|
| Newsletter | August 2001 |
All our material is anti-copyright. You may copy and pass around to your friends and colleagues, indeed we encourage you to do so. Material may be reproduced provided the source is acknowledge.
If you have been passed a copy, please contact us to subscribe for your own copy. Please feel free to pass around your own copy.
A typo slipped into the web address we gave for the location of the FoE paper on Indonesian rainforest destruction held on the Grauniad web site.
In the April issue (#0011) we gave the wrong telephone number for Quieter Skies Campaign. This should have been:
01483 200919 {24 hour answer machine}
Mike Moore, WTO DG, has given a gloomy report to assembled trade ministers in Geneva. He was very downbeat on there being a new trade round, he didn't even have high hopes for the last round. He feels WTO may become irrelevant.
Mowlam, construction come services group, believe direct action will force PPP/PFI off the political agenda.
It is only by working together we achieve anything. The lessons should be learnt from airfield opposition. Groups are far too narrowly focused, only seeing their own backyard, if they can shift the problems elsewhere, great.
We can only stop airfield expansion if we cooperate, work together, and see the bigger picture. Airfield expansion is part of a greater problem of cheap transport and globalisation. Only by attacking the growth in aviation at source can we possibly hope to stop airport expansion.
A few far-sighted aviation and anti-globalisation campaigners are now working with farmers on a common agenda of stopping cheap food imports and subsidised exports. The farmers have been made to see that fuel protesters far from being their allies are their enemies and have led to the stranglehold of the supermarkets and the global market. Others are tackling sweatshop factories and other ills of globalisation.
Even before the AGM, BAA were starting to panic when they got wind of a protest outside, and possibly inside, the AGM at QEII Conference Centre (opp Westminster Hall). The cat was then well and truly let out of the bag by distribution of a memo not only stating what action there would be, but listing some of the activists.
The rally outside was on Heathrow Terminal 5, uncontrolled expansion of aviation and climate change.
FARA (Farnborough residents association opposed to expansion of Farnborough Airport) refused to support the event, failed to tell their members or to publicise the event via their web site. Manchester and Gatwick also refused to support the rally or tell their supporters.
The chairman waffled on with a load of bullshit about the environment and sustainability. One could have been forgiven for thinking this was a meeting of one of the corporate green groups, not a multinational extracting the last drop of profit for shareholders. It was taken as read that T5 would be given the go-ahead, the only cause for concern was the attached conditions. £250 million had already been spent on infrastructure and preparatory work for T5. £6 billion is to be spent over the next 10 years, of which 43% is on T5. Passenger demand is set to double over the next 20 years, it is for BAA to rise to the challenge and meet that demand. Cheap air travel brought the benefits of cheap imported food and other goods. Aviation was the economic engine that was driving the national economy. London depended on Heathrow. Heathrow was in competition with Charles de Gaulle, Schiphol, and Frankfurt, and could not be left behind.
The first speaker from the floor drew attention to the damaging effect aircraft noise has on the education of schoolchildren, and that at some schools the kids have to cover their ears as they find the noise painful when out in the playground. The chairman rudely interrupted with 'are you giving us a speech madam.' His response was to ask for the schools(s) to be named so some money could be thrown at the problem.
The second speaker from the floor said the comments on sustainability were an insult to the intelligence of the shareholders. Then went on to highlight that companies could no longer do as they pleased and ignore public opinion. Examples were given of Monsanto (share price falling through the floor), Shell Germany (collapse of petrol sales at the forecourt), Birmingham Northern Relief Road (the original contractors went bust). Major construction projects suffered massive delays and escalating costs. What had BAA set aside to cover site occupation, security, delays etc? The chairman refused to reply, claiming T5 had widespread local support, and accusing the speaker of threatening the board! The speaker was not allowed to reply.
A later speaker wanted to know what insurance cover T5 had in the event of a crash. Apart from dismissing the possibility of a crash, the reply was £1 billion. Later, after the meeting, it was admitted that £1 billion cover, was the maximum cover BAA had been able to obtain from the market.
Questioned after the meeting, the chief executive said BAA had decided not to bid for Farnborough as 'too political', they already had enough problems with T5, without seeking trouble.
Protesters came from across the country for what was an anti-aviation and climate change rally, and thanks to fortuitous timing by BAA was in the middle of the Bonn climate talks. MPs present included Jenny Tonge and several other MPs, Darren Johnson, leader of the Green Party in the London Assembly, was also present. Caroline Lucas MEP would have liked to have been present and sent her support.
BAA sent out tea and coffee for the protesters. A media savvy protester steered the refreshments away from the TV cameras.
For Hacan, it was their biggest demo to date.
Excellent media coverage. On local radio from early morning to late evening. Morning, lunchtime, and evening coverage on regional TV. Excellent coverage in the Richmond local paper.
Next time more people on the inside so as to dominate the meeting with questions. Overall, well organised and objectives achieved. Unfortunate that badly let down by groups at Stansted, Manchester, Gatwick and Farnborough, all of whom should hang their heads in shame.
Record traffic and renewed focus on our core airports business has led to excellent results. -- BAA Annual Report 2000/01
However, at present airport development in the south-east has fallen behind .... An additional runway will be required in the south-east if demand is to be met .... -- Lawrence Urquhart, BAA Chairman
We are confident that the long-term growth trend will continue and we expect the the demand for passenger traffic to double in the south-east over the next 20 years. -- Mike Hodgkinson, BAA Chief Executive
The Government's decision about planning permission for Heathrow's Terminal 5 is imminent and BAA is confident that approval will be given. -- BAA Annual Report 2000/01
BAA is committed to operating and growing its business according to the principles of sustainable development... We fully support the Government's four objectives of effective protection of the environment, prudent use of natural resources, social progress ... and the maintenance of high and stable levels of economic growth and employment. -- BAA Annual Report 2000/01
The real challenge is to develop aviation according to the principles of sustainable development - achieving economic success with social progress and effective protection of the environment. The environmental challenge is particular complex. Globally, it is to manage the ways aviation contributes to climate change. Locally, it is to continue to take action on noise, air quality, surface access, resource consumption and biodiversity. -- BAA Annual Report 2000/01
Annual reports can make interesting reading, the BAA report is no exception.
BAA show exponentially growing passenger demand, the same figure used in the DETR consultation on aviation, then discuss how they must be allowed to grow to meet that demand. Competition is with the hubs at Schiphol and Charles de Gaulle, if they grow, then BAA must be allowed to grow in order to compete. Ten years ago Heathrow was handling 41 million passengers, it is now up to 64 million. At Stansted, expansion is being planned, even before the new extension is complete. It is desired to expand Stansted to 25 million passengers a year, current planning permission is for 15 million.
Heathrow 64.3 million 3.3% Gatwick 32.1 million 5.6% Stansted 12.3 million 23.8% Southampton 0.9 million 13.0%
T5 is seen as the BAA core investment. It will be capable of handling up to 30 million passengers a year. Major infrastructure work is already well underway.
T5 has experienced 7 years of delays. BAA have put forward an alternative method of resolving planning - by government edict, with the local community left to decide how to deliver the infrastructure. A position remarkably similar to that of the government which illustrates that no matter how ministers try to play it down it is already signed sealed and delivered. [BVEJ newsletter #0014 July 2001]
We must put behind the traditional approach to gaining planning consents. Instead the country should embrace a positive new approach, one which seeks to deal with the implications of growth in a constructive not confrontational way. The Government should create a better planning process for major projects so that it can consider and deliver complex developments in a timely and inclusive way, encouraging local agreements such as the agreement at Gatwick. It should take the strategic decisions - where to undertake major infrastructure development - and leave local authorities, and infrastructure developers, such as BAA, to discuss how to deliver infrastructure in a way which seeks to address all parties concerns.
BAA wants to move away from the confrontation of Public Inquiries, and instead reach a friendly agreement with the local authorities as it has done for Gatwick. The only reason there is confrontation at public inquiries is because big business is imposing unwanted development on local communities. Public Inquiries allow everyone to have their voice heard. Imagine if the Rotten Borough of Rushmoor were allowed to decide with TAG what was best for the local community? What BAA are wishing to see as official policy, is what happens in practice anyway. The public is allowed to have their say, then ignored.
BAA make a big thing on sustainability. We can all sleep a lot easier in our beds knowing that they are keen to promote sustainable development.
BAA is committed to operating and growing its business according to the principles of sustainable development.
This is the same BAA that is forcing through Heathrow Terminal 5, that is pushing for expansion at all of its airports, that welcomes globalisation and the air-freighting of food.
BAA recognise their contribution to climate change. They will be reducing CO2 emissions per passenger by 60%. A meaningless measure. We wish to see an initial 60% reduction, long term 90%, as generated by BAA, which would include all air transport, ground transport, and power demand.
Air quality at Gatwick and Heathrow are within government guidelines, except NO2, but that is exceeded in urban centres, so that's okay. BAA only appear to be considering on-site, not their contribution off-site, ie traffic generation. But not to worry, BAA carry out spot checks on vehicles using their airports to ensure they meet MoT emission standards!
BAA should convert all of its ground vehicles to LPG, and long term to fuel cells.
Waste per passenger has increased from 0.41 to 0.43 kg per passenger over the last year. Waste recycling has risen from 6 to 7.5% over the same period. Abysmally low, but consistent with poor UK standards. BAA intend to recycle 60%, good but not good enough, and they are counting incineration as recycling!!
BAA have achieved a 10% noise reduction per passenger within the 57 dB noise contour. A meaningless measure. What counts is a reduction in noise levels for those on the ground. Noise infringements rose from 350 incidents to 444.
BAA speak in glowing terms of globalisation and air-freighting goods around the world.
Business needs to be able to deliver people and goods quickly and efficiently around the world, so air transport is a major factor in inward investment ... and many businesses rely on air cargo for worldwide distribution ... Aviation has improved the quality of life for the consumer by bringing ... goods from distant lands within the reach of the majority of the population.
Non-executive director Chris Fay is a former chairman and chief executive of Shell UK. He is chairman of the Government Advisory Committee on Business and the Environment. Other posts include Deputy Chairman STENA International BV, Director STENA Drilling Ltd, Director Anglo American plc, Director The Weir Group plc. Shell are known for their complicity in human rights violations in Nigeria (families of victims are suing Shell in New York) and their damaging impact on the environment, Weir have been slammed by Christian Aid for their complicity in ethnic cleansing in the oil fields of southern Sudan. Chris Fay is Chairman of the BAA Ethics Committee!
The Guildford incinerator could be run by Britain's most prosecuted polluter. -- Colin Mathews, GAIN
Given this track record, GAIN does not consider Thames Water to be a 'fit and proper' applicant and questions why the Environment Agency did not take account of Thames Water's incinerator prosecutions when it assessed the company's suitability to run the Guildford incinerator. -- Colin Mathews, GAIN
Would you let a bunch of criminals run your local incinerator? That is what will happen if Thames Water (owners of Thames Waste Management) are given the go-ahead for the Slyfield Incinerator on the edge of Guildford.
