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.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Privatisation and profit or people and public service??
Bristol primary schools axed
Monday, January 26, 2009
Tidal energy from the Severn Estuary: Yes...but not at the price of estuary destruction!
Lots of talk about tidal energy and not enough debate and action on having a proper energy strategy. A correctly prioritised energy strategy would put energy efficiency top of the list - why not insulate all homes at no cost to the occupiers (such a scheme quickly pays for itself in saved energy, and thus lower bills, and rapidly reduced carbon emissions)??
Its good news that tidal lagoons will be considered. They offer large amounts of affordable and renewable power at low environmental cost to the estuary.
Its bad news that tidal reefs/fences are not on the list (though they will apparently get money to develop the idea). They too promise lower impacts.
Its even worse news that the Brean/Weston-Super-Mare to Cardiff barrage is on the shortlist. Its environmental impacts are huge and amount to destruction of the estuary. This fails the EU Directive on Habitats and Birds.
More here: http://www.stopthebarrage.com/
Petition: BBC should reverse its decision not to broadcast the Disasters Emergency Committee Gaza aid appeal
"Reverse BBC decision re: DEC"
I really think this is an important cause, and I'd like to encourage you to add your signature, too.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Time for Community Banks??
It reminded me of the longstanding Green Party policy (quoted below) to establish a widespread and well supported community banking system.
In order to help bring about the democratisation of the banking system, and in pursuit of our policies to support the growth of local economies, a network of local Community Banks will be established. These will be democratically accountable non-profit-making trusts, which will be able to provide low-cost finance both at district and regional levels. Any operating surplus arising from these Community Banks will be reinvested in their local communities. Community Banks will be empowered to create credit in the same way that commercial banks currently do, and will be given favourable conditions for doing so by the central bank. They will also be able to create their own local currencies**, to operate alongside the national currency, where this is supported by the local community.
The Manifesto for a Sustainable Society continues...
In order to bring about a more socially equitable society, it is important that poorer citizens have access to affordable credit, which can give them an opportunity to increase their basic living standards. Alongside Community Banks, measures to help facilitate this will include the promotion and support of credit unions and micro-credit schemes in which small groups of people cooperate to provide guaranteed small loans to each other.
**As for the idea of local currencies, the advantages are very well expressed by the extract below from the Schumacher Society.
...local currencies are a legal, but underutilized tool for citizens to support local economies. Local currencies function on a regional scale the same way that national currencies have functioned on a national scale—building the regional economy by creating a protective “membrane” that is defined by the currency itself. Local businesses that accept the currency are distinguished from chain stores that do not, building greater affinity between citizens of the region and their local merchants. Individuals choosing to use the currency make a conscious commitment to buy locally first, taking personal responsibility for the health and wellbeing of their community, laying the foundation of a truly vibrant, thriving local economy.
Also see these sites describing examples of local currencies in the UK:
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Bristol Airport expansion plans: flying into trouble
Bristol Airport has revealed its expansion plans. I've made a few contrbutions to the online debate, including commenting here on a local newspaper blog.
By expanding air travel we are encouraging money flow out of our economy - the difference between what Britons flying abroad spent in other countries and what visitors to this country spend here produces an £11 billion a year deficit! Its important at all times but especially in a recession, that people spend money supporting their own economy.
There are huge subsidies to the airports industry hidden in government funding for regional development, roads and airport infrastructure. The UK economy loses around £9 billion a year in taxation because aviation fuel is tax-free and all aviation transactions are VAT-free.
The most frequent flyers are in the top 10% of income-earners. They benefit most from the current tax concessions. In a typical year: less than 50% of the population flies at all; the poorest 10% hardly ever fly; of those that do fly, only 11% come from poorer backgrounds; even on budget airlines, 75% of the trips are made by the upper and middle classes.
Aviation is a very rapidly growing contributor to climate change. Planes are very heavy users of fossil fuel. The way that jet engines burn fuel produces nitrous oxides and high level clouds - tripling climate change impacts. Flying contributes 3.5% of climate changing emissions world-wide now, rising to perhaps 15% by 2050 on past trends. If expansion plans continue aviation emissions will scupper Government targets on climate change in the Bill that only recently became law.
Ecosystems, buildings and people’s health are at risk across the country. Air pollution around airports will continue to rise. Expansion is also generating more car traffic and invariably new or wider roads are proposed and built – adding to impacts in both construction and use.
The noise experienced by people living around airports or under flight paths will grow. There is no prospect of significantly quieter planes coming on-stream over the next 30 years. Already people under the flight paths to the busiest airports have to endure a plane every 90 seconds. They say it is 'like living under a sky of sound.'
The impact of aviation expansion on poor people in the developing world will be devastating unless we act. These are the people who: are worst affected by the changing climate; have few rights; have little choice about where they live; who are the least likely people on the planet to set foot aboard an aeroplane!!
