Is Dan Norris MP as sharp and underrated as Roger Bailey of BBC comedy My Family fame? Well there are certain similarities.
Views about our real wealth - the natural and social world, the source of our resources and the basis of our lives - and how it can and should be sustained for generations.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
MPs and jokes
Is Dan Norris MP as sharp and underrated as Roger Bailey of BBC comedy My Family fame? Well there are certain similarities.
Treasure nature, then vote to build on it - Labour Councillor Colin Smith
Malago Valley Conservation Group spoke of badger disturbance, bird-nesting habitat loss... Badgers are a species protected by law, including their own Act of Parliament.
These two comments in the local paper from Bedminster Labour Councillor Colin Smith got to me most of all. After visiting the site he said,
'It is a green lung for South Bristol to be treasured and it is almost secret.'
Despite, apparently, treasuring the nature site ie valuing as precious, Cllr Smith said,
'I'm going to have to support the employment issue' to attempt to justify the fact that he had just voted in favour of building over the green space as someone who sits on the relevant planning committee. Sheer hypocrisy!!
How far and for how long can we and should we go down this 'treasuring of nature but then building over it' road? What are the limits? What do the terms conservation area, site of nature conservation interest and protected species actually mean in practice?
Conditions attached to the planning permission are better than nothing but far from solving any fundamental problems they may well mean people continue to permit developments that they should not. In this case conditions include ecological management and wildlife protection measures and landscaping. However, the area occupied by nature will be vastly cut and so there will be a very high net loss of habitat and food supply, resulting in loss of wildlife.
The local paper reports that 'If any badger setts are found on the site [they did not look beforehand then!] Wring will have to make arrangements for the animals to be accomodated nearby' . Moving badgers would no doubt distress them and no doubt they will be both stressed and have their survival threatened once 'accomodated nearby'. It may well be that the area of habitat and the food supply will be smaller.
Planning Bill: ungreen; undemocratic
I believe it is vital for our Government to protect the right to be involved in decisions that affect our community, and ensure we consider climate change when deciding major infrastructure projects such as roads, airports and power stations.
In a recent opinion poll, 95% of people surveyed believed that climate change should be considered in decisions on major projects.
The Planning Bill creates a new Infrastructure Planning Commission that is undemocratic and unaccountable. It also creates a system of national policy statements which outline separate rather than integrated policy on major infrastructure.
I believe that the elected Government should take the big decisions on major infrastructure and should consider climate change.
Please speak in support of an amendment to the Planning Bill which states the need to consider climate change on the face of the Bill.
BBC report on previous opposition to the Planning Bill here.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Make the right energy choices!
Scrutinising plans and proposing changes...local democracy, not a problem!!
Public investigation and debate, which Councillor Abdul Malik seems surprisingly reluctant to have, and which has been lead by bloggers (see here too), has shed a lot of light on this issue which we would not otherwise have had. Its been vital in revealing how intensive the development is and how the process has lacked openness. The plans need to be scaled back and changed to avoid the worst impacts, which have been a big concern to the council's own Nature Conservation Officer. I’ve written direct to the George Ferguson, Chairman of the architects involved about this and copied the message to the council and developers but so far have no reply nor even an acknowledgement.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Change these plans to stop harm to wildlife
Monday, September 15, 2008
What place for legitimate nature conservation, environmental and amenity concerns in the face of high development pressures?
At least we have discussion somewhere now, thanks to bloggers and concerned locals. Bristol City Council has not consulted on the land sale, though the planning process now has to be gone through. I've not had a reply from Cllr Rosalie Walker (see here) on why this land is, apparently, not covered by the Parks and Green Spaces Strategy and have written to Kerry expressing concern about procedures and asking her to look into it.
I strongly disagree with the views my MP was pressed into giving on her blog, which appear to favour development on this high value green space which is home to such protected wildlife as badgers and sloworms (see Kerry's comments in italics below). What priority is Kerry giving to legitimate nature conservation, environmental and amenity value issues? Wouldn't we just build, on a small scale if its just a matter of scale*, anywhere eg Bristol's Downs, Leigh Woods, Ashton Court... if we shared Kerry's apparent attitude? The plans could and should in my view be scaled back and/or modified in the eastern portion at least, as the Railway Path is one of Bristol East's few good quality green spaces. This would address some of these issues whilst not impacting the development as a whole that much. Is this too much to ask??
_____________________________________________________________
And more of her views '....
Well, her own party's policy in Bristol says not on high quality green spaces !!
