Green Left members at a meeting of Greens from throughout Devon pushed for the inclusion of the objective of securing the Living Wage demand in the published in the Green Party manifesto for the Devon County Council elections next May.
We are delighted to report enthusiastic support from party members. Green Left supporters will endeavour to ensure that this becomes a key pledge for the upcoming elections !
Sunday, 16 September 2012
Devon Greens support Living Wage Campaign
Friday, 14 September 2012
Torbay Green Party Supports Living Wage Campaign
Yesterday in my guise as Secretary of Torbay Trades Union Council I was delighted to meet with Torbay Green Party members in Paignton to welcome their support for the TUC campaign in support of a 'living wage', which is to be set at 60% of the median UK wage. This is essential in the bay as the area suffers from a low wage low value employment economy, and as Romanyne Phoenix said during the Green Party leadership contest "The economic and environmental crises are two sides of the same coin. Neither struggle exists independently of the other."
Green Left SW exists to illustrate the need to fight for social and environmental justice and to promote eco-socialist ideas within and without the Green party in Torbay and across the West Country.
Unlike Ed Balls and the Labour party we will not be offering austerity-lite policies. The Green party is the only electoral party with an explicit opposition to the cuts programme of the bigger parties. We are proud to be green trade unionists !
Here is the excellent press report from the website pages of the South Devon newspaper, The Herald Express (14/09/12) :
Green Left SW exists to illustrate the need to fight for social and environmental justice and to promote eco-socialist ideas within and without the Green party in Torbay and across the West Country.
Unlike Ed Balls and the Labour party we will not be offering austerity-lite policies. The Green party is the only electoral party with an explicit opposition to the cuts programme of the bigger parties. We are proud to be green trade unionists !
Here is the excellent press report from the website pages of the South Devon newspaper, The Herald Express (14/09/12) :
The Torbay Green Party continues to campaign for real changes in the
lives of so many people who have been marginalised by the establishment parties
- Torbay Green Party and the TUC in Paignton this week supporting a ‘Living Wage’ for Torbay
and has given its full support to the 'Living Wage Campaign' being run by
Torbay Trades Union Council (TUC).
Dr Sam Moss, Chairman of Torbay Green Party said, 'Torbay Trades Council
is highlighting how their members are blighted by an ever-growing wage
inequality which endangers health and has a detrimental impact on family life. A real "living wage" of at least
£7.20 per hour, based on the work carried out for the Living Wage Foundation (LWF)
by Loughborough University, will provide a secure margin so that hard working
families do not fall into poverty and debt when they face the kind of
day-to-day challenges that the better off can take in their stride.'
Barrie Wood, Secretary of Torbay TUC commented, 'I am delighted to hear
that the Green Party locally and nationally are supporting the Living Wage Campaign,
as we seek to build a consensus in favour of justice at work.'
Sam added, 'the current minimum wage falls well short of what's needed –
more than a pound an hour short in fact – from last October the minimum wage
has been just £6.08. This is totally unacceptable. Every study finds the
"poverty threshold wage" to be higher than the minimum wage set by the
coalition government. If the Greens were in power the national minimum wage
would be set at the level of a real living wage equal to 60%
of net national average earnings. The "Living Wage" will rise above £7.20 in
November (approximately 3.5% according to the LWF). We call on Torbay Council
to establish a Living Wage Commission for the borough as soon as possible to
stop poverty wages being paid in Torbay and help reduce inequality.'
The proportion of people on low pay is steadily increasing and the
economic gap between Torbay and the rest of Devon and the UK has been widening
in recent years. The yearly
average income per person in Torbay is over £3,000 below the national average
and the bay area has pockets of severe deprivation – the consequences of this
will affect us all! The overwhelming evidence shows that more equal societies are healthier, happier and more prosperous.
Tuesday, 11 September 2012
10 Sept 2012: NUT strike vote, combined NASUWT action
Two of the largest teaching unions, NUT and NASUWT, who represent the majority (90%) of school teachers in England, announced plans to begin action short of a strike on 26th September.