Thames Water have been fined £6,000 (and ordered to pay costs of £3,825) for offences at a sewage incinerator at Crossness, Bexley and Beckton, Barking January last year. Following a fire, and not knowing the cause, Thames Water turned off the filters for 26 days, and for good measure did the same at a similar plant elsewhere. The fact that there was a prosecution at all is less down to the diligence of the Environment Agency and more down to the fact that Thames Water owned up to what had been done.
Since 1995 Thames Water have been prosecuted 24 times and fined a total of £325,000 for environmental offences.
A survey by GAIN (admittedly a not exactly impartial body) has shown that the incinerator will be bad for business in Guildford. Shoppers and tourists will think twice about visiting Guildford, local businesses will have to consider relocating.
Guildford borough council has agreed to work with GAIN (now that is a novelty, a council working with the local community) and to help fund a judicial review. The downside is that GAIN has rather foolishly ceded control over the judicial review to the council.
An anarchists' travelling circus that goes from summit to summit with the sole purpose of causing as much mayhem as possible. -- Tony Blair
It's the Euro Big Top and the main attraction is 'mayhem causing anarchists'. Step right up and try your luck at the 'decipher the EU political bullshit' stall. See three protesters shot with live ammo. Applaud European leaders with their 'time to get tough' on protesters announcements. Boo and hiss the anti capitalist critics and ignore the mostly peaceful rally on the Saturday. Still, that's the name of the game.
Before the European Union Summit had even begun in Gothenburg police had surrounded one of the Convergence Centres - rented from the local council for people to sleep in, organise actions and take part in 'For Another Europe' Conference. One person who was trapped inside told SchNEWS 'They barricaded about 400 activists in by putting up huge freight containers all around the school. They didn't let anyone in or out and said they would arrest everyone in there, which in the end they did.' Inge Johansson of the International Noise Conspiracy added 'Everybody involved in the protest saw this as something very provocative and it was clear that the police had set the tone for how they wanted the rest of the weekend to be.'
After that, anytime people gathered to demonstrate they were either arrested en masse or attacked with police batons, dogs and horses. Some cops threw rocks and some of the angry protestors replied in kind and kicked in stores like McDonalds for good measure. But it was during a Reclaim The City street party that the police fired shots into the crowd - injuring three people, one of them critically. At the last update, the protestor was in 'critical, but stable condition', however there has been a blackout on official information about him. Finally on the Saturday 25,000 people gathered in a peaceful demonstration. But that isn't really newsworthy now is it.
From Stockholm came words that European leaders hoped would be music to environmentalists ears, with them boasting that Europe will become the most sustainable society in the world. There's just one slight problem with this - the EU's over-riding priority remains ever-increasing international trade and competitiveness. At the Lisbon 'Jobs Summit'in March last year, European leaders talked about 'greater regulatory freedom' for corporations, asking the European Commission to find ways of simplifying all those bloody rules and environmental regulations that are burdening business.
Meanwhile, thirteen countries mainly from Central Europe want a piece of the EU action - but joining will come at a price with the Polish Prime Minister talking about selling 'difficult measures to the people.' That's because the price is all about getting their economies 'harmonised' y'know public services slashed and privatised, dismantling social services, removing restrictions on the purchase of land by foreign companies etc... In fact you could call it the European version of the Structural Adjustment Programmes that is forced onto the 'Third World.' (SchNEWS 287).
Pushing for these reforms are powerful business lobby groups. The most powerful of which is the European Roundtable of Industrialists (ERT), made up of 45 'captains of industry'. Its former secretary-general boasted about phoning European leaders whenever he wanted policy changes and its web-site says 'every six months the ERT makes contact with the government that holds the EU presidency to discuss priorities.' They usually get their way. Take a paper published in the eighties demanding a tunnel under the English Channel, a roadbridge connecting Denmark to Sweden, a European high speed train system, and a new Europe wide roadbuilding programme. Hey presto - they got the lot.
Now they've got all guns blazing for 'a minimal regulatory system with the maximum of flexibility.' Which roughly translates as sod the environment, sod workers rights, where's the cash.
So when Blair goes on about this 'undemocratic ... travelling circus' let's point the finger at big business pulling the strings behind the scenes and going from country to country causing mayhem in their quest for more profits.
Well kids, it looks like globalisation is here to stay. SchNEWS got the low down from a few 'experts' on the topic, and here's what they had to say: Mike Moore, Director General of the World Trade Organisation reckons that, 'Globalisation is with us. It cannot be uninvented.' For Bill Clinton, globalisation is 'not a policy choice, it's a fact. In the UK, Tony Blair has called it 'irreversible and inevitable.' And according to Renato Ruggiero, former head of the WTO, trying to stop globalisation is 'tantamount to trying to stop the rotation of the earth.' Um, excuse us? What is it with these clowns??! It's clear that these descriptions of globalisation are deliberately designed to try to stop us from analysing, criticizing, or finding alternatives to the phenomenon. But alternatives do exist! (gasp!) Globalisation is NOT driven by irrefutable economic laws; it is NOT governed by inevitable market forces. It has NOT happened by accident of nature or divine intervention. (No George Dub'Ya, God didn't invent free trade). To the contrary, globalisation has been driven over the past three decades by the world's leading business and government elites. But there are alternatives to environmental degradation, economic exploitation, and all the other 'inevitabilities' that come along with the G word. You'll just have to keep reading the Positive SchNEWS column to find out what some of them are.
[adopted from SchNEWS 310 Friday 22 June 2001, also see BVEJ newsletter #0014 July 2001]
In a week when Tony Blair complained about 'undemocratic anarchy' on the streets of Gothenburg his own Government is pressing ahead with changes to the planning system to make it harder to object to things such as motorways, airports and nuclear power stations. Under new proposals ministers will have the right to give the go ahead for controversial projects with little parliamentary debate. At a public enquiry you'll be able to discuss trivial things such as how projects are landscaped, but not to discuss if it's needed. So you can't object to a waste incinerator in your back garden on the grounds that it is bad for your health and an unsustainable approach to waste management, but you can ask them to paint it a nice shade of green!
And who is behind these proposals? SchNEWS is shocked to hear that its Tony Blair's big business friends, the Confederation of British Industry, who have been whinging about the time it takes for projects to be approved. The Campaign for Planning Sanity has promised: 'We will fight these proposals at the ballot box, in the courts, on the streets, and in the trees and tunnels.' 0161-959 0999
The Government is also thinking about building new nuclear power stations to replace old coal fired power stations. Rather than putting investment into renewables such as solar, wave and wind power it wants to use outdated, polluting technology. The new planning rules would help the government push through the proposals against objections that are bound to surface.
[adopted from SchNEWS 310 Friday 22 June 2001, also see BVEJ newsletter #0014 July 2001]
Anyone who attended the TAG-sponsored Concert in the Park was left in no doubt as to who was the major sponsor by the two very large TAG Aviation signs either side of the main stage. The concert was actually a fund raising event for Phyllis Tuckwell Hospice but no mention of the hospice on the stage. TAG clearly got their money's worth, all £6,500.
Other minor sponsors had their names displayed in front of the beer tent. The majority of sponsors either had planning interests, or contractual interests with Rushmoor. Funny that.
From early afternoon, over-zealous security men were strong-arming people out of the park. Later, no members of the public, unless they paid to go to the concert, were allowed into the park. A public park from which the public were barred. A small army of security men were employed. Did they expect the Rotary Club to riot? Who paid the bill? The same security firm who are contracted to Rushmoor to patrol the parks. The excuse for clearing the park during the day was 'the valuable equipment'. Midnight, with no one around, not a security man to be seen.
A small group of local residents mounted a picket outside the main entrance and handed out leaflets to the concert goers so they could see who their sponsors really were. This was well received, and many people expressed their shock, disgust and revulsion at the fact that TAG were the main sponsors. If TAG thought £6,500 bought them good publicity they were in for a shock as it badly backfired on them. A big question mark for lack of ethical judgement against the hospice - for a caring organisation, they showed remarkable crass insensitivity towards the local community.
The local media were briefed early in the week as to why local residents would be picketing the event. No advance coverage, nor did they bother to turn up to cover the picket. We seem to live with a Stalinist media, where nothing outside of the status quo is allowed to be covered. Farnborough News were a minor sponsor - they provided free advertising.
Although the local rag failed to provide a reporter to cover the picket, they did however manage to file a false report. The picket was never intended to be a demo, nor a mass-picket, as that would have intimidated concert goers which was never the intention. All that was planned was a small picket to inform the concert goers of who their main sponsor was.
The local residents group (FARA) were informed of the event. They failed to give any support, failed to inform their members, failed to turn up. No surprise there then. Their excuse was that their members would not like them to take any action! Probably news to their members. Have their members ever been asked? It is reasonable to assume that their members joined FARA to collectively oppose TAG and their unwanted airport. It is difficult to imagine it could drop any further but the credibility of FARA has just dropped another notch.
It is not permitted to allow congregations of people within the PSZ. The PSZ runs through the park. It was claimed 4-5,000 people attended. One rule for TAG, another for the local community.
As I have said all along we are happy operating in the plan agreed with the council. -- Len Rayment, TAG director
In the longer term, TAG may wish to seek an increase in the level of movements ... -- statement by TAG Aviation
... in runway configuration terms, the site is very constrained and the new configuration has effectively been 'shoe-horned' in. -- Ann Bartaby, TAG Director
It must be emphasised that the CAA are believed normally to require elimination rather than minimisation of obstacles as a condition of granting a license, and that they inevitably pay special attention to takeoff and approach surfaces in that regard. -- Chris Hedge, aviation expert retained by Rushmoor
TAG Aviation have submitted a document to Rushmoor requesting runway extensions. Consultation has been virtually non-existent. Only those beneath the flight path or slightly to either side have received a letter, and that sheds little light on the impact and what it does is misleading.
Runway extensions facilitate heavier aircraft.
Two independent reports have been commissioned on the TAG runway proposals. These should be in the public domain, but they are not in the file available to the public. The reports confirm what ourselves and local residents have been saying on safety and flight clearance. One report is quite explicit: the current operation (to MoD standards) is well below CAA safety standards. It is assumed that trees will be removed in the flight path, and that MoD has the approval of private landowners for tree removal (it does not and approval is not likely to be given). High-sided traffic on the road running parallel to the Basingstoke Canal would be in the flight path. Planes approaching on a glide path greater than 3.5 degrees (necessary to give safe clearance over Farnborough) are not safe, and many are not certified for a greater approach angle. One report has vital paragraphs deleted from the final draft. Why? How independent the consultants? One had previously worked for SBAC and WS Atkins on Farnborough. Were they recommended by TAG?