Saturday, September 13, 2008
By George he's not got it!
Friday, September 12, 2008
Sarah Palin: enemy of reason??
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Flogging of Bristol green space: why no consultation?
Please see the letter below I've just sent to the Bristol Evening Post [an adaptation of this blog post]. As the Executive Member for Culture and Healthy Communities I'd appreciate a response from you on the issues raised.
I'd be particularly grateful if you could clarify the status and designation of the land due to be sold on the Bristol to Path Railway Path. What are the council's 'stringent procedures' (according to the council's Pete Webb) on land selling that mean public consultation beforehand is not a requirement?
Does the Parks and Green Spaces Strategy not apply to this land? If not then could you please explain why? The strategy certainly mentions the Bristol to Path Railway Path as an example of an important green corridor so the lack of consultation before selling is most puzzling.
In your letter to me (dated 30 July), responding to my e-petition on the flogging of green spaces, you were at pains to empasise public consultation via the production of Area Green Space Plans. You also indicated that land outside the marginal, low value and surplus category would not be sold and yet land on the Railway Path is to be sold.
I look forward to your response.
In a session entitled ‘Rethinking sustainability’ at the Stephen Lawrence 8th Annual Memorial Lecture, Dr Lucas will attack the ‘bricks and mortar’ approach of mainstream models of regeneration which prioritise quick profits over the need to empower community residents.
At the event hosted by the Stephen Lawrence Charitable Trust, Dr Lucas will say:
“Plentiful green space, access to good public services and improved safety all lie at the heart of successful and sustainable communities. But in order to create neighbourhoods that really ‘work’ – economically, socially, culturally and environmentally – we also need to give people a stake in their communities.
“Reducing crime, improving prosperity, and ensuring access to services like a GP, good schools or just somewhere to kick a ball around are hugely important. Most of all though, a sense of community is crucial. Residents must be given genuine opportunities to participate in decision-making regarding their homes and areas.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Bristol to Bath Railway Path land sell-off: council response to my objection letter
Dear Mr Vowles,
Further to your e-mail dated the 4th September, I respond to your concerns with regard to the potential sale of the land as follows:
The potential loss of the green corridor along side the Railway Path was raised as a concern by Bristol City Council's Nature Conservation officer. As such, if this sale proceeds it will be on the condition that Squarepeg engage in dialogue with this officer to ensure that proposals provide the necessary compensatory measures for any loss of habitat and vegetation.
*Attempting to compensate for loss of habitat and vegetation is highly problematic and sometimes controversial. ‘Nature knows best’ is a great guideline for conservation. The council’s Nature Conservation Officer will know that a potentially big compromise has been made. We may be getting better at compensation but measuring the full value of the land before development is in itself an issue. Then you cant simply and easily ‘put back’ mature, fully functioning ecosystems and so there is likely to be a loss of quality for some time and quality may never return to its best. When land is back to an ‘equivalent value’, if at all, is often very hard to say.
Some say that habitat compensation is based on an economists view of nature not an ecologists. It thus serves to accommodate development interests not those of sustainability, attempting to legitimize damaging economic growth.
With regard to the lack of consultation over the potential sale of the land adjacent to the railway path. Bristol City Council has stringent procedures which it must follow when disposing of land, these procedures do not require the council to carry out public consultation prior to disposing of this land.
*I had the opportunity to object to the land sale only because of what I read online in various blogs (here and here). This means that very many members of the public locally, who own the land via the council, have not had the same chance. This is unjust and undemocratic. Please could you reply outlining the ‘stringent procedures’ you refer to as I’d like to see exactly why they mean public consultation is not required. Even if technically not required under current procedures I am dismayed that the council does not take the view that consultation is desirable on grounds that openness and public participation is to be valued (I note that developers Squarepeg are keen to stress that they value an open approach in the report on this issue in the Bristol Evening Post).
I can confirm this sale is not a 'done deal' and that whilst discussions have taken place with Squarepeg over the potential sale. No terms have been agreed, when seeking authority to proceed with this sale your objection will be presented along with the proposed terms.
*Not a ‘done deal’??? But today’s Bristol Evening Post story refers to a spokesman for the council saying: "The developer of the chocolate factory is negotiating with the council, which is finalising an in-principle agreement to sell a small strip of land…’ Sounds to me like a deal is virtually done - what else does 'finalising an in-principle agreement' mean!?!?
If you wish to discuss this matter any further please do not hesitate to contact me on 0117 9224028.