Both unions had an existing mandate for strike action over pensions, resulting in strikes on June 30 (NUT) and Nov 30 (both alongside over 20 other unions) in 2011, and regional action by NUT in London on March 28th this year. NASUWT already had a vote for action on pay and conditions, while NUTs ballot for both strike action and action short of a strike, regarding pay & conditions, closed last Thursday:
NUT
- 92% in favour of action short of a strike
- 83% in favour of strike action
So far NUT members have not received any information from the union regarding the proposed action short of strike on September 26, and it is not clear form it will take, but the BBC reports that:
'The industrial action will include a work to rule, not attending school meetings and some extra-curricular activities, not filling in forms or covering for absent staff, and refusing to invigilate on public exams including Sats and GCSEs.'
The Guardian quotes Kevin Courtney, the NUT deputy general secretary:
"The action is intended to be pupil, parent and public friendly, whilst resisting government policies which are undermining teachers' ability to work effectively to deliver the highest standards of education."
Apparently it will be targeted at management rather than pupils, with after-school clubs continuing.
The reports adds:
However, teachers will be asked to boycott unscheduled management meetings, refuse to hand in lesson plans to school managers and permit no more than three lesson inspections by headteachers per school year.
Courtney again:
"What we are looking for is actions which don't hit real education but hit at overwork and crazy accountability," said Courtney. A list of work-to-rule actions includes refusing to cover for absent colleagues, declining to supervise pupils during lunchbreaks and writing only one annual report to parents.
The dispute "could escalate into a strike if a School Teachers' Review Body report into pay and conditions leads to a crackdown on wages. "If the government does not listen we are intending to move to strike action," said Courtney."
There is as yet no indication regarding strike dates should they happen.
The joint action is a result of the declaration in May from both unions committing to combined action over pay, pensions and conditions.
I'm somewhat positive of the potential but I do worry that this will end up a damp squib like the NASUWT's work-to-rule last year, which was completely unco-ordinated and rarely enforced judging by teacher comments and its impact.
It has real potential if combined with strikes, but with 2000 academies in England secondaries now, it will require a real focused effort to make this action as powerful as possible.
Thanks to Choccy for this article
Both unions had an existing mandate for strike action over pensions, resulting in strikes on June 30 (NUT) and Nov 30 (both alongside over 20 other unions) in 2011, and regional action by NUT in London on March 28th this year. NASUWT already had a vote for action on pay and conditions, while NUTs ballot for both strike action and action short of a strike, regarding pay & conditions, closed last Thursday:
NUT
- 92% in favour of action short of a strike
- 83% in favour of strike action
So far NUT members have not received any information from the union regarding the proposed action short of strike on September 26, and it is not clear form it will take, but the BBC reports that:
'The industrial action will include a work to rule, not attending school meetings and some extra-curricular activities, not filling in forms or covering for absent staff, and refusing to invigilate on public exams including Sats and GCSEs.'
The Guardian quotes Kevin Courtney, the NUT deputy general secretary:
"The action is intended to be pupil, parent and public friendly, whilst resisting government policies which are undermining teachers' ability to work effectively to deliver the highest standards of education."
Apparently it will be targeted at management rather than pupils, with after-school clubs continuing.
The reports adds:
However, teachers will be asked to boycott unscheduled management meetings, refuse to hand in lesson plans to school managers and permit no more than three lesson inspections by headteachers per school year.
Courtney again:
"What we are looking for is actions which don't hit real education but hit at overwork and crazy accountability," said Courtney. A list of work-to-rule actions includes refusing to cover for absent colleagues, declining to supervise pupils during lunchbreaks and writing only one annual report to parents.
The dispute "could escalate into a strike if a School Teachers' Review Body report into pay and conditions leads to a crackdown on wages. "If the government does not listen we are intending to move to strike action," said Courtney."
There is as yet no indication regarding strike dates should they happen.
The joint action is a result of the declaration in May from both unions committing to combined action over pay, pensions and conditions.
I'm somewhat positive of the potential but I do worry that this will end up a damp squib like the NASUWT's work-to-rule last year, which was completely unco-ordinated and rarely enforced judging by teacher comments and its impact.
It has real potential if combined with strikes, but with 2000 academies in England secondaries now, it will require a real focused effort to make this action as powerful as possible.
Thanks to Choccy for this article
Monday, 10 September 2012
Don't sell off our Plasma Resources!
Plasma Petition - keep it public
The government is
planning to sell off Plasma Resources UK, the firm responsible for
supplying blood plasma products to the NHS, to a private contractor.
