations of the Committee are inadequate include three main considerations.

First, the recommendations include an increase in agro-fuels – that is biofuels produced through intensive agriculture. Already the increased demand for agrofuels is boosting the rate of deforestation and destructive land use change in Indonesia, South America and other places. In climate change terms we believe the increase in use of agrofuels will do substantially more harm than good. So called sustainability criteria are ineffective and probably unworkable on the real world.

Second, the Committee do not take into account the UK emissions that have effectively been outsourced to countries like China as they feed our increased demand for consumer goods.

Third, the targets enshrined in the Climate Act are now themselves, inadequate in the light of the latest climate science and represent un an acceptable level of risk. There is a good chance they would be insufficient to prevent a catastrophic destabilisation of global climate that would be devastating for human populations around the world, especially, and most immediately, the poorest and most vulnerable. This is the clear implication of those at the sharp end of climate change research like Professor Kevin Anderson of the Tyndall Centre who suggests that we should be aiming at something more like a 10% cut in emissions per year1, or Doctor James Hansen who heads NASA’s research effort on climate change and who says that two degrees of warming represents too great a risk.

We could add to that a fourth, namely that the international situation around the climate negotiations currently looks bleak, so that there is an even greater need to set a conspicuously bold example to break the deadlock and move things forward.

We therefore believe that the quite unprecedented situation that we find ourselves in amounts to a global emergency and requires a quantum leap in the scale of our response, over and above what the Committee on Climate change are currently recommending. The Campaign against Climate Change, for instance, are calling for an end to agro-fuel use, ten per cent cuts in emissions per year and a more or less fully decarbonised economy in a “Zero Carbon Britain” by 2030.

To do any less is still to court disaster.

NHS is for public service - not private profit

 About 60 people attended Thursday's Save the NHS meeting at Willesden Green library and many were genuinely shocked when they heard about the proposed changes and their repercussions.

Dr Ishani Salpadoula from the Kilburn Park Medical Centre tol for which they are financially rewarded. They had been organised in clusters for three years with the aim of improving performance by working together and improvements had resulted. She said that GPs were therefore some way along the government's route already but this was because GPs were 'practical people' - they were not committed to privatisation.  She said, 'GPs are not bad guys, but they are not politicised'. Although the government emphasises 'choice' the public are not being given what they asked for. Patients want their own GP who will see them in timely fashion.

Dr Ishani said that if the changes were pushed through fragmentation through privatisation and external  proviers will result and 60 years of networking between hospitals, mental health, district nurses etc would suddenly change. Patients and GPs would find themselves dealing with agencies and communication would be difficult and the system much more complicated for patients.

She said there was nothing GPs could do without having the patients behind them. She urged the audience to see their GPs and tell them what they want - including accessibility and familiarity.

In discussion one member of the audience said that what he wanted was for GPs not to be taking part in the commissioning meetings at all but to be challenging the changes GPs were trained in medicine and that is what he wanted them to do - not run businesses. Dr Ishani said that surgeries should be holding meetings with patients to ascertain their views but there was no way one GP could contact 7,000 people on his or her books. Meetings tended to be advertised in surgeries and the information only seen by 'active' patients. There were suggestions from the audience for public meetings in the cluster areas for all patients. One speaker said that there was little democratic control over the NHS already but the proposals would make things even worse and the new system was utterly opaque. There was general agreement that residents should go to their GPs and find out what consultation was planned and ensure their voices are heard.

The meeting heard that a private company was already doing triage at Central Middlesex A and E and there was potential for hiving off services such as physiotherapy, speech therapy and mental health services at the beginning of the process. One speaker emphasised that the role of health professional was vital - if professional don't cooperate the new system won't work.

Navin Shah, Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow told the meeting about his attempts to raise the issue in the GLA, He said PCTs had their problems but they were better than non-accountable private quangos. . He'd  had no response to his questions about local monitoring and auditing. A multi-disciplinary London Improvement Board would be set up and 3% of the London government grant will go to that body. Shah said he though that body should be government funded - not reduce local money available to health. He went on to say the if the reforms don't work health inequalities would increase. 

Jim Fagan from Keep Our NHS Public said it was  important  to fight the reforms in London: 'If they pacify London they've got the NHS'.

Much more was said than I can report. Videos of  the speakers and the contributors are available on Brent Greens' blog HERE

Those attending the meeting and readers of this blog are urged to join the March to Save the NHS assemble 5.30pm Thursday 17th May at University College Hospital, Gower Street WC1 (Euston, Warren Street, Euston Square tubes) to march on the Department of Health in Whitehall. Health workers should wear their uniforms.