*Please pass on my further objections along with my first letter. I'd appreciate a response to my points about the highly problematic nature of habitat compensation, what council 'stringent procedures' are, the lack of opting in to full and open participation of the public on the land sale and when exactly a deal is or is not done.
Yours sincerely
Peter Webb
Peter Webb
Portfolio Management Officer
Valuation Practice
Floor 6, B Bond
Smeaton Road
Bristol
BS1 6EE
Tel: 0117 922 4028
Fax: 0117 922 4676
Photo of land near the area concerned, by Martyn Whitelock. Lots of great photos of the path on his site http://railwaypath.blogspot.com/ well illustrating its green quality.
Tory/Labour pact running Bristol backs mass incineration option
Instead, with Labour backing, they pushed through an amendment calling for "rigorous financial assessment" before any technology option was selected.
A small, all-party working group will be set up to look at ways to achieve greater cuts in the amount of waste households throw out.
A full outline business case will be referred to one of the council's scrutiny commissions on October 23, before a meeting of the ruling Labour cabinet on October 30. (full details here).
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Vote for Knowle West !!
Party Conference: selection of policy motions passed
environmental representatives (a cause being supported by the TUC and many
unions).
Working Time Directive, and for the national minimum wage to be increased
to be in line with the Council of Europe Decency Threshold (60% of net
national earnings). This would currently mean a minimum of £8.17 per hour.
* A "right to rent" policy so that homeowners unable to meet mortgage
payments and under threat of repossession could transfer ownership of the
home, at less than market value, to the council, and then remain in the
home as council tenants.
* Policy was clarified to make it clear that the party is in favour of the
universal provision of a free lunch in all state schools in England and
Wales on every school day.
* A call for a plan to licence and purchase the Afghan opium crop, to be
processed into morphine and heroin for free or low-cost distribution in
developing countries for the use of pain relief in palliative care and for
other medically approved purposes.
* A call for building regulations to be tightened, and additional training
of architects and builders arranged, so that new buildings, extensions or
conversions meet tougher standards than those now applicable, and so that
all new dwellings are zero-carbon by 2012. (As a result of the workshop on
this motion a new housing email list is to be formed – contact internal
communications if you would like to join it.)
* A motion was passed stating that "Members should at all times, including
when proposing and implementing policy, be sensitive to the fact that the
Green Party does not and will not endorse or tolerate antisemitism, or
discrimination of any form."
* A call for a new contract between service personnel and the state
promising decent living standards to those injured, and to the dependants
of those killed, while asking them to sign a pledge to follow international
law, and to disobey any order requiring them to fire on unarmed civilians.
* Policy committee was asked to develop a new crime policy, and to
establish a crime and policing policy working group...
EMERGENCY MOTIONS
for either the right to remain or citizenship in the UK, given their
exceptional service..
b. A call for Westminster MPs, who have control over the issue, to grant
the same access to abortion in Northern Ireland (where it is now almost
totally banned) as is available to women in England, Scotland and Wales.
c. A call for a full enquiry into the problems with policing the Climate
Camp at Kingsnorth.
d. A call for extensive highly protected marine reserves around the coast
of Britain to cover 30% of UK waters to 200 nautical miles by 2015.
e. Offering support for the Green New Deal (which was outline in a panel
session chaired by Caroline Lucas at which Tony Juniper, Jeremy Leggett,
Colin Hines and Ann Pettifor spoke).
f. Condemning plans by the Home Office to launch a central database of all
so-called "communications data" as a violation of civil liberties.
Monday, September 08, 2008
Pete Postlethwaite in 'The Age of Stupid'
More news/bckground on this here.
Sunday, September 07, 2008
New Green Leader, "Energy companies robbing poor to give to the rich"
The BBC reports that,
In her speech to the London conference she called for a windfall tax on energy companies and a "Green new deal" of investment in energy efficiency.
Ms Lucas branded bosses of energy companies energy "robber barons".
She told the conference: "Just three companies - BP, Centrica and Shell - together made £1,000 profit every second over the first six months of this year.
"These corporations are robbing from the poor to give to the rich and they know it. And it's about time they learned that, in a progressive democracy, there is no place for robber barons."
For more information about Caroline Lucas and the Green Party leadership move:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7602202.stm
http://www.carolinelucasmep.org.uk/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Lucas
http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/carolinelucas
http://www.carolinelucas.org.uk/
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Bristol to Bath Railway Path land sell-off
Dear Sir/Madam,
Railway Path land sell-off, Greenbank
I'm very concerned about the proposed Railway Path land sell-off at Greenbank, Bristol, linked with the planned development of the former chocolate factory. I'd like to register an objection to the sale of this land.