1. Blood plasma is essential for the treatment of many conditions, including burns, shock and major trauma; immune disorders and neurological conditions; protecting unborn children from haemolytic diseases. Possibly best known plasma product is Factor VIII used to treat around 3,000 haemophilia patients.
2. The profit impetus may compel any company taking over services to cut corners in order to make return. This could have devastating consequences for patient safety should contaminated, poorly packaged or improperly labelled products reach frontline healthcare services.
Please consider signing the petition at http://you.38degrees.org. uk/p/blood-plasma and stop the sell off of this important public service.
Mr. Lansley has already been party to breaking up the Blood Transfusion Service (NHSBT) in 2011.
1. Blood plasma is essential for the treatment of many conditions, including burns, shock and major trauma; immune disorders and neurological conditions; protecting unborn children from haemolytic diseases. Possibly best known plasma product is Factor VIII used to treat around 3,000 haemophilia patients.
2. The profit impetus may compel any company taking over services to cut corners in order to make return. This could have devastating consequences for patient safety should contaminated, poorly packaged or improperly labelled products reach frontline healthcare services.
Please consider signing the petition at http://you.38degrees.org.
Mr. Lansley has already been party to breaking up the Blood Transfusion Service (NHSBT) in 2011.
It is the part that he has separated off that he is looking to sell off.
That company is Plasma Resources UK (PRUK), the principal supplier of plasma and plasma products to the NHS.
Blood and Plasma are obviously joined at the hip.
When a donor gives a pint of blood, 55% of that fluid by volume is plasma.
Much of today's service is about producing blood and plasma products for the treatment of a wide range of patients.
Treatments using plasma products are no less important than those using blood products.
You
have only to google‚ medical uses of plasma to find out the wonderful
way its products can influence patients lives, such as the treatment
folk suffering from burns, shock and major trauma; immune disorders and
neurological conditions; protecting unborn children from haemolytic
diseases. Possibly best known plasma product is Factor VIII used to
treat around 3,000 haemophilia patients.

Will Duckworth, Green Party Deputy Leader, Bristol Conference 2012
Fine speech by Will Duckworth, Green Left member and Deputy Leader of the Green Party at the Party's Autumn Conference in Bristol, September 2012
Thursday, 6 September 2012
Bristol Green Left
About
Bristol Green Left is part of a national network of Green Party members who support an explicitly ecosocialist agenda. We aim to promote ecosocialist values both within the Green Party and in the wider community. We believe that electoral work is only one aspect of the struggle for change. The mass anti-capitalist and climate change movements, the Arab spring and the popular opposition to austerity here and across Europe point to other ways of fighting the system.
We hold monthly meetings that are open to all Green Party members and sympathisers. For further information email uplandtrout@hotmail.co.uk.
This should be the basis against which all those involved in Green politics judge their candidates and organizations they choose to support. http://pwccc.wordpress.com/2010/04/24/peoples-agreement/
People’s Agreement of Cochabamba
April 24, 2010 in Announcement, News
World People’s Conference on Climate Change
and the Rights of Mother Earth
April 22nd, Cochabamba, Bolivia
PEOPLE’S AGREEMENT
Today, our Mother Earth is wounded and the future of humanity is in danger.
If global warming increases by more than 2 degrees Celsius, a situation that the “Copenhagen Accord” could lead to, there is a 50% probability that the damages caused to our Mother Earth will be completely irreversible. Between 20% and 30% of species would be in danger of disappearing. Large extensions of forest would be affected, droughts and floods would affect different regions of the planet, deserts would expand, and the melting of the polar ice caps and the glaciers in the Andes and Himalayas would worsen. Many island states would disappear, and Africa would suffer an increase in temperature of more than 3 degrees Celsius. Likewise, the production of food would diminish in the world, causing catastrophic impact on the survival of inhabitants from vast regions in the planet, and the number of people in the world suffering from hunger would increase dramatically, a figure that already exceeds 1.02 billion people.The corporations and governments of the so-called “developed” countries, in complicity with a segment of the scientific community, have led us to discuss climate change as a problem limited to the rise in temperature without questioning the cause, which is the capitalist system.