An important assumption made by the consultants was that the trees in Farnborough, ie all obstacles, had been cleared. They were led to believe by Rushmoor that all trees had been cleared. If these obstacles remain then it is not possible to provide the runway configuration requested by TAG - 1800 metres landing, 2000 metres takeoff - as CAA criteria would not be met. The glide path for Farnborough is 3.5 degrees. This is steeper than the usual 3 degree approach to avoid ploughing into Farnborough, but the faster descent poses additional safety risks. The runway configuration has literally been shoe-horned in.
Chris Hedge (aviation expert retained by Rushmoor):
ICAO Annex 10 recommends angles between 2 degrees and 4 degrees, adding that glide paths exceeding 3 degrees should not be used except where alternative means of satisfying obstruction clearance requirements are impracticable. 3 degrees is the norm ... Glide slopes exceeding 3.5 degrees are not considered to be practicable for jet aeroplane operations because the relatively high approach speeds would otherwise produce excessive rates of descent, the recovery from which would pose an unacceptable risk of heavy landings. By no means all business jets are certified for steep approaches in any case, and it is virtually certain that some types can never be.
In carrying out their appraisals, the independent consultants were entirely dependent upon data provided by TAG.
The agenda for councillors is once again one-sided (cf TAG planning application August 2001, BVEJ newsletter #0004 September 2000). It reproduces in full all the comments from TAG rubbishing objectors but not the objectors original objections, nor have objectors been granted the right of reply. The independent reports have not been reproduced in full. The recommendations by the officials to approve, neglect to mention the reservations in the independent reports. One of the most important being the assumption that all the trees in the flight path have been removed. TAG claim all the trees they had earlier noted as obstacles have been removed. This will come as as surprise to several local residents who have denied access to their trees. It has always been claimed that heathland destruction was conservation, the fallback position MoD flight safeguarding. The lie is finally exposed in the agenda which notes the work was to enable runway configurations to meet CAA approval.
FARA were asked to make a presentation to the council meeting. They refused!! Why?
Rushmoor will determine this planning application Wednesday 8 August 2001.
Work to extend the runway has already started, ie prior to planning consent being obtained. If planning consent is granted, more trees on the heathland to the west of the runway will be destroyed.
TAG have denied in the local press (Farnborough News Friday 6 July 2001) an article in Flight International (late May 2001) that they would be expanding beyond the 'imposed' limit of 28,000 movements. A similar denial was issued when Caroline Lucas (based upon a briefing by TAG) said there would be massive expansion. TAG are currently expanding at a rate in excess of 20% a year, are making a massive investments in the site, but expect the local community to believe that when they hit 28,000 in only a few years time, they will suddenly cease expansion. Anyone who has any remaining doubts as to TAG's intentions only has to look at their original planning application where they will find TAG asked for an initial 25,000 movements with the automatic right of revision at 20,000. The 28,000 was only the foot in the door. [BVEJ newsletter #0007 December 2000 and BVEJ newsletter #0014 July 2001]
Two weeks later TAG issued a retraction. Apparently they were now intending to expand. A public apology to Caroline Lucas MEP is well overdue. [Farnborough News 20 July 2001]
Farnborough News appears to have finally got its finger out and is at long last reporting on how TAG are adversely affecting the local community. There is still though a lot they have yet to cover, and they are still barring critical letters from the letters columns.
Well done FARA for at last last getting material into the News but there is a lot more that needs to be done, that isn't being done.
FARA were barred from the local Aldershot Green Day. We live in a fascist state, where only the sound of big business can be heard, any dissenting voice has to be silenced. Roland Dibbs (Cons) is believed to have been responsible for banning FARA.
Rushmoor chief executive Andrew Lloyd and Tory council leader John Marsh went on a freebie trip to Paris at the expense of SBAC. Airshow promoters SBAC, are major backers of TAG, may have their own planning application pending, the council were not told of the trip, but neither of the two clowns could see that they had done anything wrong.
John Marsh works for BAE Systems (another major TAG backer). BAE Systems were sponsors of last year's Green Day in Aldershot. [BVEJ newsletter #0002 July 2000 and BVEJ newsletter #0008 January 2001]
SBAC are planning to turn their temporary exhibition site into a permanent show ground for Europe. It will have motorway connections, nearby rail station, and its own airport.
In a letter to the Surrey-Hants Star (Thurs 12 July 2001) under the heading 'More anti-flying hysteria', Roland Dibbs refuses to accept that TAG are making life hell for local residents. Maybe if he actually lived within the vicinity of the flight path he would appreciate the problem. As Dibbs has failed to act for the local community either on the airport or destruction of the town centre we look forward to seeing him kicked out at the next election.
In a letter to the Farnborough News (Friday 20 July 2001), Richard Gardner, local Tory chairman and failed election candidate last year, has called the fuss over the clowns trip to Paris 'so much fuss about nothing substantive at all'. If Gardner cannot understand the fuss, then he has demonstrated himself unfit to be a councillor. A point the local community should remember should he stand for council in the future. Gardner has in the past worked as a consultant to TAG.
In a follow-up letter to that of Gardner, Sydney Foster (a fellow of the Royal Aeronautical Society no less), continues the Farnborough Airport silly season started by Gardner with more crass stupidity (Farnborough News Friday 20 July 2001). Farnborough residents living at the end of the runway will be surprised to learn that according to Foster's map they are living in an unpopulated area and that they are unaffected by noise! Historians will be surprised to learn that Farnborough has an unblemished safety record over the last century! Beginning with Sam Cody, who had numerous crashes at Farnborough, the last of which proved fatal, there have been many crashes at Farnborough including fatal crashes.
Go-ahead has been given for an eyesore control tower and associated buildings. Developers could apply for a 30 metre erect penis and Rushmoor would say yes. Now come to think of it the control tower does remind us of something.
The military landing system at Farnborough is no longer operational. Until TAG install an ILS, Farnborough is a fair weather airport only. Runway visibility has to be a few thousand metres and the cloud base not below 800 feet. Runway lengths are given as those TAG have applied for. As independent experts have stated, these lengths are only safe if the trees are removed, it raises further questions on safety and TAG's cavalier attitude to safety.
Slough Estates, major developers of part of the airport site, are sponsors of the local Summer Fun 2001. Slough Estates currently have an amendment to their planning application in the system requesting a relaxation on the upper limit on car parking spaces (ie they want more car parking spaces).
At next year's Farnborough International Airshow (22-28 July 2002) flying is to be limited to 2 1/2 hours each day as the noise disrupts the arms dealers carrying out their bloody trade. The weekend is to be interactive fun for all the family - roll up roll up, try your hand at dropping cluster bombs, enjoy the realism, get sprayed with blood and gore as bodies are torn apart.
A second runway opened at Manchester earlier in the year. Local residents have noticed a marked increase in noise. Aircraft are not keeping to preferred noise routes, the airport seems powerless to enforce adherence to the PNRs.
Manchester is seeking runway extension. This may be blocked, or seriously delayed, by the imminent designation of a wildlife area at the end of the runway.
Publication of Heathrow Terminal 5 Inquiry has been put on hold until at least September or October. The reason for the delay is flooding. T5 would be built on a flood plain. The original inquiry made no inquiry into flooding.
Heathrow T5 has been designed by the Norman Foster Partnership, who also designed the wobbly millennium bridge and have recently been fired as the architects for the Welsh Assembly.
It was a dream really, but it was working. The business was thriving. We had lots of bookings, the restaurant had quite a name for itself locally. -- Michele Fricheteau
Few people other than those who had visited it or worked there had heard of Hotelissimo belonging to Michele and Pascal Fricheteau until it had its moment of fame and glory when a year ago Concorde crashed into it and burnt it to the ground. It has since sunk back into obscurity.
A small wood-framed hotel of 40 rooms Hotelissimo is no more. It was a dream come true for Michele and Pascal Fricheteau who renovated and ran the derelict hotel. They worked hard to build up its reputation, with the emphasis on personal service. They could have employed poorly paid agency workers, instead they chose to stick to their socialist principles and train local people off the dole queue.
Michele and Pascal are still awaiting compensation. All of the staff have been made redundant, two chambermaids were killed, one is still receiving psychiatric care. The most Air France has so far offered the redundant staff is the difference between their old salary and their unemployment benefit.
Michele Fricheteau, Putain de Crash
The government's PPP simply cannot withstand serious public scrutiny. -- Ken Livingstone
Bob Kiley has been sacked from his position as London Transport chairman. He retains his position as Transport Commissioner for London, to which he was appointed by Ken Livingstone. It appears the government cannot stand any dissenting voices. Bob Kiley was sacked one day after the back bench parliamentary revolt. It seems no lessons have been learnt.
The following day an injunction was served on London Transport Commissioner Bob Kiley and London Mayor Ken Livingstone to prevent them from disclosing the contents of a highly critical report from accountants Deloitte & Touche on PPP. The government failed to injunct a highly critical report on safety from the engineering firm Parsons Brinckerhoff.
A couple of weeks later the High Court reversed the injunction and the report on the economics can now be published. Earlier in the same week Londoners lost their case to stop PPP, but the judge only ruled that the government has the last say, not on the viability of PPP. If Blair is determined to ignore the wishes of the travelling public, then street action will be necessary.
Canary Wharf are suing the Jubilee Line for failure to deliver.
During the Concorde test flight from Heathrow one of the protesters outside was attacked. BA are mounting intense lobbying behind the scenes to have an airworthiness certificate reinstated for Concorde. Shareholders hold precedence over safety.
South West Trains threatened seizure and arrest for distributing Rising Tide's 90% for 90% railcards outside Guildford Station.
The London Chamber of Commerce has said 80% of its members wish to see Heathrow Terminal 5 and a third Heathrow runway. Competition with Schiphol and Charles de Gaulle cited. Environmental problems grudgingly admitted, but those affected can always move.
New signalling equipment newly installed on the West Coast line have to be replaced as it does not meet Health and Safety requirements.
This shows the lengths that the biotech industry will go to keep its activities from public scrutiny. If Aventis has got scientific evidence on the safety of this pesticide why won't they let us see it? -- Peter Roderick, FoE legal adviser
GM company Aventis is taking the UK government to court to prevent it giving information on the environmental and health effects of its biocide glufosinate ammonium to FoE.
Glufosinate ammonium is one of two biocides to be sprayed on GM crops in farm-scale trials. Glufosinate ammonium was previously only allowed to be sprayed on crops during the summer, because of fears over the environmental and health impact of using the biocide during the winter months. Possible effects include leaching into groundwater. Following a request by Aventis, the Government allowed glufosinate ammonium to be sprayed on GM crops during the winter.