Kilburn Library Garden will open on Saturday

The reading garden in April

 It is a pity this on the same day as the Green Fair in Willesden Green but perhaps you can spend some time at both events. After getting funds from  what was then Neighbourhood Working in 2008 local people got digging and have transformed a rubbish dump behind Kilburn Library into a reading garden. This year they have managed top get Ward Working funds for the seats.

Victory on Climate Targets?

The Campaign Against Climate Change writes:

The Observer this morning has reported that the combined pressure of the Green Movement has borne fruit and the Government has now accepted the recommendations of the Committee on Climate Change. Yippee!

The demo, advertised for THIS Monday 16th, at 8.00am at Lib Dem HQ, at 4 Cowley Street, Westminster – map here.  (with a move on to Downing Street for 8.45am) will still go ahead. But it will now take the form of a reminder to the Lib Dems and to the government, that despite this victory for the greener forces within the government we are still courting climate disaster until we see a real quantum leap in the scale of our response to the climate crisis.
This is because – in particular:

1) The Committee on Climate Change recommends an increase in the use of biofuels which will do more harm than good.

2) The Committee’s recommendations do not take into account the effective outsourcing of a large proportion of UK emissions to countries like China to feed our increased demand for consumer goods.

3) In the light of the latest science, the targets enshrined in the Climate Act are inadequate. This is what those at the sharp end of scientific research into climate change are saying, like Kevin Anderson of the Tyndall Centre who says we need something more like 10% cuts a year, or James Hansen who heads the climate research effort at NASA who says that 2 degrees of warming is too dangerous.

We’ll take this message to the Lib Dems and to Downing Street.

How the story has unfolded - up to the victory that became clear last night

On Monday May 9th The Guardian broke the story that the chief executive of the Committee on Climate Change warned that a key cabinet decision on whether or not to stick to the UK's climate change targets was imminent, describing it as "the key test of the government's green credentials".

Later that day, Friends of the Earth called for Chris Huhne, the minister for Energy and Climate Change to resign if his fellow ministers renege on targets. Soon, George Monbiot had penned an article about it and the Guardian printed a follow-up story, claiming that Vince Cable had clashed with Huhne, arguing that an aggressive level of cuts would be "would be detrimental to UK", arguing instead for a weaker target. This led to public outcry, with the heads of 15 environmental NGOs writing an open letter to the Prime Minister, as well as the leader of the opposition and former Energy and Climate Change minister Ed Miliband writing his own letter.

Any more updates will be on www.campaigncc.org, and of course on Twitter @campaigncc

Stonebridge Adventure Playground stays to avoid Big Lottery clawback

Stonebridge Adventure Playground in earlier times

Another report going to the Executive on May 23rd seeks authority to award a contract to Brent Play Association for  running the Stonebridge Adventure Playground and Special Educational Needs Afterschool Clubs in Brent.

The contract has been going through years of short-term renewal since 2008 when BPA lost the contract to a charity called Kids after a bidding process. Kids sponsors included David Cameron and Cheri Blair but there were doubts about its ability to cater for Brent's diverse community and concern that the 'locally grown' playleaders who offered a positive role model to local children would be lost.  Kids eventually said they were unable to deliver the contract and withdrew. The BPA were invited to step back in to retrieve the situation and there followed a series of re-tendering proposals, short-term contracts and uncertainty for staff and children.

The uncertainty continues with this contract as it only runs from 1st June 2011 until 31st March 2012.
While securing play for children over the summer holiday  it still leaves the future in doubt. Playworkers will be in a quandary about whether to seek other work after the summer and the BPA is likely to have to once again issue protective redundancy notices to staff.

The Council faces a major problem with the Stonebridge Adventure Playground because the Playground Project was funded in 2008 under a deed of dedication with the Big Lottery Fund. Under the deed the site can only be used for the Project and cannot be disposed of without the consent of the Fund. In addition the Fund can withdraw funding or require repayment if the Council does not comply with any of the terms of the deed. The short-term contract removes the risk of repayment. 

The ten month contract is valued at £150,000 and the Council  will pay the running and utility costs of the Stonebridge Centre and the running costs of playschemes. The BPA will continue to occupy the Adventure Playground. Over the summer officers will consider options for the  'most appropriate future service delivery models for providing play services in Brent.' Sounding a note of of warning the report states that 'within a reduced budget it is likely this service will be increasingly targeted to those in greatest need'.  This sounds like the rationing of children's play opportunities. Sad, when £150,000 in the context of the overall budget, is such a small sum.

Meanwhile the campaign to secure the long-term future of Stonebridge Adventure Playground continues LINK
The Council report can be found HERE

Declaration of Interest: I am a trustee of Brent Play Association and a member of Play England which is dedicated to improving play facilities for children. This blog represents my personal views and not necessarily those of either organisation.