We confront the terminal crisis of a civilizing model that is patriarchal and based on the submission and destruction of human beings and nature that accelerated since the industrial revolution.
The capitalist system has imposed on us a logic of competition, progress and limitless growth. This regime of production and consumption seeks profit without limits, separating human beings from nature and imposing a logic of domination upon nature, transforming everything into commodities: water, earth, the human genome, ancestral cultures, biodiversity, justice, ethics, the rights of peoples, and life itself.
Under capitalism, Mother Earth is converted into a source of raw materials, and human beings into consumers and a means of production, into people that are seen as valuable only for what they own, and not for what they are.
Capitalism requires a powerful military industry for its processes of accumulation and imposition of control over territories and natural resources, suppressing the resistance of the peoples. It is an imperialist system of colonization of the planet.
Humanity confronts a great dilemma: to continue on the path of capitalism, depredation, and death, or to choose the path of harmony with nature and respect for life.
It is imperative that we forge a new system that restores harmony with nature and among human beings. And in order for there to be balance with nature, there must first be equity among human beings. We propose to the peoples of the world the recovery, revalorization, and strengthening of the knowledge, wisdom, and ancestral practices of Indigenous Peoples, which are affirmed in the thought and practices of “Living Well,” recognizing Mother Earth as a living being with which we have an indivisible, interdependent, complementary and spiritual relationship. To face climate change, we must recognize Mother Earth as the source of life and forge a new system based on the principles of:
- harmony and balance among all and with all things;
- complementarity, solidarity, and equality;
- collective well-being and the satisfaction of the basic necessities of all;
- people in harmony with nature;
- recognition of human beings for what they are, not what they own;
- elimination of all forms of colonialism, imperialism and interventionism;
- peace among the peoples and with Mother Earth;
The model we support is not a model of limitless and destructive development. All countries need to produce the goods and services necessary to satisfy the fundamental needs of their populations, but by no means can they continue to follow the path of development that has led the richest countries to have an ecological footprint five times bigger than what the planet is able to support. Currently, the regenerative capacity of the planet has been already exceeded by more than 30 percent. If this pace of over-exploitation of our Mother Earth continues, we will need two planets by the year 2030. In an interdependent system in which human beings are only one component, it is not possible to recognize rights only to the human part without provoking an imbalance in the system as a whole. To guarantee human rights and to restore harmony with nature, it is necessary to effectively recognize and apply the rights of Mother Earth. For this purpose, we propose the attached project for the Universal Declaration on the Rights of Mother Earth, in which it’s recorded that:
- The right to live and to exist;
- The right to be respected;
- The right to regenerate its bio-capacity and to continue it’s vital cycles and processes free of human alteration;
- The right to maintain their identity and integrity as differentiated beings, self-regulated and interrelated;
- The right to water as the source of life;
- The right to clean air;
- The right to comprehensive health;
- The right to be free of contamination and pollution, free of toxic and radioactive waste;
- The right to be free of alterations or modifications of it’s genetic structure in a manner that threatens it’s integrity or vital and healthy functioning;
- The right to prompt and full restoration for violations to the rights acknowledged in this Declaration caused by human activities.
The “shared vision” seeks to stabilize the concentrations of greenhouse gases to make effective the Article 2 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which states that “the stabilization of greenhouse gases concentrations in the atmosphere to a level that prevents dangerous anthropogenic inferences for the climate system.” Our vision is based on the principle of historical common but differentiated responsibilities, to demand the developed countries to commit with quantifiable goals of emission reduction that will allow to return the concentrations of greenhouse gases to 300 ppm, therefore the increase in the average world temperature to a maximum of one degree Celsius.
Emphasizing the need for urgent action to achieve this vision, and with the support of peoples, movements and countries, developed countries should commit to ambitious targets for reducing emissions that permit the achievement of short-term objectives, while maintaining our vision in favor of balance in the Earth’s climate system, in agreement with the ultimate objective of the Convention.
The “shared vision for long-term cooperative action” in climate change negotiations should not be reduced to defining the limit on temperature increases and the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, but must also incorporate in a balanced and integral manner measures regarding capacity building, production and consumption patterns, and other essential factors such as the acknowledging of the Rights of Mother Earth to establish harmony with nature.