The Government has said that it expects the number of passengers using UK airports to nearly treble by 2030. To meet this demand means new runways are needed at Stansted, Heathrow, Birmingham, Edinburgh and most likely Glasgow. Many of the country's other airports would see significant expansion, such as that proposed for Bristol. Government has provided a charter for the aviation industry and developers to proceed with airport expansion despite its new legislation on climate change, with a target of cutting emissions from 1990 levels by 80% by 2050!!
Further information:
http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/pages/aviation.html
http://www.neweconomics.org/gen/z_sys_PublicationDetail.aspx?PID=261
http://www.planestupid.com/?q=reasons
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Bristol's tranquil places
The idea is to build a map of valued quieter spots eg green spaces, in the city. The noise consultation will feed into the noise action plan for the city and help in developing a noise strategy for Bristol. Its worth noting that actions needed to lower noise pollution will also help create safer streets and will contribute to tackling air pollution and climate impact eg through speed reduction, encouraging walking and cycling and (hopefully) using shared space principles. This is the way to go to achieve better health, wellbeing and quality of life.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Bristol City Council: adopt and enact a noise strategy
*Reduce noise through better planning and design, ackowledging that growth in Bristol’s population, housing, air travel and traffic presents great challenges
*Seek to make the most of redevelopment and refurbishment eg through high density, mixed-use developments with quiet outdoor, green spaces
*Establish a Bristol award scheme to promote excllence in relation to design and noise
*Encourage quieter transport eg walking, cycling, electric vehicles
*Build noise reduction into day-to-day traffic management and integrating noise considerations across all council policies – cutting speeds, reducing congestion, reducing stop-start driving where appropriate, smoothing traffic flow, allocating street space better
*Protect existing quieter spaces eg open, green spaces
*Create quieter spaces like: open, green spaces; home zones; 20mph areas; pedestrianised areas
*Seek funding for developing targeted traffic noise reduction projects and for experimentation with fuel cell buses, hybrid-electric buses
*Extend support for the encouragement of smoother and thus quieter, safer, cleaner and cheaper driving eg via driver training
*Maximise the use of noise-reducing surfaces across all roads where they would be effective, primarily faster roads, along with less disruptive and better reinstated streetworks
*Where impacts are highest, protect wider areas from road and other noise using appropriate noise barriers (if/where the issue cannot be immediately tackled at its source) and investigate the integration of photovoltaic power generation into barriers
*Seek the cessation of night flying across the city via lobbying
*Lobby for a national noise strategy which was promised years ago and has not been delivered
and request that councils be given a remit to tackle traffic noise, as is the case in many EU countries.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Ecological footprinting: living in a dome
Picture a city totally enclosed by a transparent dome. The city’s people would obviously be unable to survive for long inside it unless they had access to air, water and other essential resources from outside. Think through how far the dome would have to extend in order to keep the city going indefinitely given a certain level of consumption, energy and resource supply and technological development and you are ecological footprinting. London was found to have a footprint of 49 million hectares, about the land area of Spain (!) in a study by Best Foot Forward in 2002. You could also picture a dome totally enclosing a person, a house, factories, offices, a country, group of countries – or indeed a planet! You could draw a boundary around various products, say beef or cars, and assess the ecological footprint of the product’s lifecycle.
An ecological footprint is the total land and sea area required to supply the resources and safely absorb the wastes and pollutants from a certain lifestyle and can be thought of at a range of levels. The unit of land area used is global hectares, where one global hectare is equal to one hectare (2.47 acres) of world average biological productivity with current technology. Some, like WWF, use ‘planets’ as a unit, which is good because any footprint greater than one immediately illustrates the unsustainability, excess demand or ecological debt (world footprint is now 1.3 planets and if current patterns are not changed we are heading for a 2 planet footprint by 2035). Land and sea is needed for: crop, animal and forest products; for housing and infrastructure; to absorb carbon emissions from fuel burning; biodiversity preservation; human wellbeing and quality of life.
William Rees came up with the ecological footprint idea, publishing the first academic paper on the subject*. Personal Environmental Impact Accounting, a concept closely related to ecological footprinting, was developed in the early 1990s by Don Lotter and released in 1992 as EnviroAccount software which became Earth Aware software in 1996 (still available as a free download from the internet). Rees worked on footprinting with Mathis Wackernagel in the early 1990’s at the University of British Columbia, Canada, the two publishing a book Our Ecological Footprint in 1996 explaining the concept. Much work has since followed eg the book Sharing Nature’s Interest published in 2000, written by Wackernagel, Nicky Chambers and Craig Simmons.