Waste Strategy Costs Mount

Will the new Waste Strategy mean no more Brent scenes like this?

The cost of the implementation of the Council's Waste Strategy which involves fortnightly collections of residual waste and expanded dry recycling, has increased following urgent decisions taken by the Chief Executive of the Council under his delegated powers. The costs relate to the deployment of new vehicles and the purchase of more than 100,000 new collection containers.

The original plan to purchase 12 new waste vehicles at a cost of £1.7m, including interest charges, spread over 7 years (approximately £243,000 annually), has been ditched. Instead Veolia will hire vehicles for the remaining two and a half  years of their contract, at a cost of £1.1m, to be paid for by an increase in their contract price. The annual cost will be £440,000, £197,000 more than buying and £493,000 more over the remaining two and a half years. The original plan left the Council with the vehicles when the contract expired but the new plan leaves them owning none.

Officers argue that they  will save £600,000 in total costs in the long term (£1.7m versus £1.1m) and that hiring will 'relieve the Council of the burden of ownership (my emphasis) at the end of the current contract in 2014, which will improve our ability to go to the market for the replacement contract and seek competitive prices.'  My reading of this is that this leaves Veolia holding all the cards at the end of the contract and puts them in a winning position for the new contract - after all Brent will have a waste strategy with no vehicles!

The other additional cost is in waste containers with wheeled bins replacing the current green boxes (I am still waiting to hear if they are going to be recycled). This is a table of the new purchases:

The caddies and kerbside containers will cost £96,300 and Officers deemed this a low value contract not requiring Executive approval.  In the case of the bins Officers considered that it was prudent to conclude arrangements on bins and vehicles at the same time as the two were interdependent.They needed to make a purchase quickly because of  the rise in prices for the oil-based polymer from which thy are made. The total cost of the bins will be £1,693,250 which is £58,000 over budget. The urgency again meant that the Chief Executive made the decision. Officers argue that the deal is still affordable and within budget as they will use the existing container revenue budget of £97,000.

Read the document for yourself HERE

Brent Library Closure Delays

No Brent libraries will be closed until after the last 'A' Level exam on July 1st according to a report on the Libraries Transformation Project going to the Executive on May 23rd. This will mean that no action need to be taken of the referral made by Scrutiny Committee earlier this month after representations from Brent Youth Parliament.

The report acknowledges that it is difficult to give firm dates on the closures 'due to management of variables including contractual notice for facilities, the profile of staff who are leaving and the potential legal proceedings'.

The report states:

The library users may commence legal proceedings against the Council by way of Judicial Review. This could also have implications for the date of closure of the six libraries

Councillors are reminded that a report on the implementation of the Project is not scheduled until April 2012

LINK to report

Defend the Planet Against Government Hypocrisy - before breakfast!

The Lib Dems look as if they are going to renege on yet another promise - is it double figures yet? Environmental organisations have called an emergency demonstration for Monday - a good one for the early risers amongst you:

EMERGENCY DEMONSTRATION

8.00 am at Lib Dem HQ, at 4 Cowley Street, Westminster Demand the Lib Dems stand up for their environmental principles!  Or are they just poodles to the Tory right? 
8.45 am  Move on to Downing StreetDemand that Cameron stick by all he argued for when he supported the Climate Act. Or was that all just green posturing? Is this the most green-backtracking government ever?

The Campaign Against Climate Change say:

This looks like crunch time for this government, and for the country on whether we will have any meaningful targets on emission cuts, or whether they will be watered down in the interests of the business lobby and short term economic interest every time…

The crucial decision will be taken at a meeting on Monday… hence the timing of this demo

Never mind that the targets - even before they are watered down - are not stringent enough in the light of the latest science, anyway. Never mind that the UK’s whole carbon-cutting strategy will rapidly unravel once regular budgets for cutting emissions like this are not maintained. Never mind that delaying emissions cuts risks putting a fatal amount of carbon in the atmosphere before we ever get to making those cuts anyway. Never mind that the fate of billions hangs on us actually getting to grips with the climate crisis and making it our number one priority. Never mind that we will never be able to influence other countries effectively if here at home we are seen to put our own economic welfare before the global environment  we share with the rest of the world….

…still it looks like short sighted, short term, economic considerations are threatening to take us down the path to misery and suffering on a colossal, unimaginable, scale…

See:
www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/may/09/climate-defining-green-moment-cameron
www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/may/09/friends-earth-ipcc-proposals-policywww.monbiot.com/2011/05/09/shaking-the-tree/
www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/09/vince-cable-chris-huhne-carbon-emissionswww.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13343055