Developed countries, as the main cause of climate change, in assuming their historical responsibility, must recognize and honor their climate debt in all of its dimensions as the basis for a just, effective, and scientific solution to climate change. In this context, we demand that developed countries:
• Restore to developing countries the atmospheric space that is occupied by their greenhouse gas emissions. This implies the decolonization of the atmosphere through the reduction and absorption of their emissions;
• Assume the costs and technology transfer needs of developing countries arising from the loss of development opportunities due to living in a restricted atmospheric space;
• Assume responsibility for the hundreds of millions of people that will be forced to migrate due to the climate change caused by these countries, and eliminate their restrictive immigration policies, offering migrants a decent life with full human rights guarantees in their countries;
• Assume adaptation debt related to the impacts of climate change on developing countries by providing the means to prevent, minimize, and deal with damages arising from their excessive emissions;
• Honor these debts as part of a broader debt to Mother Earth by adopting and implementing the United Nations Universal Declaration on the Rights of Mother Earth.
The focus must not be only on financial compensation, but also on restorative justice, understood as the restitution of integrity to our Mother Earth and all its beings.
We deplore attempts by countries to annul the Kyoto Protocol, which is the sole legally binding instrument specific to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by developed countries.
We inform the world that, despite their obligation to reduce emissions, developed countries have increased their emissions by 11.2% in the period from 1990 to 2007.
During that same period, due to unbridled consumption, the United States of America has increased its greenhouse gas emissions by 16.8%, reaching an average of 20 to 23 tons of CO2 per-person. This represents 9 times more than that of the average inhabitant of the “Third World,” and 20 times more than that of the average inhabitant of Sub-Saharan Africa.
We categorically reject the illegitimate “Copenhagen Accord” that allows developed countries to offer insufficient reductions in greenhouse gases based in voluntary and individual commitments, violating the environmental integrity of Mother Earth and leading us toward an increase in global temperatures of around 4°C.
The next Conference on Climate Change to be held at the end of 2010 in Mexico should approve an amendment to the Kyoto Protocol for the second commitment period from 2013 to 2017 under which developed countries must agree to significant domestic emissions reductions of at least 50% based on 1990 levels, excluding carbon markets or other offset mechanisms that mask the failure of actual reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
We require first of all the establishment of a goal for the group of developed countries to achieve the assignment of individual commitments for each developed country under the framework of complementary efforts among each one, maintaining in this way Kyoto Protocol as the route to emissions reductions.
The United States, as the only Annex 1 country on Earth that did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, has a significant responsibility toward all peoples of the world to ratify this document and commit itself to respecting and complying with emissions reduction targets on a scale appropriate to the total size of its economy.
We the peoples have the equal right to be protected from the adverse effects of climate change and reject the notion of adaptation to climate change as understood as a resignation to impacts provoked by the historical emissions of developed countries, which themselves must adapt their modes of life and consumption in the face of this global emergency. We see it as imperative to confront the adverse effects of climate change, and consider adaptation to be a process rather than an imposition, as well as a tool that can serve to help offset those effects, demonstrating that it is possible to achieve harmony with nature under a different model for living.
It is necessary to construct an Adaptation Fund exclusively for addressing climate change as part of a financial mechanism that is managed in a sovereign, transparent, and equitable manner for all States. This Fund should assess the impacts and costs of climate change in developing countries and needs deriving from these impacts, and monitor support on the part of developed countries. It should also include a mechanism for compensation for current and future damages, loss of opportunities due to extreme and gradual climactic events, and additional costs that could present themselves if our planet surpasses ecological thresholds, such as those impacts that present obstacles to “Living Well.”
The “Copenhagen Accord” imposed on developing countries by a few States, beyond simply offering insufficient resources, attempts as well to divide and create confrontation between peoples and to extort developing countries by placing conditions on access to adaptation and mitigation resources. We also assert as unacceptable the attempt in processes of international negotiation to classify developing countries for their vulnerability to climate change, generating disputes, inequalities and segregation among them.
The immense challenge humanity faces of stopping global warming and cooling the planet can only be achieved through a profound shift in agricultural practices toward the sustainable model of production used by indigenous and rural farming peoples, as well as other ancestral models and practices that contribute to solving the problem of agriculture and food sovereignty. This is understood as the right of peoples to control their own seeds, lands, water, and food production, thereby guaranteeing, through forms of production that are in harmony with Mother Earth and appropriate to local cultural contexts, access to sufficient, varied and nutritious foods in complementarity with Mother Earth and deepening the autonomous (participatory, communal and shared) production of every nation and people.