Footprinting’s methodology for the national level is detailed in the 2006 Living Planet Report and the Global Footprint Network's method paper. The Global Footprint Network has clearly indicated how research should be used to improve the method. This is important because different methods have been used in various studies with respect to: sea area; fossil fuels; imports and exports; and nuclear power. Data sources used have varied. Whether to use average global numbers or local numbers when looking at a specific area has been an issue. Including space for biodiversity has been debated. Footprint standards, are bringing methods closer together, making data more consistent and comparable. EU assessment of footprinting has been positive and ackonwledges the work being done to perfect methods.
When consideraring footprint data it is important to remember what they don’t tell us in addition to what they do. The footprint concept is itself inevitably a simplification of reality. The computer models used to calculate footprints are further inevitable simplifications. This is both a plus and a minus of course. Footprints do not deal with that which it is difficult or impossible to convert to a land area: pollutant toxicity; health impacts; the depletion of non-renewable resources (though it does account for the energy, land and resources needed to process them); socio-economic impacts; noise and visual impacts, for instance.
Keeping in mind its limitations, ecological footprinting is an excellent tool for awareness raising, getting a sense of the overall scale of unsustainability by comparing it with actual land area. The biological capacity of an area indicates resources that can indefinitely regenerate without depletion or degradation. Most industrialised countries have insufficient capacity to support their population eg Netherlands (average footprint 4.8 gha/person, land area 0.8gha/person in 1999) unless they have large land areas and low population densities eg Canada (footprint 2.7 gha/person, land area 8.8 gha/person, in 1999). The world as a whole went into ecological debt (where consumption exceeds regerative capacity) on 19 Dec 1987 and because of unsustainable living we enter into this debt earlier every year – in 2008 we went into debt on 23 Sept!
Friday, January 16, 2009
20 mph for Bristol: go for it!!
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Shopping local: the benefits

Update on Tesco's plans to convert The Friendship in Knowle into one of their stores. The campaign against the plans is developing very well and I'm very happy to be playing a decent role in it. To date the paper petition organised by local shopkeepers has several hundred signatures. My e-petition has a respectable 67 signatures so far and has I note fairly recently been signed by Cllr Mark Wright (who is also the Prospective Liberal Democrat MP for Bristol South). I have submitted two letters of objection, have helped other people to voice their opinions (for and against!!) and will submit a statement to the council planners on the benefits of local shops (below) today. I've written direct to Tesco Corporate Affairs Manager Juliette Bishop (who has yet to even acknowledge it let alone reply!). Several news stories have gained publicity for the issue (eg here and here) and letters have been published in the local paper (eg here). The resulting online discussion has been very lively!
With other local campaigners I've helped to get local councillors much more active on the issue, overcoming what appeared to be initial reluctance. To his credit Knowle's Lib Dem Councillor Gary Hopkins has now done some very useful work which I and others opposing Tesco's plans appreciate. The issue: has been given more time for consideration; will now be going to a planning committee (though no-one told any local that it was to have been delegated to officers!) probably on Tues 18 Feb at 2pm; its been made clear that the Tesco plan cuts across council policy favouring district shopping; a public meeting will be held to debate the issue on 16 Feb, 6.30pm, Redcatch Rd Community Centre and will hopefully gather together many locals, businesses etc. I plan to attend the 16 Feb public meeting to contribute and plan to make a statement and/or submit my e-petition to the 18 Feb planning committee meeting once details are confirmed.
It appears that the council have not yet informed local people about the changes to planning application deadlines and extended time available to comment/support/object!! Perhaps the local media will help to inform local people of the changes along with this blog.
There are concerns that unless shopping habits change, high streets, small ranks of shops and corner shops will disappear. Popping to the local shop for milk, bread or tea… will not be an option for many unless more shoppers change their ways. By supporting local shops we can help slow down and stop this decline and boost the local economy as well as help in the fight against climate change.
The Office of Fair Trading has looked at supermarket dominance, referring tha matter to the Competition Commission. Small shops are currently struggling to survive due to the power of the big supermarkets, with thousands of independent shops going out of business each year. Supermarkets power has become huge. The four biggest already control over three quarters of the grocery market. Tesco alone take 30 per cent and is still moving into neighbourhoods all over the country including Knowle (see: http://epetitions.bristol.gov.uk/petition.php?id=231).
The All Party Parliamentary Small Shops Group warned in 2006 that many independent shops could be gone within a decade unless action is taken now to curb the power of the biggest supermarkets. Big supermarkets have announced plans to improve their environmental credentials, but shopping locally is still a better option, especially if you leave the car at home and buy locally-sourced food.
The range of benefits from local shops is excellent: greater likelihood of providing local food; they often offer a much more personal service; they keep money circulating in the local area supporting other local businesses; along with street markets they offer affordability without roping you via special offers and some slashed prices into more expensive purchases (a Friends of the Earth survey in 2003 found that apples were cheaper in greengrocers than supermarkets and in 2005 a study for the New Economics Foundation found that street markets in London were "substantially cheaper" than supermarkets for fruit and vegetables); they are more energy efficient than huge superstores – a study by Sheffield Hallam University showed that it would take more than 60 greengrocers to match the carbon dioxide emissions from just one average superstore (more here); a broad range of local shops provides more choice than one big supermarket.