I dont want any of the green corridor of the Railway Path lost. The mature vegetation supports a wide range of biodiversity which would be adversely affected by the plans. In addition the greenery absorbs carbon from the air and the area would be less effective at doing so if developed. Users of the path are likely to experience a loss of visual amenity and the feel of the place will change negatively if developed as suggested.
I'm dismayed and unhappy that consultation on the land sell-off is completely lacking. The City Council are breaking at least the spirit of their stated openness and participation policies. One cant help but feel that behind the scenes its all a 'done deal' before it eventually reaches the public domain via planning processes.
I'd appreciate a response telling me exactly what the current situation is and how the council and developers respond to accusations of cutting biodiversity, reducing the carbon sink effect and reducing visual amenity with their plans.
Yours sincerely
Glenn Vowles
http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
Rosy outlook for Bristol green spaces??
I've made no statements at all that indicate that I recognise the importance of the Parks and Green Spaces Strategy, except in the negative sense that it legitimises flogging land, though you could be forgiven for thinking I had looking at the letter's beginning. I have read all the relevant documents and understand them at least as well as, if not better than, Cllr Rosalie Walker. Its always a useful argument tactic to just tell your opponent they simply dont understand or are not aware (too stupid, too lazy...not labels that stick well to an academic egghead like me), though its not aimed at genuine debate (which would have involved Rosalie in the very hard task of explaining for instance how flogging off land to be covered in concrete helps rainwater management...).
I'm much more interested in what the council actually has done and is doing than what some documents say (though she fails to comment on the councils past record). I'm at a loss to see how flogging land can be consistent with council policies on health and wellbeing, climate change, rainwater management, biodiversity...none of which are likely to be improved due to green land becoming tarmac/concrete...
I simply dont believe that no-one at the council has looked at where land might be sold off - how did they come up with figures like 90 acres or the previous 200 acres if they have not looked and estimated? How genuine is the Area Green Space Plans process if the council already has a very good idea what it wants to flog and where?
As for being committed to not selling higher value land, what about planning to flog off strips of green space near/on the Bristol to Bath Railway Path for housing development, using technicalities as an excuse?
As for the Parks and Green Spaces strategy being popular, well I seriously doubt that the council has measured this fairly via its 'consultation' processes - I'm sure that investment in parks is something people want but I'm also confident that people dont want land flogged off to a sales target!
____________________________________________________________________
Dear Mr Vowles
E-petition – Protect and enhance green spaces instead of flogging 90 acres to developers
Thank you for using the council’s e-petition processes to contribute to the debate about the Parks and Green Spaces Strategy. I am pleased that you and fellow petitioners recognise the vital importance of this new policy framework for the city’s green spaces, which was adopted by the Cabinet in February this year. It would appear however that you have not read the strategy, or indeed if you have, not understood how the council intends to approach the admittedly complex issues over land disposal. Indeed you do not appear to have read nor understood the wider green space policy imperatives around health, climate change, biodiversity etc which underpin the proposed 20 year investment programme – and where the council, yourself and most of the petitioners are fully in agreement. I am of course assuming you are aware that the approved strategy and numerous background documents are available at http://www.bristol.gov.uk.parkstrategy/.
Regarding your concern over the lack of evidence to justify land disposals in the form of maps, lists and debate, I refer you to page 36 of the adopted strategy which explains how the council is interpreting value and states that this will drive any future decision on the potential disposal of ‘low value green space’. This page includes the following…….
“…value will, therefore, be assessed at the stage when Area Green Space Plans are being drawn up and sites are being identified as possible candidates for change of use/type or disposal.”
“…This strategy document is not the end of the decision making process or to community involvement in what happens at the local level. We will develop “Area Green Space Plans” in consultation with local people and ward councillors, making specific proposals to improve quality and facilities and provide the parks people need in their local area……..Part of the analysis for producing Area Green Space Plans will be an assessment of value of those spaces identified as candidates for change of use or disposal.”
Further information on value assessment can also be found in appendix 5 of the strategy. If you would like to know more about the programme to produce Area Green Space Plans please email richard.fletcher@bristol.gov.uk who would be pleased to send you more information.