Climate change is now producing profound impacts on agriculture and the ways of life of indigenous peoples and farmers throughout the world, and these impacts will worsen in the future.
Agribusiness, through its social, economic, and cultural model of global capitalist production and its logic of producing food for the market and not to fulfill the right to proper nutrition, is one of the principal causes of climate change. Its technological, commercial, and political approach only serves to deepen the climate change crisis and increase hunger in the world. For this reason, we reject Free Trade Agreements and Association Agreements and all forms of the application of Intellectual Property Rights to life, current technological packages (agrochemicals, genetic modification) and those that offer false solutions (biofuels, geo-engineering, nanotechnology, etc.) that only exacerbate the current crisis.
We similarly denounce the way in which the capitalist model imposes mega-infrastructure projects and invades territories with extractive projects, water privatization, and militarized territories, expelling indigenous peoples from their lands, inhibiting food sovereignty and deepening socio-environmental crisis.
We demand recognition of the right of all peoples, living beings, and Mother Earth to have access to water, and we support the proposal of the Government of Bolivia to recognize water as a Fundamental Human Right.
The definition of forests used in the negotiations of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which includes plantations, is unacceptable. Monoculture plantations are not forests. Therefore, we require a definition for negotiation purposes that recognizes the native forests, jungles and the diverse ecosystems on Earth.
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples must be fully recognized, implemented and integrated in climate change negotiations. The best strategy and action to avoid deforestation and degradation and protect native forests and jungles is to recognize and guarantee collective rights to lands and territories, especially considering that most of the forests are located within the territories of indigenous peoples and nations and other traditional communities.
We condemn market mechanisms such as REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) and its versions + and + +, which are violating the sovereignty of peoples and their right to prior free and informed consent as well as the sovereignty of national States, the customs of Peoples, and the Rights of Nature.
Polluting countries have an obligation to carry out direct transfers of the economic and technological resources needed to pay for the restoration and maintenance of forests in favor of the peoples and indigenous ancestral organic structures. Compensation must be direct and in addition to the sources of funding promised by developed countries outside of the carbon market, and never serve as carbon offsets. We demand that countries stop actions on local forests based on market mechanisms and propose non-existent and conditional results. We call on governments to create a global program to restore native forests and jungles, managed and administered by the peoples, implementing forest seeds, fruit trees, and native flora. Governments should eliminate forest concessions and support the conservation of petroleum deposits in the ground and urgently stop the exploitation of hydrocarbons in forestlands.
We call upon States to recognize, respect and guarantee the effective implementation of international human rights standards and the rights of indigenous peoples, including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples under ILO Convention 169, among other relevant instruments in the negotiations, policies and measures used to meet the challenges posed by climate change. In particular, we call upon States to give legal recognition to claims over territories, lands and natural resources to enable and strengthen our traditional ways of life and contribute effectively to solving climate change.
We demand the full and effective implementation of the right to consultation, participation and prior, free and informed consent of indigenous peoples in all negotiation processes, and in the design and implementation of measures related to climate change.
Environmental degradation and climate change are currently reaching critical levels, and one of the main consequences of this is domestic and international migration. According to projections, there were already about 25 million climate migrants by 1995. Current estimates are around 50 million, and projections suggest that between 200 million and 1 billion people will become displaced by situations resulting from climate change by the year 2050.
Developed countries should assume responsibility for climate migrants, welcoming them into their territories and recognizing their fundamental rights through the signing of international conventions that provide for the definition of climate migrant and require all States to abide by abide by determinations.
Establish an International Tribunal of Conscience to denounce, make visible, document, judge and punish violations of the rights of migrants, refugees and displaced persons within countries of origin, transit and destination, clearly identifying the responsibilities of States, companies and other agents.
Current funding directed toward developing countries for climate change and the proposal of the Copenhagen Accord are insignificant. In addition to Official Development Assistance and public sources, developed countries must commit to a new annual funding of at least 6% of GDP to tackle climate change in developing countries. This is viable considering that a similar amount is spent on national defense, and that 5 times more have been put forth to rescue failing banks and speculators, which raises serious questions about global priorities and political will. This funding should be direct and free of conditions, and should not interfere with the national sovereignty or self-determination of the most affected communities and groups.