The Competition Commission should enact measures to achieve a healthy balance between the big supermarkets and local shops – but consumers should not wait for such action because it could be too late for many local shops if they do.
Gaza: petition for a complete ceasefire, civilian protection, humanitarian assistance
Petition to the UN Security Council, the European Union, the Arab League and the USA:
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Gordon Brown's plans: definitely more brown than green!
However, there is no such plan available from Gordon Brown's Labour Govt.. Where is what should be top priority, a plan to insulate all homes free of charge for instance (its something that self-evidently pays for itself in saved energy and thus lowered bills)!?!?
Looks like PM Gordon Brown's plans are pefectly consistent with his past actions as Chancellor doesn't it - definitely more Brown than green!
Monday, January 12, 2009
Cows, cars and climate
The figures Gil gives are certainly credible estimates, with the greenhouse gas contribution from animals raised for food (18%) being higher than the greenhouse gas contribution from all transport (13%). Its not just the methane emitted by the animals that is the problem - meat production makes intensive use of fossil fuels, chemicals, drugs, land, plus money, and the international trade in meat only makes this worse! http://www.vegsoc.org/environment/index.html
Meat production is inherently inefficient. A food chain involving meat is longer, with more links. The ecological rule of thumb is that there is a 90% energy transfer ‘loss’ (used for the organism's life processes or lost as heat to the environment) at each link in the chain! On average a meat eater’s diet uses twice as much land per person as a vegetarian’s and five times as much as a vegan’s. Over two thirds of UK land is used for farming, most of this being used for meat. Around two thirds of the vegetable crops grown in the UK are fed to farm animals.
According to the book ‘Sharing Nature’s Interest’ the ecological footprint of meat is 6.9 to 14.6 hectare years per tonne, depending on the type of animal rearing (pasture-fed animals have a lower footprint than grain-fed ones). Comparable figures for other foods are: non-aquaculture fish 4.5 to 6.6; fruit and vegetables 0.3 to 0.6; milk 1.1 to 1.9; grain such as wheat and rice 1.7 to 2.8; and pulses such as beans and peas 3.6 to 2.8. Even allowing for the fact that these are broad estimates the comparison is stark and is rooted in basic science.
The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation’s figures show that meat consumption has tripled since 1961. World meat consumption is now well over 230 million tonnes per year. By 2020 demand for meat will surge nearly 60%. Meat consumption has been and still is a feature of a ‘developed’ country given that someone living in a developed nation consumes three times as much as someone in a ‘developing’ one.
Put the facts on methane emissions and land/energy/chemical use from meat production together with fast rising meat consumption and you can see that we have trouble – not just in terms of climate change but also in economic terms, with food and fuel prices reaching very high levels during 2008 helped by high and rising demand. You’ll note that I’ve not even touched on the ethical/animal welfare issues or the health and disease issues involved in eating animals in large quantities!
So when Gil writes ‘Perhaps governments should be encouraging people to cut down on their meat consumption…’ I’d agree (although this should be in addition to tackling the environmental impacts from transport, energy generation and use, and so on which are many, varied and significant). It is especially important to tackle a meat industry parts of which, as Gil says, are clearing forests to create farmland for cattle rearing, boosting climate damage from cow methane, releasing carbon dioxide from the soil, rapidly releasing carbon dioxide when forests are burned and cutting the extraction of carbon from the air by forests simultaneously (more here).
I’ve spent some time describing the evidence and the problems. Solutions wont be easy. Action is needed across a wide range of policy areas, from environmental and health education informing personal food choices, to UK and EU action on personal and household carbon budgeting, to international agreements on deforestation and global trade…Would I advocate that we all go vegetarian or vegan? No, and I’m not a vegetarian myself, though I would strongly advocate that people consider a low meat diet, making dietary choices to stay within a carbon budget, and taking into account health, disease and animal welfare issues. Its certainly environmentally friendly to eat less meat whilst at the same time being cheaper, healthier and more ethical.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Invest in creating a low waste economy: create jobs, boost efficiency, cut pollution...
Suzanne correctly identifies the growing stockpiles of waste collected for recycling as a problem, giving Recycling UK figures of 100,000 tonnes of waste paper and cardboard currently in warehouses, growing at 8,300 tonnes every week – meaning a stockpile of 200,000 tonnes within months!! (It must be said that some feel the stockpiling reports in the media have been 'overblown' however).