With regard to your concerns that the council will keep selling higher value green space to raise funding, the strategy also covers this in some detail. On page 42 concerning ‘resources’, this section summarises the ambitious investment plans for the city’s parks and green spaces which by the way attracted overwhelming support during last summer’s comprehensive public consultation.With an estimated £87m needing to be raised over the next 20 years to bring the green spaces up to a ‘good’ standard, an estimated £41m of this would be raised from property disposals, with 70% of the capital receipts reinvested in the strategy. This section goes on to state…..
“…The achievement of the strategy will be geared to the pace at which capital can be generated; this is why disposal of some land is essential if its ambitious quality improvements are to be realised. It is important to emphasise that it is not the intention of the council to keep selling land until the funding requirements of the strategy are achieved, irrespective of the importance and ‘value’ of the space to the community. On the contrary, should there be insufficient ‘low value’, marginal land available once the area planning process has been concluded, the council will review the ambitions of the strategy and consider alternative funding sources.”
I hope that this to some extent eases your concerns over the way the strategy is going to be delivered. We appreciate that some residents feel that every square metre of green space needs to be protected at all costs – however our research and consultation has demonstrated that a large majority are more concerned to see the quality of our parks and green spaces improved and that a small loss of quantity to help raise funding for this purpose, and to release land for essential needs such as affordable housing, is a compromise worth making and in the wider public interest.
Yours sincerely
Councillor Rosalie Walker
Darling, you need to do much more
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
No to merging Ilminster and Connaught Schools; reject the approach of the Primary School Review
Green space flog off: so it goes...
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Gordon Brown: talk to the nation on climate change...
Friday, August 22, 2008
Bristol City Council Leadership Crisis
'On yer bike' - Ok say growing numbers
Very interesting report in todays local paper revealing an important and encouraging trend. Investing in stronger local communities, generating local jobs, would make a significant contribution to solving transport, pollution, climate change, health and other problems given the proportion of people that seem to be prepared to change to cycling.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Bristol bus fare hike
Buses can and should be a key aspect of a sustainable, greener transport system but we need lower prices and more and better quality services. Community ownership and control of local transport is needed. Govt and council should invest, invest, invest here.
Bus campaigning news: http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/campaigns/public_transport/buses/blog
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Environment Agency boss bashes barrage
Mongolian Greens Leader and many others arrested
They were protesting the detention of hundreds of people who contested the June 29th Mongolian elections. See here for further details.
Ambassador
Embassy of Mongolia
7 Kensington Court
London W8 5DL
18 August 2008
Dear Mr Davaasambuu,
I am writing to you from the Green Party of England and Wales to request the immediate release from detention of our colleagues, Ms Saruul Agvaandorj, leader of the Mongolian Green Movement, and Mr Arslan Gombosuren, leader of the Just Society Front, who were arrested in Mongolia on 5th August while participating in a peaceful protest.
Ms Agvaandorj and Mr Gobosuren were demonstrating peacefully and silently, alongside families of detainees, for the release of the hundreds of other protesters who have been held since June, after protesting about the conduct of national elections. We join our colleagues in also urging you to press for the immediate release of these prisoners.
The right to peaceful protest is a legal cornerstone of any democracy. In contrast, the detention of peaceful protestors is an unacceptable abuse of power, wherever it occurs.
The arrest and detention of peaceful protestors is something every country that claims to uphold human rights should reject. The government of Mongolia should ensure protest and free speech are welcomed not restricted on the streets of your country.
I urge you to act quickly to release all the detainees.
Yours sincerely,
Caroline Lucas MEP
Principal Speaker, Green Party of England and Wales
Friday, August 15, 2008
Blog Action Day 2008, Oct 15, on poverty

Just visited the Blog Action Day 2008 site to register this blog as a participant. This year the action day is all about poverty. I'm happy to promote the event and hope many other bloggers will join in, as they did for last year's day on the environment.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Imposed mass housebuilding makes no sense
Best science and economics tells us we need to be significantly lowering our social and environmental impacts but massive population increase, massive land take for housing and infrastructure and all the pressures on transport, job availability and so on, make this even more difficult than it already was.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Green Party Leader and Deputy Leader Election
Find out more about Caroline Lucas here and Adrian Ramsay here.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
An introduction to green Bristol
There’s plenty of green space just outside the city boundaries, within easy reach, eg Ashton Court. As in many parts of the country green spaces are threatened by development. Bristol City Council has agreed a strategy to sell off of 2.4% of city green space. The future of green space is a key ongoing issue when there are plans to build many thousands of houses both within and around the city as well as a ring road around South Bristol. Bristol is a very popular place to live. Its population is currently forecast to rise by over 30% by 2031, exerting very significant additional social and environmental pressure at a time we need to cut it.