Back in February 2000, FoE asked Maff to supply the information that Aventis supplied to back up its requests. Initially the Government stalled. In January this year it refused to disclose the information. However, following the threat of legal action from FoE the Government backed down. Aventis had claimed 'commercial confidentiality' to block disclosure.
What is Aventis trying to hide, what is it afraid will leak out?
This is not the only problem facing Aventis. All 11 of their English National Seed List Trials of GM winter oil seed rape have either been destroyed by covert actions or have failed naturally, this leaves just two sites in Scotland. Two other Aventis crops in Dorset and Hertfordshire have both been damaged. No matter how creative the legal system tries to be in bringing charges against GM protesters, those pesky protesters keep on getting off. Aventis hasn't even been able to recover costs for its damaged crops as various courts and judges have ruled crop trashers were acting with a 'positive purpose'.
The only GM crop left in Wales was a farm-scale trail of Aventis maize at Sealand in Flintshire. This was scheduled last month for a Citizens Inspection (grid reference SJ 697 862), so maybe even this site no longer exists.
The Co-op is heading for a massive show down with the EU over size. Go into any supermarket and you will find all the fruit is the same size. It doesn't grow that way, outsize fruit is waste, destined for local markets or caterers. Supermarkets claim it is what the customer wants, even though they are not able to substantiate the claim. The real reason is that the EU specifies the size of the fruit we are allowed to eat.
During the period 1 July until 31 October, peaches must be at least 50 mm in diameter. Heavy financial penalties can be imposed for non-compliance, and as we saw in Sunderland with the little Hitler there is always someone only too happy to oblige.
Carrots have to have a top of at least 20 mm in diameter, apples must be at least 65 mm in diameter for large varieties like Bramleys and at least 55 mm in diameter for dessert apples, plums must be at least 35mm in diameter and so the mind boggling nonsense goes on.
The Co-op has decided to take a stance. They will be selling fruit, in open breach of EU directives, that fall outside of the specified EU dimensions. Selected stores will have posters: 'I am small and perfectly formed but legally you cannot buy me'. The Co-op is asking for the public's support. The directors face fines of up to £10,000 and 6 months imprisonment for taking this stance.
Not everyone can be on the streets of Gothenburg or Salzburg protesting against the EU but we can engage in mass civil disobedience by supporting the Co-op in this campaign. Next time you go shopping, demand your retailer sells you fruit outside of the EU dimensions.
The Co-op is also taking a stance on pesticides. Several pesticides are to be banned, others are to have their permitted levels lowered. A step in the right direction which we should pressurise other retailers to follow.
The Co-op was founded to give the ordinary person an alternative to corrupt shopkeepers. An historic mission that has been forgotten in recent years. It is good to see that the Co-op is returning to its roots.
Some of the tactics adopted by the London police and later by other forces were those developed and used by the army and the RUC Special Patrol Group in Northern Ireland. The introduction of 'snatch squads' and 'wedges' in demonstrations, and random stop and searches and roadblocks on the streets were based on the army's experience in Ulster. -- Robert Mark, former Metropolitan Police Commissioner
The Special Branch collects information on those whom I think cause problems for the state. -- Merlyn Rees, former Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and former Home Secretary
The object of the exercise is not just to secure convictions but to secure information. -- Leon Brittan, former Home Secretary
Northern Ireland is where techniques of social control are tried and tested. Rubber bullets and tear gas were tested, snatch squads tried, and of course the (temporary) Prevention of Terrorism Act. The Act was less about removal of terrorists, and more about control and intimidation of the population, trawling for information. Points readily admitted by agents of the state in less guarded moments. Having been heavily benchtested in Northern Ireland, we now have a terrorism act covering the whole of the UK.
During the first seven years of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, of the 5,000 people arrested, only 7% were charged. 98% of those detained under the PTA were innocent of any crime. During the 1995 IRA ceasefire, 22,691, mainly Irish, people, were detained and searched for up to one hour. Every year, 50,000 Irish people are stopped and questioned at British ports. Subsequently acquitted, and regarded as one of the major miscarriages of the British legal system, Paul Hill (one of the Guildford Four) was the first person to be charged and convicted under the PTA.
We should not be surprised by any of this. Special Branch, originally called the Irish Special Branch, was established in 1883 to deal with Irish rebels.
The treatment of the SchNEWS crew shows that the TA is not some obscure piece of legislation, it is intended to be used. Equally worrying is the realisation that even plods on the beat have been briefed that the TA can be used to deny people their basic civil rights.
The Terrorism Act (2000) received royal assent last July and came into force spring of this year. Big business was coming under increasing pressure from activists, both profit and reputation were suffering. To be able to demonise activists as terrorists and isolate them from the rest of society was just what big business was looking for.
[BVEJ newsletters passim]
Last Friday some of the SchNEWS crew picked up the last boxes of our new book from the printer in East London. Just as we entered the 'ring of steel' near Liverpool St Station, police pulled us over saying that surveillance cameras, which check every number plate entering the city, showed that ours had a query. The problem was with the previous owner of the van, but before we knew it seven over-eager cops opened it up. Seeing the book with the word 'terrorist' on the cover and thinking they had uncovered some sinister plot, they asked if we were at Mayday. Getting quite excited they said, 'Did you know that under the Terrorism Act it could be illegal to be carrying such literature?' Urmm... Then they had an even better idea: 'Under the Terrorism Act we can search your van without reason'. The cops told us later that we had fitted the bill as terrorists - two guys, an old white van, boxes in the back, entering the city, and apparently in the four hours our van sat in Bishopsgate looking suspicious, there were 15 calls to the station about it! The City Of London is a security 'ring of steel' best avoided.
A chance to plug our book again - get your copy quick before the office is raided. £8.50 including postage, cheques payable to Justice?. Just don't wave your copy around in the ring of steel.
[SchNEWS 310 Friday 22 June 2001]
The Football (Disorder) Act enables the prevention of suspected football thugs from travelling abroad. A crime does not have to be committed, or charges pending, the word of a police officer is sufficient. The reaction of Tony Blair and Jack Straw to the protesters at Genoa indicate these restrictions could easily be extended to protesters. Paranoia! Look to Holland and Germany where it is already happening.
Holland and Germany have football hooligan legislation which can also be used to target activists. In Germany this legislation was used last year to prevent activists from going to Prague.
The similarity of terrorist legislation across Europe indicates coordinated action. The threats issued by Blair and his ilk at Gothenburg (and then Genoa) to the people on the streets should not be dismissed as idle threats. When it comes to the suppression of democracy these people mean business.
The role of the state has always been to protect the rich and powerful. Originally the king, and his barons, later land owning gentry and factory owning capitalists. Now the state is used to protect global business and deliver a docile workforce.
Similar electronic data access legislation, giving access to all electronic communication (fax, mobile phone, e-mail, web access etc), is being pushed through across Europe.
EU is pushing hard to establish its own police force and prosecution service. Serving members will be immune from prosecution. The EU may also establish its own squad of stormtroopers to deal with protesters at international summits.
[Do or Die No 9, Statewatch Vol 11 No 2 March-April 2001]
To describe Star Wars as criminally insane is to slander reputable psychopaths. -- Nick Cohen
It's surreal. This is easier than getting into a public library. Call this security? This is a laugh. -- one Lancashire-based missile to another
We have defeated the the logic of the whole thing. The fact that we were able to get over 100 volunteers into the base shows how easy it would be to take out US defences. There is no way that the most sophisticated electronic surveillance can guard against attacks by suitcase bombers. -- Steven Tindale, executive director Greenpeace UK
Menwith Hill is the key to the whole star wars operation. -- Tam Dalyell
Anyone with lingering doubts as to the direction Greenpeace would take with the retirement of Peter Melchett had those doubts put to rest with the Greenpeace raid on Menwith Hill.
Protesters shuffled past the guard post dressed as missiles, others scaled the security fences. More than 100 managed to invade the base, several managed to hang on until the next day, 4 July, American Independence Day. Several more protesters managed to join those already on the base on Independence Day.
Menwith Hill is an electronic monitoring site. Part of the Echelon electronic eavesdropping system, all transatlantic electronic communication is routed through Menwith Hill. Menwith Hill is also a missile tracking station. Menwith Hill will be a key component of Star Wars II. Without Menwith Hill Stars Wars II could not go ahead.
With the raid on Menwith Hill Greenpeace have put the peace back into Greenpeace.
Earlier in the year on US Presidential Inauguration Day (20 January 2001), a group of protests went for an hour and a half stroll around the base.
A week after the Greenpeace invasion, the US announced it was going ahead with Star Wars II. A few days later, the US had its first successful missile test launch. On his way to the Bonn Climate Talks George W Bush made it clear he would not give way to pressure on Star Wars II.
The Brits may have pulled out of most of their colonies in the 1960s but their behaviour in former colonies is still that of colonial masters with nothing but contempt for local people.
These bases are British sovereign bases, British territory ... -- Jack Straw, British Foreign Secretary
We shall protest and protest and protest. And I repeat, over my dead body will they install this antenna. -- Marios Matsakis, Cyprus MP
Around a thousand Cypriots, men, women and children, including members of the Green Party, members of the parliamentary environment committee, and several opposition MPs, recently invaded the British base of Akrotiri in the southwest of Cyprus. The reason for the unrest was the decision to build a large communication mast in the middle of a salt lake and to rescue Marios Matsakis, a Cypriot MP described by the British High Commissioner as 'a medical monkey up a stick'.
There are two large salt lakes in Cyprus. The other is outside Larnaca. Both are important wildlife sites.
The Brits occupy 3% of the territory of Cyprus, a hangover from old colonial days. They also have 'rights' over the island. A further 37% of the island is occupied by Turks following the 1974 illegal invasion by Turkey.
Contrary to the official view of the British military high command the British are not popular in Cyprus. The behaviour of the squaddies in Dhekalia is even worse than in Aldershot. Their idea of a good night out is to get pissed and beat up a few locals. Brits are viewed as marginally better than Turks.
In the west of Cyprus lies the unspoilt area of Akamas. The Brits use this for shelling practice and bombing raids. A couple of year ago Marios Matsakis and other activists occupied the area. Shelling went on regardless. The Brits have offered to stop shelling Akamas, if the Cypriots offer them another part of their country to destroy.
A couple of years ago the Brits destroyed hundreds of trees that local farmers had planted within the SBAs (Sovereign Base Areas, UK sovereign territory). A petition presented to the High Commissioner was refused.
The reason for retaining the SBAs is that they form important monitoring sites for the former Soviet bloc and the Middle East. Up until the 1970s, the function of the bases was Top Secret and was the basis of the infamous ABC trial, though at the time tour coaches passing through the SBAs would point out 'the British Spy Bases'. During the Russian tourist boom in the 1990s, coachloads of Russian tourists would pass through, filming everything they could see, ignoring the No Photography notices. The RAF base at Akrotiri, is a forward base. During the Cold War it housed nuclear weapons, and was used as a forward base during the Gulf War.