She makes some very pertinent suggestions about what we should be doing as a priority eg legislation or systems of taxation to ensure that manufacturers don’t use so much packaging in the first place; not exporting waste to China and elsewhere, instead using the materials better in the UK; shops providing bags made from recycled cardboard and paper; using recycled materials to make packaging.
Yes, yes, yes – have you been reading the waste section of my blog Suzanne or perhaps the Green’s manifesto?? Some of her list of suggestions are being taken up but far too slowly and far from comprehensively. To set up the most efficient and the most sustainable systems of resource use and waste management you need to ‘complete the circle’ ie have a complete cycle of: cutting out resource use that is unnecessary; using and reusing products and resources efficiently; having localised and national reuse and recycling facilities; widespread production using reused products and recycled materials; making the consumption of products made from recycled materials commonplace and preferable…
We dont have law and taxation favouring this. We don’t have much infrastructure for doing all this. We have not had much investment in this. We’ve not had the total systems thinking needed. Masses of new jobs could be created by setting up local reduction, reuse, recycling economies and a low waste, even zero waste, national economy/society. What better time than now for putting in the government money needed (see the Green New Deal report)? It will be a massive lost opportunity if we don’t.
Bristol green spaces flogging delay
A report to the council's Quality of Life Scrutiny Committee meeting on Monday says the recession would have an impact on the 'rate of progress' of the plan.'
Green spaces are one of the most popular and desirable features of the city - and we certainly need them if we are going to build sustainability and enhance the quality of our lives. This city is supposed to have green capital ambitions after all!
Worryingly there is growing evidence that Bristol City Council is not fairly and uniformly applying its green spaces policy process of establishing Area Green Space Plans through consultation in the same way across all wards in Bristol.
The meetings that were called to deal with the Neighbourhood Partnership area involving Knowle, Filwood and Windmill Hill excluded discussing Filwood. This means that Filwood will be handled separately and with very considerable pressure on it for housing development - I'm told that consultants not present at the other meetings will be present at meetings about Filwood for instance.
On the Bristol to Bath Railway Path the council have a sham consultation on a land sale loaded with leading questions instead of bringing forward the Area Green Space Plan process for the location.
Filwood Park was sold off within hours of the adoption of the new policy on green spaces, The Parks and Green Spaces Strategy - outside the spirit of the policy entirely.
Friday, January 09, 2009
Create jobs in Bristol by building a green economy
With properly directed investment though we can be positive and hopeful. I believe we need a Green New Deal * which would involve:
- Massive investment in renewable energy and wider environmental transformation in the UK, leading to,
-Building a new alliance between environmentalists, industry, agriculture, and unions to put the interests of the real economy ahead of those of footloose finance
Going green is the best way to fight the recession and get a healthier society with ongoing decent quality of life - ask an ever growing number of economists!! After all we have worked hard to mess up the environment for decades which means there is a lot of work to be generated in stopping this and putting things right!
Colin Hines,Co-Director of Finance for the Future, former head of Greenpeace International’s Economics Unit,
Tony Juniper, former Director of Friends of the Earth,
Jeremy Leggett, founder and Chairman of Solarcentury and SolarAid,
Caroline Lucas, Green Party MEP,
Richard Murphy, Co-Director of Finance for the Future and Director, Tax Research LLP,
Ann Pettifor, former head of the Jubilee 2000 debt relief campaign, Campaign Director of Operation Noah,
Charles Secrett, Advisor on Sustainable Development, former Director of Friends of the Earth,
Andrew Simms, Policy Director, nef (the new economics foundation).
Talking trash on Bristol City Council (again!)
The mass incineration they seem so keen on is the thinking of the past - why keep recycling it ??
We need central and local government investment in waste reduction, reuse and recycling.
Now is the time to direct govt money this way - to create jobs and build a greener economy for the future!
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Shoes made from recycled bus seats and tyres
Its notable that Justin Davies, First's MD locally is keen to stress the company committment to sustainability, including its waste management programme and climate change strategy via the side issue of recycled shoes (not that its a bad idea to make shoes from such recycled materials). Of course the major thing First can do to show their committment to sustainability is to run bus and train services of good quality, on a decent number of convenient routes, and at affordable prices! This is not something they are doing at all well at present and the production of shoes from recycled buses wont go anywhere near making up for the poor service !!
Should First be running our bus and train service at all?? No, lets have community ownership and establish a democratically run transport authority for Bristol and the surrounding area.
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
Further questioning Bristol City Council on green spaces and transport
Note that a 31 page, 13,000 word document of complaint was sent to the Local Government Ombudsman by me this morning saying: that Bristol City Council has not followed its own green spaces policy and procedures; that senior officers have taken ad hoc decisions; that prominent figures with a vested interest in developments have had undue access to officers and influence over decisions; that officers and councillors did not respond adequately and promptly to communications; that the decision on not conducting an environmental impact assessment on the 'cycle house' plans may not have been taken on a proper basis; that dealing with my complaint was consistently delayed, lacking in detail, lacking in references, lacking in explanation and lacking in direct response from those with the most specific expertise; that current consultations are sorely lacking compared to official policy.