Bristol is also relatively green as a city as it gained its first Green Councillor, Charlie Bolton, in Southville, a few years ago. About time many would say, given the large number of organisations promoting respect and care for the environment that have for years been Bristol-based (CREATE Centre; City Farms; Transition Bristol; Farmers Market; Slow Food Market; local food advocates like the Better Food Company; Community Recycling Network; City Car Club…). What better example than the BBC Natural History Unit in Clifton, one key organisation behind June’s Festival of Nature and October’s Wildscreen the world's largest and most prestigious international wildlife and environmental film festival. The unit is responsible for world class television like Blue Planet and Planet Earth…playing a huge part in raising green awareness (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/).
Leading sustainable transport charity Sustrans, has, from its central Bristol HQ, been closely involved in some of the most discussed and controversial local issues this year. Bristol City Council had planned to build a bus rapid transit route over the Bristol to Bath Railway Path, the UK’s most popular cycle path, also used by a large variety of local walkers, until a 10,000 signature petition and a motion to the council from Green Councillor Charlie Bolton helped to cause a rethink. Going ahead with the plan might well have messed up the council’s bid to become the UK’s first ‘Cycling City’, which was ultimately successful. The council will have tens of millions to spend, wisely one hopes, on cycling.
Sustrans and other local greens, such as those at the Bristol Cycling Campaign or Bristol Friends of the Earth will continue activity on cycling but also on Bristol’s many transport problems. One of the major ways in which Bristol is very far from being green is the poor quality public transport (bus and train firm Firstbus are hardly fondly regarded locally!). Partly as a result Bristol’s air quality and noise levels can be poor at times and the city contribution to climate change needs to be cut by a factor of ten over the coming decades to approach sustainable levels! One small success of late is the rail service improvement on the ‘Severn Beach’ line – it’s a quick, efficient way to get around certain parts of the city, such as from Montpelier or Stapleton Road to Clifton.
There is ongoing scrutiny of how green Bristol actually is in a relative and absolute sense, eg whether or not it decides to mass incinerate much of its waste . The Bristol Partnership, the council working together with businesses, voluntary and community groups, has ambitions for the city to become a green capital ‘a low carbon city with balanced and sustainable communities enjoying a high quality of life’.
The eleven green objectives are commendable; leading Bristol-based organic food charity the Soil Association a leading light behind the September’s Organic Food Festival, is no doubt pleased to see the objective seven ‘healthier, locally produced food’ but the tension between green objectives and the Bristol Partnership’s other ambitions are great, in particular its economic thinking, which is still based on economic growth and a consumer society when environmental resources are finite. Bristol’s major current development is the huge new shopping area Cabot Circus. Green economics guru EF Schumacher, whose work is celebrated here every October at the Schumacher Lectures is probably turning in his grave.
Monday, August 11, 2008
Olympic-size pool yes - but keep local pools like Jubilee in Knowle too
We need more sources of healthy exercise not less. Local facilities are an important community feature, especially for those who find it most difficult to travel, such as the elderly and families with young children. Its also more polluting if people have to travel further to a more remote pool as its beyond walking distance for many and they will tend to go by car.
I'd also like to see renewable energy systems used in the new leisure centre, especially to heat the water in the new pool (which would otherwise consume a massive amount of polluting and non-renewable fuel). I've written to the council making enquiries about this twice but have not even received an acknowledgement from them.
Friday, August 08, 2008
Oath of allegiance to the Queen: MPs and others should have the option of swearing allegiance to their constituents instead!!
' A group of MPs are campaigning to scrap their traditional oath of allegiance to the Queen, the Mail can reveal. The declaration has been sworn by those joining or returning to Parliament for more than 500 years. But 22 MPs from all three main parties say their 'principal duty' should be to represent the people who voted for them - not the monarch. They want the Commons and the Lords to be allowed to swear allegiance to their 'constituents and the nation' instead...'
Good luck to them! MP's, Lords and anyone else who currently is required to swear this: 'I swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, her heirs and successors, according to law. So help me God.' (unless they are atheists in which case they leave out the God stuff and substitute 'solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm') should be given the option of an oath that does not involve monarchy and does involve the people they represent. We are supposed to be a democracy after all, including those who are republicans.