The Brits are guarantors of the sovereignty of Cyprus, but were complicit with the Americans in allowing the Turkish invasion. The Brits have done nothing since to encourage the Turks to leave.
A week after the base invasion, an independent report was published. Although the report fails to assess the impact on wildlife or humans of radiation it does note that the site impinges on an important wildlife site. Salt lake plants are being killed with weed-killer and the many birds using the site risk collision with the mast.
In the parliamentary elections in May, a Green was elected to the Cypriot Parliament for the first time.
Parts of Kenya are used by the Brits as a shelling range. The shells should be removed and destroyed after each exercise. They are not, they are left lying around causing injury to the local tribesmen.
A conference held at Conway Hall in London. Speakers: Colin Hines, Tim Lang, Alan Simpson MP, Caroline Lucas MEP, Vandana Shiva. Contributions may have got assigned to the wrong speakers. Special thanks to Kath for organising the event. A detailed briefing is available:
Colin Hines introduced the conference and his fellow speakers.
Globalisation has become the new religion, as Maggie would have said there is no alternative. Countries are being told to become mean and lean and fit, to compete on the world stage. They destroy their own infrastructure, social provisions, to find everyone else has done the same in the name of global competitiveness.
The Chinese have kicked a million people off the land, a further two and a half million are to be shed from uncompetitive industries. No matter how hard the rest of the world squeezes wages and working conditions there is no way they can compete with a quarter of a billion unemployed Chinese.
The way forward is localisation. On a local, regional and national level we produce for local markets. Only when we have satisfied these needs should we be exporting. What can be produced locally, should be produced locally. Big business should be forced into a sell here, produce here policy. [BVEJ newsletter #0006 November 2000]
Governments are being bludgeoned by footloose capital. It is time to fight back. There is an alternative.
Colin Hines, Localisation: A Global Manifesto, Earthscan, 2000
Jerry Mander & Edward Goldsmith (eds), The Case Against the Global Economy, Earthscan, 2001
Where do we get get our food from? However we answer, possibly the local shop, we cannot possibly know as the food chains are too long and complicated. The meal enjoyed by the speakers that evening had Italian water on the table!!! Wine yes, but water from Italy?
Future policy has to look to reducing the length and complexity of food chains. When we reduce food chains, apart from reducing the impact on the environment, we have greater accountability.
The attack on local abattoirs was well justified, but not the solution, closure.
For the future we have to look to Sweden and Norway.
The best thing Welsh farmers did a couple of years ago was to riot over low farm-gate prices. When Welsh farmers were getting £2-00 a head for their lambs, the supermarkets were selling the equivalent lamb as meat for £80 to œ100.
A reform of the advisory scientific committees is required to remove all the vested interests. It is difficult to find independent scientific advice - scientists are bought by the industry, whole university departments are bought.
Blair and his cronies are out to lunch with agribusiness, a meal well irradiated with cash. If Blair wants to carry out a review of benefits he should start with the corporate spongers and parasites, not start with the disabled. We live in a rich society, and yet the poorest members cannot afford to put a decent meal on the table.
Two years ago the then Cabinet Enforcer sent all back bench Labour MPs a Christmas memo telling them the fuss over GM was a fuss over nothing stirred up by environmental extremists, they should be ignored. Six months later supermarkets could not strip their shelves of GM fast enough, Cunningham has gone.
We import parsnips from abroad! Why?
At a local farmers market one of the farmers was asked why no sell by date on his carrots, why not shrink wrapped in plastic? The farmer replied that he could give no sell by date but he could give a dug by date, and they were dug up the previous night, and he could guarantee they'd be on the dinner table that night. A woman then butted in, wanting to know why she could not buy carrots of this quality in the local supermarket.
We can change the rules. Supermarkets pay no local taxes on their car parks. In France, local breweries below a certain output pay only half VAT.
A local potato farmer outside Nottingham had just gone bust. He was getting 3p a pound for his potatoes, in the supermarkets in the city centre potatoes wee selling for in excess of 30p a pound. But then we do have added value - the packaging, weighing, transport half way around the country.
In Sweden the produce will not only be from local farmers, but it will be sectioned for each farmer with background information on production methods and a Freephone number for further information.
A Food Poverty Bill is to be pushed, but first need to generate a large ground-swell of grassroots support. It is crazy that on the one hand farmers cannot get a decent price for their produce, whilst on the other hand poor families cannot afford to put a decent meal on the table. More info from:
Food for All 62 Bargery Road London SE6 2LW 020 8698 3682 07951 761 229 ron@camhosts.net
Much of the trade that takes place across the EU cancels itself out:
Import of 1 kg of apples from New Zealand contributes 1 kg of carbon dioxide, a box scheme for local apples, less than 50 g.
Millions of animals were killed during the foot and mouth to protect a meat export trade. A similar amount of meat is imported.
Reform of CAP is hard work. The reforms that have taken place are marginal. Food policy should be taken at local level, with EU only deciding cross-border problems, eg nitrate contamination of common water courses.
There are some EU improvements on animal welfare standards, eg phase out of battery cages but why so far in the future? But farmers will then be at a competitive disadvantage to imports. We need to protect local markets from undesirable imports.
Caroline Lucas, The Great Food Swap, Green Party, 2001
IT people who left for Silicon Valley are now coming home to no jobs as the recession begins to bite. First and foremost we should look after the land and farmers.
Subsistence farmers feed people, but these are the people who are being driven off the land. As are the big farmers, many of whom are now committing suicide because of growing debt.
The cost of inputs is growing, but the price for produce, especially cash crops has collapsed, but the price paid by the poor on the street has gone up fourfold. Families who once could barely afford one meal a day cannot now even afford that.
With the poor lacking purchasing power a grain mountain is building up. Grain is rotting in warehouses because it is beyond the means of the poor. Grain is now being dumped in the sea. The corrupt Indian government can afford to pay subsidies to Cargill to buy the unsold grain, but cannot pay subsidies to the poor.
Indian farmers were already suffering with the price they were paying for inputs, including seeds. Genetic engineering, and the privatisation of water, would make a bad situation worse. Ten years ago farmers barely made 1% of what their produce sold for, now that figure is negative, sustained only by mounting debt.
The British came to India for our spices. The country is now being flooded with cheap imports from China. The country is being flooded with cheap food imports from Europe and North America, with which local farmers cannot compete.
Globalisation is driving Indian farmers off the land. They have nowhere else to go. When there are no farmers left, who is to produce the food?
Vandana Shiva, Poverty and Globalisation, SchNEWS SQUALL Yearbook 2001
Can organic still be classed as organic when it is being shipped from around the world? Greed is devaluing organic values. It may be organic but it is not sustainable. Organic is not just about not poisoning our food, it is also about not poisoning the planet.
E-mail the conference organiser for a detailed briefing:
Jose Bove and Francois Dufour, The World is Not for Sale, Verso, 2001
John Humphrys, The Great Food Gamble, Hodder, 2001
Eric Schlosser, Fast Food Nation, Allen Lane/Penguin, 2001
Helana Norberg-Hodge, Bringing the Food Economy Home, ISEC, October 2000
Peter Stevenson, Cheap Food - Who Pays the Price?, Compassion in World Farming Trust, undated
The Ecologist Report, June 2001
The July market was surprisingly even better than the June market. Surprising, because the market which is normally held on the first Tuesday of the month was arbitrarily moved to the second Tuesday for July (how to kill a market without really trying). Lots more food stalls, than even June, and June was better than previous months.
One depressing feature is finding a few stalls displaying NFU. When will they ever learn that it is the NFU working hand in hand with Maff/Defra that is pushing big business export oriented agriculture, that is driving small family farms out of business.
Future Guildford markets will revert to the first Tuesday of the month.
Farmers markets can also be found at Secretts Farm, Milford (third Sunday), Dorking, Epsom, Woking (third Thursday), Farnham (fourth Sunday) and Aldershot.
Farnborough is at last to get a farmers market. Farmers markets involve the whole of society, but not in the Rotten Borough of Rushmoor, where the concept of local community is an alien concept. No consultation with the local community or traders. The obvious time for a market is midweek, Wednesday or Thursday, when trade is low. The markets will be held on a Saturday. Only two: Sat 29 September and Sat 22 December 2001.
After a break of a year, the picnic was back with a bang, well maybe a whimper.
Not a patch on the picnic two years ago, but still pretty good fun. Maybe it was the weather, it pissed it down the previous day and was still raining in the morning, or maybe just poor organisation.
Compared with two years ago there were few stalls. The excellent food stalls, the teapot stall, none were there. The live sound stage only had a small space in front of it. The other larger stage had no live acts at all, just techno crap blasting out. No one was rattling buckets as the punters left for home.
Decriminalisation of cannabis was pushed to the limit!
Or when is enough enough?
The most heavily indebted countries have carbon emissions that hover around the sustainable levels. All other countries emit unsustainable levels. However we measure it, either on current emission levels or historical outputs, the G8 countries have used up their fair share, they owe the rest of the world a carbon debt. We can give this carbon indebtedness a value: calculate the carbon value of a barrel of oil, world GDP divided by global carbon emissions, the value carbon traders place on excess emissions. However we value it, the value will far exceed the monetary debt of the most indebted countries. We can thus offset one against the other. The debt is wiped out, not in cash terms, but by the provision of carbon saving measures provided free by the North to the South.
In the light of new evidence and taking into account the remaining uncertainties, most of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. -- IPCC
Beyond 2100, the thermohaline circulation could completely, and possibly irreversibly, shut down in either hemisphere if the change in radiative forcing is large enough and applied long enough. -- IPCC
The nub of the report is that global warming is much worse than previously thought, and the cause is human activity. The rate of temperature rise is greater than previously predicted. We are living through an unprecedented period of climate instability.
All three volumes of the IPCC report published by Cambridge University Press.
[see BVEJ special climate issue newsletter #0014 July 2001]
More than 50 countries are required to ratify Kyoto for it to come into effect. Of those that sign, they have to account for more than 50% of global greenhouse gas emissions. On the eve of the Bonn meeting, only Romania had signed up.
The week before did not hold out much promise. The Japanese were wanting Kyoto watered down.
The evening before the start of the talks Michael Meacher (Environment Minister) was espousing the benefits of Kyoto - emission trading, clean development trading .... Urgh, a bloody trade treaty.
FoE pulled their usual stunt of dividing the environmental movement by hitting out at direct action. First to criticise but only too happy to jump on the bandwagon and claim credit later.
On the first day of the talks a group travelled from Oxford to Paddington using the Rising Tide 90% for 90% railcard. Outside Guildford station where the cards were being distributed, an angry South West Trains ticket office manager tried to stop the action on the grounds that 'use of the old BR logo was illegal'. He threatened to call the revenue collectors to seize the cards and the transport police to make an arrest.
As he set out for G8 talks in Genoa, with a stop over in London, Bush made it clear that he had no intention of ratifying Kyoto.
The discredited Kyoto protocol, a trade agreement in all but name, got watered down. What was agreed, to self-congratulation from the delegates, was a worthless piece of paper. Environmental groups who should have known better, joined in the self-congratulation. No doubt they will be out with their begging bowls showing what they have achieved.
Carbon sinks are to be permitted. Countries can now increase their emissions as these will be offset by carbon sinks. London is set to become the world centre for carbon trading - fuck the planet, let's make a fast buck. Clean development mechanisms are to be allowed. At best we will see a 2% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
Canada was one of those countries pushing hard for carbon sinks. Having almost destroyed all the temperate rainforests in British Columbia, the logging companies can now make money through plantation forestry (already 10% of which is GM).
Those who were grasping at straws highlighted that at least a framework was in place. A framework has been in place since Rio, a decade ago. Kyoto was to flesh out the details and to provide hard numbers.
We need 60% minimum, immediate cuts. The cuts agreed, put off to the future, ever deeper cuts needed to stabilise atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases.
At Genoa Blair prattled on about violence. The violence on the streets of Genoa was nothing compared with the violence inflicted on the world's poor by climate change. As the delegates in Bonn patted themselves on the back, and so-called environmentalists joined in, Orissa was facing massive floods - 10,000 villages destroyed, 1 million people forced from their homes, 6 million at risk. Earlier in the year Orissa was suffering drought, last year it was hit by a cyclone.
Greenpeace managed to shut down an Esso oil refinery in Essex (guilty consciences?) leading to massive and swift police response and several arrests. A hunt for a missing schoolgirl was even temporarily abandoned. Last year misguided farmers and hauliers were allowed to shut down the entire country's fuel supply. [BVEJ newsletter #0005 October 2000]
[see BVEJ special climate issue newsletter #0014 July 2001]
For those who did not see it a brilliant programme on globalisation by John Pilger broadcast by Carlton TV. Classic Pilger at its best.
Pilger looked at the sweatshop factories in Indonesia. Posing as a customer he was able to show the conditions inside the factory. One of the customers was GAP. Then a tour of the shanty town dormitories where the workers live, open sewers running down the street. The workers described their long hours for little pay, forced overtime, failure of GAP to verify their code of conduct, their shock when they discovered the prices the GAP garments were selling for in the UK. Once able to afford three meals a day, the workers could now barely afford two.
Then switch to the brutal military regime, the corruption, the millions killed with CIA and the Brits proving the intelligence, business leaders meeting to carve up the country. Billions of dollars stolen from the people, a third of World Bank loans missing, unaccountable. The poor have to pay the burden of debt repayment.
Asked for answers, World Bank, IMF, had none.
Blair saying the protests that follow every summit are of no consequence. Illegal detention of protesters in Oxford Circus on May Day, Blair and his crude attempts to demonise the protesters, the violence of globalisation against the world's poor. More and more people are coming out onto the streets and saying no, they are uniting across the world.
An excellent free booklet to accompany the programme is available from Carlton (A4 SAE):
Carlton TV Gas Street Birmingham B1 2JT www.carlton.com/tv
John Pilger, Distant Voices, Vintage, 1992, 1994
John Pilger, Hidden Agendas, Vintage, 1998
John Pilger, New Rulers of the World, Carlton TV, 18 July 2001
GAP the sweatshop shop employs or uses sweatshop labour in Russia, Macao, Honduras, Indonesia, and Saipan. In these countries workers are paid below a living wage. In Russia workers are paid 10p an hour, in Honduras £3 a day. Last year, GAP chief executive Millard Dexter received £23,000 a day.
BBC Panorama (October 2000) exposed GAP clothes being produced in Cambodia by children under 15. GAP has failed to honour its commitment to independent monitoring of its sweatshop factories beyond a single PR exercise in one Central American factory.
John Pilger (Carlton 18 July 2001) exposed GAP clothes being produced in Indonesia. The GAP code of conduct not heard of, long hours of overtime, refusal not an option.
GAP has failed to settle the Saipan case for breach of workers rights. Saipan is a Chinese island, US territory. Products from Saipan carry a 'Made in USA' label. Workers are imported from China Bangladesh, Thailand and the Philippines. Although US legislation applies, GAP ignores it. Workers have been working 12-16 hours day without overtime pay, they have to pay a recruitment fee for working in these conditions. GAP has refused to settle a case brought against it on the grounds that 'it lacks merit'. [BVEJ newsletter #0002 July 2000]
GAP contracts more business - over $200 million a year - than any other company on Saipan.
GAP owns Banana Republic and Old Navy. In 1999, sales exceeded $11.6 billion, with net profits of $1.1 billion. Last year Millard Dexter received $172.8 million in salary, bonuses and stock options.
Please write to GAP and tell them what you think of their behaviour:
GAP - the Sweatshop Shop 6 Bruton Street London W1J 6AL
Fax the co-founder Donald Fisher and chief executive Millard Dexter:
+1 415 427 7037
Boycott GAP until they improve their employment conditions, leaflet their staff and customers, picket their stores.
On the eve of G8 in Genoa, GAP in Guildford and Oxford Circus (London) were targeted, all part of coordinated action across the country. Follow up actions took place the following weekend.
More actions are planned. If there is a GAP near you, obtain leaflets from Labour Behind the Label and target the store. Repeat actions are planned against the Guildford stores.
Naomi Klein, No Logo, Flamingo, 2000
John Pilger, New Rulers of the World, Carlton TV, 18 July 2001
[BVEJ newsletters #0009 February 2001 and #0011 April 2001]
We are used to sweatshop working conditions in the Third World, long hours, poor pay, cramped sleeping quarters, to make foreigners feel at home the same conditions are imposed when they come to the UK.
In the West Country, highly qualified Filipino nurses, many to degree and higher degree, are attracted to the UK by promise of well paid nursing jobs. Many pay a recruitment fee, as high as £7,000, only to find on arrival they are working as cleaners and similar jobs in nursing homes at below minium salary. Hours are 7am to 5pm, often on to 11pm, with overtime paid only after 55 hours. Free sleeping accommodation, is two to a bed, deducted from wages at £100 a week. Ability to complain is made impossible by employer holding work permits.
Portuguese workers are being abused in the water cress industry in Andover. Very long hours, inadequate protective clothing, 'free' accommodation three to a room deducted from wages. Sick workers are denied time off work. If they become seriously ill and are forced to take time off work they are threatened with deportation.
The regulatory authorities are turning a convenient blind eye.
Business likes migrant workers - low pay, pliant, easy to exploit, don't know their rights, can be kicked out the country if they prove awkward.
Yesterday the state organised the provocation. It is scared the response will be bigger and bigger. We are not afraid. -- Jose Bove
I see more and more pictures of police kicking and punching protesters who are clearly not throwing anything and seemingly doing nothing. I watch a slow-mo picture of a policeman smashing his fist into a young protester's face. -- Noreena Hertz
It could well be that it was the authoritarian conduct of Silvio Berlusconi that fired up this war of Genoa. -- Der Tagesspiegel
The black bloc believes that the violence of capitalism ... must be answered with violence. -- Die Welt
Heads of states ... have made themselves deaf and blind to the realities of the world that they have made. -- L'Humanite
Global protest is a force for good. The G8 leaders must listen, then act. -- The Observer
The G8 should scrap summits. They are transformed into steel-ringed media circuses and serve only to stir up resentment. -- La Libre Belgique
Tear down the wall ... -- The Wall, Pink Floyd
Once again the world leaders cowering behind steel barricades, troops and police patrolling the streets.
The Global Resistance train from the UK, one of many converging on Genoa, was cancelled, then reinstated, then finally diverted and the remaining part of the journey made by coach. Dubbed 'the anarchist express' by the media, a crude example of media smear tactics.
On the eve of the G8 summit, a peaceful protest took part in the streets.
The morning of the first day Jack Straw was giving press briefings from the Foreign Office rubbishing those on the streets, claiming democratic legitimacy which those on the streets lacked (24% voted for New Labour, yet again an example of votes cast being used to legitimise a corrupt system), and globalisation was helping the world's poor. Later in the day Clare Short was repeating the same garbage.
John Pilger's excellent Carlton TV documentary should be compulsory viewing for bastards like Straw and Short.
Violence erupted on the first day of the G8 meeting. Pitched battles between protesters and police as the protesters tried to force their way into the sealed off red zone. One protester shot dead by the police.
A spokesman for CAFOD accused the police of aggressive and unnecessary violence, of pitching into protesters with unconcealed zeal, of deliberately spraying pepper spray into the face of protesters.
Tony Blair showed his usual arrogance by dismissing the protesters. He talked of engaging in dialogue, surely an alien concept to Blair. In Third World democracies, where there is no democracy, the only way to affect change is to riot. There is no longer democracy in the West, it is global big business that is calling the shots. The people on the streets represent millions of poor, unseen, unheard voices. If Blair and his business cronies wage war on the poor, then they should not be surprised when the poor start to fight back.
Following the death of a protester, the G8 dined on a luxury liner moored offshore, no doubt discussing liberalisation of world trade to alleviate poverty. Earlier in the day G8 had announced a further wave of trade liberalisation.
On the next day a peace procession took place. Several UK NGOs dropped out which was unfortunate as it legitimised the G8 hiding behind their barricades. A small group broke away and hurled missiles at the forces of the state. The state retaliated by attacking innocent protesters. Protesters tried to calm the situation but their attempts were frustrated by police aggression.
The violence was inexcusable, but it does not match the violence of big business against the poor.
A Sunday Times hack went undercover with Globalise Resistance. No doubt he was hoping to churn out another 'RTS gun-running' type of crap for which the Sunday Times are notorious. He bought more than he had bargained for. He was savagely beaten by the Italian police. [The Sunday Times 22 July 2001]
The City had given Genoa Social Forum a couple of schools to serve as HQ. Around midnight the police raided the schools. The schools were being used to transmit video footage and reports via the net. The police seized video equipment and disks. The purpose of the raid seemed to be to stop the broadcast of uncensored information from the streets and to teach the protesters a lesson. People were lined against a wall, then savagely beaten. Several were beaten unconscious, the floors covered in blood. The brutality only stopped on the arrival of a member of the Italian parliament who warned the police that they were on state property, had no search warrant and ordered them to leave. Protesters retaliated by trashing a nearby police station.
The Genoa Social Forum HQ was being used to collate witness statements of police brutality. All were illegally seized by the police. An appeal was put out on Radio Gap for help. Those who arrived on the scene, including lawyers, doctors and politicians were denied access. The injuries suffered were consistent with a desire to inflict maximum pain. The police knew the schools were not being used by the black bloc, so why the raid, whereas the camp used by the black bloc was not visited?