I've been compiling this document as the issue has developed over weeks/months and every time I've thought it was complete another relevant development has occurred eg the 'consultation' referred to in the question below (very ably criticised by the Bristol Greengage and Green Bristol Blog).
Q. Consultations have begun over the sale/lease of land on the Bristol to Bath Railway Path to property developers Squarepeg, though the process appears to be a very, very poor substitute for the Area Green Space Plan process laid out in official policy, the Parks and Green Spaces Strategy and appears to focus in much more on the development issue via leading questions than on the land sale/lease: can you explain why the Area GreenSpace Plan process, now underway in several parts of Bristol, was not brought forward for the locality encompassing this land ??
Follow-up questions to Cllr Mark Bradshaw on transport issues in South Bristol also submitted to the same meeting:
Q1. In response to questions I put to the November Cabinet [see C2, C3, C4 on the link] meeting about the South Bristol Link you informed me that estimates of the impact on air pollution and congestion in the Knowle/Brislington area had not been released: what are your thoughts on the importance of information such asthis being made widely available asap during a consultation period??
Q2. In response to questions I put to the November Cabinet meeting you confirmed that you may use Cycling City cash to buy land along the Callington Rd Link (intended to be part of a strategic road network): will cash be returned to the cycling budget if a road is built there??
Further detail on previous green spaces and transport questions here and here.
Sunday, January 04, 2009
Totterdown Residents Environmental and Social Action
Saturday, January 03, 2009
Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare: petition
*Animals are sentient and can suffer.
*Animals’ welfare needs must be respected.
*Animal cruelty must end for good.
What will it achieve?
The adoption of a UDAW by the United Nations would:
*Establish animal welfare as an international issue.
*Encourage governments to improve and enforce national animal welfare legislation by providing a benchmark.
*Recognise that animal welfare is a key factor in humanitarian and environmental policy making.
*Encourage industries which use animals to keep welfare at the forefront.
*Acknowledge the risks to animals caused by environmental factors such as climate change, habitat loss and pollution.
*Create a more compassionate global attitude to animal welfare, including their needs and habitats.
*A declaration would also enhance the lives of over 1 billion people who rely on animals for their livelihoods, and the countless others look to animals for companionship.
*A UDAW would work for human health – animal welfare contributes to sustainable farming systems and the improvement of human food safety.
Community Caretakers Action Group
One voice together protecting workers rights, ensuring equality and fairness and fighting privatisation. Working towards a better way
FYI
Full blog can be viewed here
Review Update
Well its getting close to Crunch time . Management have submitted there final proposals for Caretaking Services... you can find them here (Click on caretaking halfway down the page).
What does this proposal mean :
· All caretakers face a cut in pay and benefits.
· These cuts range from approx 2.54% - 33.52% (£7,433). See appendix D of the report.
· In fact these figures will be larger as the value of current benefits to residential staff is disputed . Management state the average difference between the figures they use and the real value is approx £800pa . this will be an immediate loss to effected workers that will not be recognised or protected.
· This means roughly 50% of staff will not have had a pay rise for 6 years!!!
· Only two residential caretakers per area.
· The final decision will NOT be made by councillors , but by the head of paid service.(Is this the cabinet bottling out?)
· Demoralised and unmotivated staff.
· More chiefs and less Indians .
· Caretakers and their families becoming further in debt and forced into bankruptcy.
We have a full mandate from the work force to ensure the devastating proposals set out by management are rejected by any and all means .
The workforce has the right to be angry . Especially as they were told by management that they would probably be better off working for MacDonald's.
Please support your caretakers , contact your MP and local Councillor, write to the papers and come to a rally being held at 1.30pm at the council house on 8th of January ......HR committee meeting will start at 2pm .
The time for action is now.
p.s. HAPPY NEW YEAR . (if you can afford it)
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Environmental action in schools and colleges
2. Can the figures for carbon emissions from Bristol’s schools be made available and if there are none as yet available will the member ask officers to approach the Stockholm Environment Institute, the Sustainable Development Commission’s partner in producing the report referred to, as they hold the raw data and may be able to break it down to give figures for the city?
3. Consistent with objective 10 in the Bristol Green Capital pledge list to enhance environmental education and awareness, will the member circulate a Model Environmental Charter, such as the one described in my petition submitted to this meeting, to all Bristol schools and colleges, accompanied by a letter to governors urging them to adapt the model charter to suit, adopt it asap and agree to annually review and report progress relating to it?
4. Does the member agree that schools can play a major role in tackling climate change, especially through starting with their own school buildings, transport, waste and procurement, helping pupils and communities to learn about the sources of and solutions to carbon emissions and the consequences of not taking urgent and large scale action?