In view of the inefficiency of the current mechanism, a new funding mechanism should be established at the 2010 Climate Change Conference in Mexico, functioning under the authority of the Conference of the Parties (COP) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and held accountable to it, with significant representation of developing countries, to ensure compliance with the funding commitments of Annex 1 countries.
It has been stated that developed countries significantly increased their emissions in the period from 1990 to 2007, despite having stated that the reduction would be substantially supported by market mechanisms.
The carbon market has become a lucrative business, commodifying our Mother Earth. It is therefore not an alternative for tackle climate change, as it loots and ravages the land, water, and even life itself.
The recent financial crisis has demonstrated that the market is incapable of regulating the financial system, which is fragile and uncertain due to speculation and the emergence of intermediary brokers. Therefore, it would be totally irresponsible to leave in their hands the care and protection of human existence and of our Mother Earth.
We consider inadmissible that current negotiations propose the creation of new mechanisms that extend and promote the carbon market, for existing mechanisms have not resolved the problem of climate change nor led to real and direct actions to reduce greenhouse gases. It is necessary to demand fulfillment of the commitments assumed by developed countries under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change regarding development and technology transfer, and to reject the “technology showcase” proposed by developed countries that only markets technology. It is essential to establish guidelines in order to create a multilateral and multidisciplinary mechanism for participatory control, management, and evaluation of the exchange of technologies. These technologies must be useful, clean and socially sound. Likewise, it is fundamental to establish a fund for the financing and inventory of technologies that are appropriate and free of intellectual property rights. Patents, in particular, should move from the hands of private monopolies to the public domain in order to promote accessibility and low costs.
Knowledge is universal, and should for no reason be the object of private property or private use, nor should its application in the form of technology. Developed countries have a responsibility to share their technology with developing countries, to build research centers in developing countries for the creation of technologies and innovations, and defend and promote their development and application for “living well.” The world must recover and re-learn ancestral principles and approaches from native peoples to stop the destruction of the planet, as well as promote ancestral practices, knowledge and spirituality to recuperate the capacity for “living well” in harmony with Mother Earth.
Considering the lack of political will on the part of developed countries to effectively comply with commitments and obligations assumed under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol, and given the lack of a legal international organism to guard against and sanction climate and environmental crimes that violate the Rights of Mother Earth and humanity, we demand the creation of an International Climate and Environmental Justice Tribunal that has the legal capacity to prevent, judge and penalize States, industries and people that by commission or omission contaminate and provoke climate change.
Supporting States that present claims at the International Climate and Environmental Justice Tribunal against developed countries that fail to comply with commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol including commitments to reduce greenhouse gases.
We urge peoples to propose and promote deep reform within the United Nations, so that all member States comply with the decisions of the International Climate and Environmental Justice Tribunal.
The future of humanity is in danger, and we cannot allow a group of leaders from developed countries to decide for all countries as they tried unsuccessfully to do at the Conference of the Parties in Copenhagen. This decision concerns us all. Thus, it is essential to carry out a global referendum or popular consultation on climate change in which all are consulted regarding the following issues; the level of emission reductions on the part of developed countries and transnational corporations, financing to be offered by developed countries, the creation of an International Climate Justice Tribunal, the need for a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth, and the need to change the current capitalist system. The process of a global referendum or popular consultation will depend on process of preparation that ensures the successful development of the same.
In order to coordinate our international action and implement the results of this “Accord of the Peoples,” we call for the building of a Global People’s Movement for Mother Earth, which should be based on the principles of complementarity and respect for the diversity of origin and visions among its members, constituting a broad and democratic space for coordination and joint worldwide actions.
To this end, we adopt the attached global plan of action so that in Mexico, the developed countries listed in Annex 1 respect the existing legal framework and reduce their greenhouse gases emissions by 50%, and that the different proposals contained in this Agreement are adopted.
Finally, we agree to undertake a Second World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth in 2011 as part of this process of building the Global People’s Movement for Mother Earth and reacting to the outcomes of the Climate Change Conference to be held at the end of this year in Cancun, Mexico.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)