Francesco Martone (Green Party senator for Genoa):
We saw people being led out with broken legs, arms and noses. There was blood everywhere. One man was lying on the ground in a pool of it. The protesters, just kids, were trembling in fear.
Vittorio Agnoletto (leader of Genoa Social Forum):
They refused everybody access. They didn't want us to see what was happening. They refused to show us their legal authorisation to enter the building. There was no one in authority to talk to. They beat us, too.
Genoa Social Forum:
They took away documents, witness statements of police brutality, lists of lawyers, video evidence collected against people for the violence in the past few days.
Vittorio Agnoletto (leader of Genoa Social Forum):
We believe this was a well organised attempt to discredit the protests against world leaders. There was clearly two operations - one to suggest to the public they were trying to crack down on the black bloc, the other to make sure they took away incriminating evidence against themselves.
Another example of the crude smear tactics. The Mail showed a picture of the 'weapons' collected during the raid. Automatic weapons, stun grenades, concusion bombs? No. A dozen Swiss army knives.
There is a long and sordid history in Italy of collusion between the police and neo-fascist groups. Anarchists were seen wandering freely in police stations, getting out of police vans, curiously never attacking the steel barrier or trying to enter the red zone. Fascist groups are believed to have infiltrated the Genoa police.
Luigi Malabarba (Communist MP):
I saw groups of German and French people dressed as demonstrators in black inside the police station near the Plazza di Kennedy. Draw your own conclusions.
At lunchtime, on the third day, the G8 leaders packed their bags and left. In their final communique they said they would push forward with globalisation, promised to bring the benefits of globalisation to the world's poor. Blair bleated that more attention had been paid to the people on the streets than to him. To Blair this was turning democracy up side down!
Hidden behind their barricades, the G8 leaders had failed to hear the message from the streets. Once again a demonstration of G8 dancing to the tune of big business.
But what did they achieve? The commitment to the environment can be seen for all the world to see in the Kyoto agreement. The fund for AIDS was but a tenth of that the UN had already agreed was needed.
In parallel with the G8 summit, as the G8 leaders left for home the world's 49 poorest countries were meeting in Zanzibar. In contrast to the garbage coming from Blair, they said they did not want further liberalisation of world trade and were considering acting to stop further moves at WTO.
The next G8 summit in Canada is to be limited in size, each country will be limited to 400 delegates!!!
Genoa Social Forum are mounting an inquiry into the violence. They have accused the police of collusion with the anarchists, of provoking the violence, others have accused the police of using undercover agents and agent provocateurs to throw Molotov cocktails and direct the anarchists.
Several Brits who were arrested during the midnight raid on the Genoa Social Forum HQ were illegally detained for several days without access to friends, lawyers or consular access. The British consul made no attempt to gain access. Back in the UK Jack Straw, who as Home Secretary showed a complete disregard for human rights, made no attempt to demand the Italian government grant access. The prisoners were without food for two days and badly beaten whilst detained. An Italian lawyer acting for one of the detained said he had never seen anything like this in his entire professional career. He said the arrests and continuing detentions were illegal and unconstitutional. All of the detained were released without charge following the intervention by an Italian magistrate.
Only when the protesters were released and an outcry erupted across Europe, including Italy, did Jack Straw suggest there should be an investigation. Italian politicians have called for an investigation and for the resignation of the interior minister.
Tony Blair praised the police behaviour.
The Italians have shown a level of behaviour more akin to Turkey or Pinochet's Chile. Italy is a signatory of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Vienna Convention. In its brutal treatment of the illegally held detainees, beating of protesters, threatening to rape women with police truncheons, torture, and the denial of consular access, Italy is in breach of its international obligations.
Amnesty International is to mount an investigation.
In the last year at least 3 million people in more than 20 countries both north and south have taken to the streets to oppose neo-liberalism. The next big event will be the IMF/World Bank meeting end of September in Washington. It is expected to be the biggest demo in the US since Vietnam.
The only way to force change is mass demonstration, civil disobedience and direct action.
Building the Ilisu Dam would damage the environment, destroy historic towns and villages, abuse the human rights of tens of thousands of Kurdish people and threaten regional peace. -- Charles Secrett, FoE
Two select committees have slammed the Ilisu Dam, an environmental impact assessment drives further nails into the coffin. The government set out 4 criteria for the Ilisu Dam, the report shows none are met. But that aside the report is shoddy.
Four conditions not met:
Conditions laid down by UK government:
Key points in the report:
The word Kurd is not mentioned, nor human rights. In theory there are generous compensation packages on offer, but no mention of Kurds being driven at gunpoint from their homes, the homes razed to the ground.
A 'process of normalisation' is taking place in the area, ie bloody repression of the Kurds. A lack of data on the cultural heritage of the living population is noted, but no explanation is offered, ie the bloody repression of Kurdish culture.
No mention of the lack of proper surveys. Kurds are beaten and tortured if they protest, or talk to foreigners.
That Hasankeyf has a history going back 10,000 years, the area 100,000, an important area for early adoption of plants and animals and understanding of prehistory are all noted, then the archaeological value of the site is downplayed. To suggest the archaeological value can be exhausted before the area is flooded is nonsense.
It is a sick joke to suggest the area could become important to tourists. The military occupation makes it difficult for anyone from outside to enter the area.
The wildlife, the farmland, woodland, pastures are all dismissed as low economic value. As a sop, 20 islands are to be created in the reservoir as wildlife havens.
The current waste discharge into the feed rivers amounts to 10% of the annual flow. Toxic algal blooms are likely to arise due to toxic waste and agricultural run-off. A large area of stagnant water will give rise to malaria.
No mention of the impact on downstream states, the destabilising effect it will have on the region, the breach of international treaties.
The project is for electricity generation and irrigation. No mention of alternatives, eg renewables, reducing transmission losses in the grid. Irrigation will cause further problems of discharge into the reservoir. No mention that the land is likely to be used for cash crops.
Copies of the environmental impact assessment report can be obtained from:
ECGD
PO Box 2200
2 Exchange Tower
Harbour Exchange Square
London E14 9GS
020 7512 7000 {tel}
020 7512 7649 {fax}
ilisueiar@ecgd.gov.uk
www.ecgd.gov.uk
Two select committees have called for a parliamentary debate. Demand that Patricia Hewitt (Trade Secretary) allocates time. Demand that Patricia Hewitt drops the project.
Ilisu Dam is now out for consultation. Views to Patricia Hewitt, and your MP, by September 2001.
Ilisu Dam Campaign will be publishing a detailed critique of the environmental impact assessment some time in August, ie this month.
[BVEJ newsletters passim]
If Yusefeli is turning into Ilisu 2, I am really looking forward to getting stuck into the government for a second time on the issue of dams, funding and Turkey. -- Mark Thomas
Amec, well known to road protesters, have applied to ECGD for export guarantees for a dam in Turkey. They also have the begging bowl out to several overseas export credit banks.
The Yusefeli Dam is to be built on the Coruh River in north-east Turkey, it will displace at least 15,000 people from Turkey's minority Georgian population. Amec, part of an international consortium, is seeking corporate welfare to the tune of £68 million from the British taxpayer.
[BVEJ newsletter #0004 September 2000]
Most customers who have complaints do not share it with the restaurant - they just don't come back. -- McVomit internal web site
This is one of the biggest prosecutions in the illegal employment of schoolchildren and it is refreshing that the court has taken such a tough stance. -- Ian Hart, Child Employment Officer, Surrey County Council
Fear of mad cow disease and shit food is causing customers to avoid McVomit's. Crap service is now causing customers to turn away in their droves.
11% of McVomit's worldwide customers are sufficiently dissatisfied to complain everyday. Of these some 70% are dissatisfied with the way their complaint is dealt. In turn they tell their friends what a shit place is McVomit. According to insiders this is believed to be the tip of the iceberg.
McVomit have seen their profits fall, they are contemplating the unthinkable, the closure of 250 outlets.
Two McVomit's in Camberley have been prosecuted for exploitation of school children. McVomit's (franchise holder Ikhya Enterprises) were fined £12,400 plus £60 costs for 20 offences of illegal employment of school kids. None of the kids had work permits.
McVomit's had been working school kids long into the night on school days, often without a break. A 15-year-old girl was forced to work 16 hours one Saturday, seven hours longer than legally permitted, a 16-year-old worked from 5 pm to 2 am on a school day. Between 24 May and 14 June 2001, 51 breaches of regulations involving kids aged 15-16 in compulsory full-time education were identified.
Two years ago the appeal court in London ruled in the McLibel appeal that it was fair comment to say that McVomit's employees 'do badly in terms of pay and conditions'. Last year McVomit was found to be supplying 'free' toys that had been made by sweatshop workers in China paid a few pence an hour.
They are so thick-skinned they can't understand why people get upset about this type of thing. -- Patrick Kirby, Independent Rushmoor councillor
Such a trip was highly inappropriate when you consider the planning applications coming in for the redevelopment of the airfield by TAG, for instance, and the fact that SBAC are thinking of putting in one for the redevelopment of the site. -- Craig Card, leader of LibDem group
Rushmoor chief executive Andrew Lloyd and council leader John Marsh (Cons) decided to swan it off to France on an all expenses paid trip to look at the Paris Airshow. They neglected to tell their colleagues because in the words of Andrew Lloyd 'We didn't bring it up at the council meeting because we did not see the point of making a song and dance about something so minor and it did not seem relevant', or in the words of John Marsh 'I didn't bring it up as no big deal.'
As Patrick Kirby has said, 'it beggars belief' this contempt for the electorate.
The excuse was to see how the Paris Airshow is organised and see what lessons could be learnt for Farnborough. The council does not organise the Farnborough Airshow. We already know the impact: noise, air pollution and traffic jams.
The two clowns were guests of SBAC, major backers of TAG.
Marsh has tried to claim there to be no link between TAG, SBAC, the airport and any planning applications. SBAC are and always have been major backers of TAG. The TAG operation of the airfield safeguards the Farnborough Airshow (organised by SBAC). SBAC are wanting to turn their site (and adjacent land) into a permanent exhibition site for Europe, the airport is part of those plans. BAE Systems are the largest airshow exhibitors and major stakeholders in SBAC.
The arrogant comments by Marsh have shown utter contempt for the local community. If Marsh cannot see anything wrong he is either a fool or a knave, either way he is unfit to be council leader or even a councillor and should go.
We have previously highlighted that Marsh, as an employee of BAE Systems, is unfit to hold the post of council leader (BVEJ newsletter #0008 January 2001). Once again he has shown himself to be unfit. We expect Marsh to tender his resignation.
Once again it is two fingers to the local community.
The main objective of the Green Family 'Sun' Day is to raise awareness of a broad range of Local Agenda 21 issues that affect all of us in our everyday lives ... -- Les Murrell, Rushmoor LA21 co-ordinator
The event was a tremendous success giving local people an opportunity to find out about green and quality of life issues ... -- Les Murrell, Rushmoor LA21 co-ordinator
The Aldershot Green Day has once again descended into farce. Last year it was sponsorship by BAE Systems (BVEJ newsletter #0002 July 2000), this year it was the banning of FARA (Farnborough residents association opposing the airfield).
FARA was banned on the grounds that it is political, that it is not an environmental group, and that it is a single issue group.
By no stretch of the imagination can FARA be described as 'political'. According to the Borough Solicitor the Green Day is a fun day, not to be used for campaigning, where groups show how the borough's environment can be improved. He claims that FARA are not dealing with environmental issues, that it is OK for BVFoE to have a stall as they are not a political campaign group, that they do not campaign against council policies!!!!
Therein lies the rub. It has been decided that Farnborough shall have a business airport, it is council policy, to campaign against the airport is to challenge the council.
There is no greater environmental threat to the locality than Farnborough Airport - air quality, noise, risk of a crash, health problems and stress for local residents. Globally - climate chaos, globalisation.
Local residents, who wish to highlight environmental issues within their own locality, are banned from their local Green Day!
In Guildford the council works with the local community to oppose an unwanted incinerator, in Farnborough the council works with developers and against the local community to impose unwanted developments.
If Rushmoor are frightened of a little inoffensive, ineffectual organisation like FARA it shows how sensitive the airfield has become, and why we must all redouble our efforts to oppose it.
It is believed that Roland Dibbs (Cons) was responsible for banning FARA. He has no authority to do so. Dibbs has cabinet responsibility for the environment. Dibbs is ward councillor for those residents immediately under the flight path, but to date has failed to represent their interests.
Les Murrell, Rushmoor LA21 co-ordinator, wrote to FARA on 22 May 2001, telling them they could not have a stall, ie almost two months before the event. FARA failed to make formal objections, failed to tell their own members, failed to put it on their own web site.
On the Green Day local residents picketed the event. They were in Aldershot handing out leaflets saying that they were gagged, and highlighting that local residents had wanted to put out their stall to show the environmental impact of the airport, but were barred from doing so at their own local green day. They got a good response from everyone they talked to, including several councillors. The only exception was the mayor, who rather ignorantly pushed his way past and refused to speak to the protesters. He was than forced to slink around the side to avoid the protesters on his return. The general response was one of disgust at the behaviour of Rushmoor.
Apart from the excuse that FARA were single issue political group as grounds for a ban (a description that equally applied to many other groups who were allowed), a further pathetic excuse put forward by Les Murrell, LA21 organiser, was that it was supposed to be a fun day.
Someone has a very strange idea of fun. Bloody boring would be a better description of the Aldershot green day.
The day itself was very poor compared with the Green Ambient Picnic held in Guildford, where a fun day out is combined with the provision of information. How would Rushmoor handle groups like SchNEWS, SHAC, London Greenpeace, wanting a stall? As with other 'green' events in Rushmoor, a cosmetic exercise to give the impression something is being done.
Who sponsored the event this year?
This is absolutely ridiculous. They want us to move out but we are happy here and I know that at least half of the residents want to stay. -- Firgrove Court resident
I will not stand for them pulling down my home and if need be I will chain myself with padlocks to my flat. -- Firgrove Court resident
The newly submitted plans by the Arabs for town centre destruction are far worse than anything so far envisioned. The public highway through the north end of Queensmead is to go, the houses at Firgrove Court are to be demolished to make way for a car park, the grassy area on the service area will also go, the southern entrance into Queensmead appears to be going, shops that have only recently relocated to this end are being told they have to go, residential tenants are being told to go ....
The houses in Firgrove Court in the main belong to Pavilion Housing Association, some are privately owned. It would appear that Pavilion have done a deal behind the backs of the residents to sell the land to the Arabs. All the residents are being offered is moving expenses, plus £1500. Anyone who is foolish enough to move will find they have a less secure tenancy. All for a car park? A scam is suspected. This land would suddenly become very valuable were it granted planning permission for an office block.
An exhibition was held in one of the deserted shops opposite Sainsbury's. Missed it. It was only open for two days with little publicity.
Those manning the exhibition showed an arrogant contempt for the local community. No maps or any other information was available. They could not see the need. It was claimed that local residents were now happy with the cinema complex! That the feed into the roundabout from a busy main road would cause no problems. That consultation had taken place. The only consultation was with the Farnborough Business and Community Panel who represent no-one other than themselves. They do not consult with local traders, have no one from the local community, the meetings are barred to the public, including local traders, minutes are not available. So far Farnborough has escaped the drunken yob culture that affects many other towns, but not for long it seems. It was claimed that boarding up the shops was by popular demand! Proper notice was not given. Blame was put on Rushmoor. It is reasonable to expect the Arabs to at the very least to have the courtesy to inform their own tenants. A tenant of ten years standing who asked what they would be paying as new rent if they moved, was told such details had not even been considered, which only serves to illustrate the contempt for the local community.
Members of the local community made it very clear how they felt. Their views fell on deaf ears.
It would be reasonable to expect a local authority to fight hard for the interests of the local community, not work hand in glove with the developers, delivering them everything they want, but then we are dealing with the Rotten Borough of Rushmoor.
The go-ahead has been given for the unwanted cinema/bar complex. So far Farnborough has escaped the night-time economy that blights other town centres, but not for long it seems. Local residents said no, the police said no, traffic feeding into the roundabout car park will snarl up the main Farnborough Road (A325), but if developers want something the Rotten Borough of Rushmoor is only too happy to oblige.
The security company that supposedly safeguards the town centre has not had its contract renewed. The very helpful and polite female security guard was pushed out the week before. Traders pay a service charge for security but don't believe they get their money's worth. They were not consulted over the change of security company and were only informed after the event.
Local traders are forever whinging. They have much to complain about but they would do themselves a whole lot of good if they got of their backsides and actually did something rather than whinging.
Farnborough is at last to get a farmers market, all two of them - Sat 29 September and Sat 22 December 2001. A Saturday was the worst day to choose, midweek, Wednesday or Thursday, when trade is slack, would have been a far better choice. There was no consultation with traders or the local community. One of the benefits of farmers markets is greater community involvement!
[BVEJ newsletters passim]
Few people are aware of the existence of Merrow Brook, even fewer have ever seen it. Merrow Brook runs through Farnborough town centre between the old Post Office site and Pizza Hut. It is now culverted over, classed as a sewer and the responsibility of Thames Water. It emerges past the Post Office sorting office and drains into Cove Brook.
It is not permissible to build within three metres of a sewer pipe. The Arabs plan to build over the sewer pipe to within 3 metres of the Pizza Hut leaving a nasty little alleyway. In doing so they are not only building on top of the pipe, they are stealing public space as they are building on the highway. Parking for the development will require the theft of the grassy area to the rear and alongside the sports centre, the trees will also go. This too will cause disturbance to Merrow Brook.
Rushmoor gave planning permission for the development (4 retail units and 26 flats) even though it involved theft of public space and the highway had not been deregulated.
Rather late in the day, an application has now been made to the Secretary of State for Transport (via Government Office of the South East, Guildford) for the deregulation of the Highway. Objections have to be received before the end of the month.
Government Office for the South East Bridge House 1 Walnut Tree Close Guildford Surrey GU1 4GA tel 01483 882 300 fax 01483 882 339 www.go-se.gov.uk
Rushmoor gave the go-ahead for the development even though it means building on top of a sewer. Thames Water (the regulatory authority) knew nothing until they were tipped off early this month.
Any interference with Merrow Brook could have serious consequences. What we can say with certainty of the future is that there will be heavier rainfall, with very heavy downpours, and a tendency to flooding. Pile driving could cause the culvert to collapse.
Merrow Brook drains into Cove Brook. During the construction phase all vehicles have to be cleaned on leaving the site. This will all wash down into Cove Brook.
There has never been, another example of eliminating an existing trunk road and returning it to nature. It is a measure of the importance we give to the environment around Winchester. -- Cecil Parkinson, then Transport Secretary, February 1990
With pound signs springing up all over, what chance do cowslips and butterflies have? -- Private Eye
A promise that was given, and surprisingly carried out, was the removal of the A33 Winchester bypass. It was dug up and the route restored as wild flower meadows. It has become a popular local route for a quiet stroll, with nearly 200 species of flowering plants and 27 species of butterflies.
Wildlife rarely can withstand greed. An unholy alliance of New Labour government, Tory Hampshire county council, and Winchester LibDem city council has decided that 10 acres of meadows and adjoining area of outstanding natural beauty shall be ripped up for a car park. This is part of a bigger plan for expansion of housing and light industry.
A library is a source of unfettered information, or so it should be. Surrey Library Service is practising censorship through its free internet access service in Guildford Library. Access to both of the SchNEWS sites are blocked. How many more radical sites are blocked?
For handing out Rising Tide 90% for 90% railcards on the first day of the Bonn Climate Talks.
Outside Guildford station, a South West Trains ticket office manager demanded to know why the cards were being handed out. He claimed they were causing confusion. He claimed the use of the old BR logo was illegal. It was pointed out to him that BR ceased to exist years ago, and in any case he was South West Trains therefore it was none of his business. He demanded that the action stopped, and if not revenue collection men would be called (the thugs who man the barriers) and the cards would be confiscated. He then threatened to call the Transport Police to affect an arrest.
Distribution of 90% for 90% railcards were part of a week of local action to coincide with the Bonn Climate Talks.
Concerned officials and councillors have been meeting to decide what to do about voter apathy within the borough. All sorts of dumb ideas have been put forward. The blindingly obvious, act for the local community, has not been mentioned. Maybe the cretins will suss that no one wants to vote for the shits on offer.
YHA is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, it is being forced into a fire sale of many of its hostels. Nothing new there then.
Several years ago due to maladministration and mismanagement, YHA was forced to take out multimillion pound bank loans and put 26 hostels up for sale. It has never recovered from that situation, its income goes on debt servicing and admin costs.
Foot and mouth may have dealt the death blow. Income is down by £5 million and more than 20 hostels may be put up for sale. A more resilient YHA would have suffered but not to this extent. YHA is using foot and mouth as an excuse to con money from anyone who will listen. An investigation of years of bad management and a thorough overhaul should be undertaken before any money is given to the YHA.
Selling of the hostels may be no bad thing if they go to groups who will run the properties as hostels commensurate with the original aims of those who established the YHA in the 1930s, ie to help those, especially those of limited means, to explore and appreciate the countryside.
Hostels for sale may have covenants preventing their use for anything other than hostels or even preventing sale. YHA has in the past tried to cheat its members out of covenanted hostels