5. Does the member agree that the education system should provide a continuous opportunity to experience, practise and evaluate sustainable behaviours in recognition that empowering people to find solutions to sustainability problems is one of its core purposes and that therefore it is vital for all establishments to adopt their version of an environmental charter or a similar statement of intent, preferably accompanied by action plan?
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Bristol's Northern Slopes - housing plans??
The Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) Stakeholder Technical Assessment lists possible sites for housing and has maps, including site ST111 which includes a large part of the Northern Slopes. The Knowle West Regeneration Framework covers this valuable green space too (a bit of background + links here) and there is a Kingsweir / Torpoint Masterplan that will be complete within 6 months apparently. All these could over-ride the Area Green Space Plan process and given the councils green spaces record look set to do exactly that!!
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Should Tesco be allowed to impose themselves on Knowle?
Dear Juliette
Re: Plans for a Tesco Express convenience store – former public house on Axbridge Road, Knowle
As a Knowle resident with a very strong interest in the provision of local facilities, like shops, to meet local needs I have taken a serious interest in Tesco plans for The Friendship pub, which I used to live opposite and still live quite close to. I’ve been talking to many locals, shopkeepers in particular and have been given a copy of the letter you wrote (dated 28 November) to a very small number of people in the area.
Whilst some locals might have heard rumours of Tesco plans most people are taken aback and will be concerned by the sudden developments and serious lack of prior community consultation. The ‘professional team’ that has been working on ‘plans for an Express store’ have not thought to involve a range of local people from the off. Your letter was quickly followed (on 4 Dec) by the submission of a planning application to build a car park over the pub garden. Local residents only have until 6 January to respond, with Christmas and New Year rapidly approaching!
This is for me not the action of a ‘good neighbour’ though your letter begins ‘Dear Neighbour’ and mentions that Tesco ‘operate a ‘good neighbour’ policy’. A good neighbour would generally be in close, frequent and good quality contact with people, probably a wide range of people, in the community – agreeing with the idea that neighbourhoods and communities should ideally shape where they live through partnership arrangements.
Given what I have said I ask you to slow this process down and give everyone involved proper opportunities to discuss plans in the new year. Would Tesco be willing to send representatives to a meeting with those living and working in Knowle?
I don’t agree that the planned Express will be a ‘small neighbour convenience store’ in a few key senses. First, the store floor area (3000 sq feet) and takings expected will be significant at a neighbourhood and community level eg compared with the existing convenience store and newsagents on Axbridge Rd and many other local shops of all kinds. As a result the impact of your Express on the existing local shops is likely to be significant and negative. Second, the changes on the local roads, already increasingly busy, will be significant both due to the proposed new car park and due to deliveries to the proposed store in very large vehicles. Local roads are not suitable for more yet more traffic and more large vehicles. Congestion, air quality and noise are likely to worsen further and people’s health and quality of life along with it.
The statement that Tesco ‘intend to improve the existing car park arrangements’ is not true. In fact you wont be modifying existing pub parking arrangements but instead plan to build a new car park over the pub garden! Its very disappointing that as yet no drawings are available online to show the exact layout proposed but the council planning officer dealing with this case described what is intended to me over the phone.
The loss of green space with a lot of potential, to be replaced by a car park, would be a big blow to local amenity and to local wildlife. Cars turning in and out of the car park onto the busy road with much greater continuity and frequency than currently means greater risk of accidents. I’ve already referred to the environmental and health consequences. Tesco have not been proactive in seeking out locals and discussing such plans.
Your letter states that you locate ‘Express stores where they will be convenient for people to walk to, reducing the need to use a car’. In fact the proposed store is likely to get quite a lot of trade from people passing by in their cars – thus plans for a new car park. The effect of Tesco opening on this spot may well make the operation of other local shops unsustainable – if/as they close over time then the distances people are from their shops will increase, making it less likely that people will walk to the shop. Stats show that once walking distances to shops exceed 400 metres it becomes much harder for the elderly to access them.
Many items that would be sold in your store are already on sale in existing local shops at affordable prices. You are quoted in the Bristol Evening Post as saying that the immediate area was "currently under-served for convenience retailing". This opinion is not shared by local people who have a wide choice of types of shop close by already. In fact concern is high that should Tesco open then others shops will close, reducing choice, cutting competition and allowing prices to creep upwards. This is not the right location for a Tesco Express in my view.
There is concern locally that despite your ‘good neighbour’ policy the setting up of Tesco Express stores can be accompanied by: increased local litter; the increased presence of large bins which can obstruct walking and sometimes overflow; noise and anti-social behaviour due to people congregating; illegal parking on busy roads by some customers.
There are several possible uses for The Friendship – properly managed pub with good quality, large garden; conversion to flats, with access to large garden area; conversion to accomodation for the elderly…Options have not been fully explored and certainly have not been fully discussed locally.
You may feel that some/all of what I have said is flawed. You may feel you can allay fears. You may acknowledge negative impacts but feel that you can mitigate them somehow. I would welcome further communications and hope you will agree to meet with locals as I suggested earlier. I look forward to your reply.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Compliment to Bristol's 'citizen journalists' - including this one!
The campaign to save the Railway Path also marked the point at which "citizen journalism" came of age in Bristol. There have been local blogs and "alternative" local news websites around for years, but 2008 was the year in which we suddenly found there were a few of them actually worth looking at. The Bristol Blogger, James Barlow, Vowles the Green, the Green Bristol Blog and some others don't just peck away at their keyboards complaining. They find stuff out as well sometimes, and made a lot of the running in the Railway Path campaign and on a couple of other issues.
Good to get some recognition. I'll do my best to keep up the efforts. The Bristol Blogger deserves his 'Top Banana' award but several other bloggers (see right and see the long list on the Bristol Blogger site) and their commenters have contributed to reporting, debating, activity and campaigning. I'm sure that 'citizen journalism' will continue to grow in size and influence.
Get your objection to the Tesco plan to build a car park over The Friendship pub garden in Knowle submitted now!
As a Knowle resident I am very strongly opposed to the Tesco plan to build a car park on the pub garden. I don’t want to experience: loss of amenity; a less attractive area; a less green area; more accident risk; more traffic congestion; poorer air quality; more noise pollution; health impacts; bringing a Tesco Express in The Friendship a step closer. I’m happy to join with many other locals who feel as I do and ask you to refuse planning permission or at the very least delay to allow discussions between all interested parties on what sort of shopping facilities are necessary and desirable for Knowle, consistent with the thinking behind Neighbourhood Partnerships.
Building a car park over the pub garden will have a detrimental visual impact and loss of amenity for all neighbouring residents, those regularly in the area and of course local wildlife. The pub garden is a large, pleasant green space with plenty of trees and shrubs and a lot of potential. Better use can be made of this space than a car park, which cannot be built to attract customers on foot at a time when the city has the aim of becoming a green capital of course!
The proposed car park will also impact negatively on road safety on an already increasingly busy road. Cars would be turning in and out of the propose car park onto Redcatch Rd/Axbridge Rd where they currently don’t, adding to accident risk. Cars turning into and out from the car park would inevitably cause some additional traffic congestion to build up, worsening air quality and increasing noise pollution locally and adding further to climate change. This all impacts on our health, wellbeing and quality of life.
I call on you to bear in mind that this planning application has obviously been made by Tesco because of their publicly stated intention to establish a Tesco Express in The Friendship based on existing permissions. Disquiet about this is significant, amongst both local people and the many and varied existing shops locally, with two mutually supportive petitions opposing Tesco’s intended move signed by many. There are very strong concerns about Tesco: further impacting the local area beyond car park effects, with large, very inappropriate delivery lorries; increasingly dominating the local economy; monopolising trade; causing loyal and longstanding local businesses to become unsustainable as time passes; cutting shopping choice, cutting competition, increasing prices as time passes; increasing dereliction as shops close.
There are very strong concerns that when considering such planning applications no-one at the council is considering what kind of neighbourhoods and community locals need and want – this is more about keeping and improving Knowle’s variety of shopping provision than opposition to Tesco plans per se. I hope therefore that good sense among those making planning decisions prevails and that broad considerations are accounted for along with precise factors.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Tesco plan to build on The Friendship pub garden in Knowle
Tesco dont have to apply to set up a store but have applied for planning permission to build a 12 car plus 1 disabled space car park on the pub garden (see photos), with access gained by removing part of the wall on Axbridge Rd/Redcatch Rd. The council can only judge this application, as the planning officer dealing with this case has told me, on its merit and demerits -and the Tesco application makes no mention of their plans to convert the pub into a shop!
I urge local people to write to the council, via case officer Jo Edwards, opposing this application quoting ref number 08/04903/F. Two notices will shortly be put up in the local area and people have 21 days to respond once the notices are on display. You can also object or comment online here.
The Bristol Evening Post covered the setting up of an e-petition today and the ensuing online debate/commenting was reasonably lively, including a few rather vociferous 'anti-vowles' comments saying I was out of touch with what locals want!! Strange then, if what online commenters said is true (!), that when I again went to the area today talking to people, everyone I spoke to felt the same as me - and the paper petition opposing a Tesco already has hundreds of local signatures and the newly launched online one already has 30!
Monday, December 15, 2008
Walking in Bristol
My contribution to the current Bristol City Council consultation on walking policies for the city, inspired considerably by various Green manifesto's and policies which have long argued for walking strategies: