Europe drowning in plastic waste

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Now that China has closed its doors, from January 1, 2018, to (plastic) waste for recycling from Europe (and elsewhere) the countries of Europe are beginning to drown in (plastic) waste and many are now looking for other developing countries, such as Vietnam, to take this waste for recycling, Britain among them.

Instead of actually reducing waste, especially, though not restricted to, plastic waste, and secondly building our own facilities for recycling the countries are, yet again, looking for places with lower environmental standards to where to dump the waste rather than doing the other.

Obviously, considering the high environmental legislations in the home countries it would be too expensive for the capitalists to do it at home and hence other countries, with lower and fewer environmental laws and legilations have to be found where our waste can poison the unsuspecting workers. Couldn't possibly have those recycling plants properly operated in our own countries now, could we. But that is exactly what we should be doing.

Before even thinking about recycling we should, properly, work on reducing the amount of waste, plastic and otherwise, that we generate and that is where all, but for starters industry and legislators, come in.

Now that China declines to take any more of our garbage we should be doing our own recycling, after reducing as much as we can, of our waste and by doing so lead the way and we would also create jobs.

When, however, we talk about recycling then recycling it really should be rather than, as in the case of most glass recyclables, downcyling said glass into a road aggregate akin to sand. That is not recycling.

As far as single-use plastic is concerned this needs to be eliminated once and for all as it cannot, properly, be recycled, at least not into decent objects and while there is nothing, per se, wrong with good solid, for lack of a better word, plastic that will and can be in use for a long time, we should phase out plastic more and more over time till we are almost, once again, free of the stuff.

As far as other waste, including and especially E-waste is concerned, industry has to come into play and design to once again – yes, we were there once already – to make products that actually last not just for a year or three but for decades and more. Oh, yes, sorry, I forgot that that does not give huge profits to the capitalist shareholders.

Instead of solving the problem at home our respective governments are looking for other developing – we used to call those Third World – countries which we can contaminate, and their unsuspecting residents, with our waste, by having them recycle the stuff that we don't want to recycle at home, in bad conditions. The new colonialism.

We should be doing the recycling – after looking at all the other options of reuse and so on prior to recycling – at home, in good conditions for the workers and the environment, as dictated by law. This would also create jobs, from collecting, to sorting, to the actual recycling. But, alas, that cannot be as that would be expensive.

© 2018

Tories Victorian values bring the return of Rickets & Co

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Children are suffering malnutrition and Victorian diseases as poverty tightens its grip

In Salford, Greater Manchester, UK, the number of malnutrition cases has doubled – with many of the victims children.

Victorian illnesses such as rickets and beriberi – thought to be long eradicated – are on the rise due to food poverty according to a shocking new report with the number of people being admitted to hospital with the condition doubled over a four year period.

These shocking pictures show what poverty was like in Manchester in the 60s and 70s and although health conditions are often a primary cause, Salford council leaders believes that poverty is also to blame.

The number of people being admitted to hospital with malnutrition increased from 43 in 2010 to 85 in 2014. Although an exact breakdown of those admitted was not available, many of them are believed to be children. 50,000 emergency food supplies given to struggling families across Greater Manchester in past year. This was significantly higher when compared to Greater Manchester overall.

In addition, just alone in Salford, there were other signs that household poverty was increasing. The number of homeless people rose from 40 in 2010/11 to 356 in 2014/15.

In 2013 the number of children deemed to be living in poverty was 12,175, as measured by households in receipt of work benefits and tax credits, which equated to 26 per cent of children in the city. The figure for the North West was 21 per cent and for England 18 per cent.

Anecdotal evidence has suggested that some children in the city are being fed when they arrive at school as they have gone without breakfast and nearly 12,000 unwanted tinned meals given to foodbanks across Greater

Manchester.

But, if the Tories are to be believed, we have never had it as good as we are having it now in Britain. In Germany the government is using the self-came mantra, a country that has also seen a serious increase in poverty and homelessness levels.

We are seeing a drastic rise in in-work poverty, foodbank usage and homelessness. In 2014 the Faculty of Public Health said conditions like rickets were again becoming more apparent because people could not afford quality food in their diet. Forgotten forms of poverty and diseases associated with it are becoming standard again.

It would appear that this was the standard that the Tory regime in Britain has been aiming at by promoting a “return to Victorian values” forgetting to tell people that what they really meant and mean with it is a return to Victorian conditions.

But neoliberal “conservative” regimes in other countries of Europe (and elsewhere) are, it would appear, working towards the same aim. There seems to be an agenda there somewhere.

© 2017

Thank You for voting Tory

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Thanks for voting Tory. Everyone who did has really done well.

Due to the actions of the Conservative government of the “United Kingdom” it has been estimated that 120,000 children will wake up homeless this Christmas and many, many more in dire poverty. Hope you are proud of yourself. But, I guess, as long as it is not you and your children why should you care.

The Tories have been talking about getting Britain back to Victorian values but what they really aim to do is turning back the clock and bringing us all back into the Victorian era and if we are not careful back further still.

Victorian values were not, necessarily, the greatest thing either but the era definitely was no good for the common man, woman or child. Homelessness was rampant and dire poverty and we are on the best way to that kind of situation again.

It won't be long, if we allow the Tories to remain in power, that we will have workhouses and child labor again, but, no doubt, that is also something that the Tories would not mind, as long as it is not their children but only those of the working class.

The most worrying part is that such a great number of working class people actually vote Tory (or even further right-wing) and thus are causing misery for their class and the children of their class. But it seems to be the attitude of “I am alright, Jack” in the same way as Gypsies in the West are not prepared to do anything to help those of the same race persecuted in Eastern Europe, for instance. But, when the shoe is on the other foot they are the first to complain.

I do not even want to start to talk about the other things that are being destroyed, dismantled and sold off to the highest bidder for private gain, by the Tories, such as the NHS and other aspects of the welfare state. You really have done well keeping those parasites in power.

© 2017

Staycations up by a quarter this summer, research suggests

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

The number of British people opting to take domestic holidays this summer is up by as much as quarter over last year, research reveals.

The unfavorable exchange rate and unpredictable political landscape have attributed to the rise in staycations, it is suggested. To that we should also add that there are still many who literally cannot afford to go abroad as they have not had a pay rise for many years.

A 23.8% rise in British holidaymakers planning UK stays for summer 2017 was identified based on searches and bookings made between October 2016 and January 2017 to depart from June to August this year.

UK trips are getting shorter too, as the data indicated that more than half of domestic holidaymakers are planning a break of three days or less – up 8.8% from last year.

A notable decline of 5.2% was found in the number of UK travelers planning a staycation of 12 days or more, however this group still accounts for 16.6% of the total. The top five UK destination cities this summer are London, Edinburgh, Belfast, Glasgow and Manchester.

While staycation bookings are up, Spain remains the top summer destination for UK holidaymakers, followed by with Italy, Greece and Portugal, though France has dropped out of the top five this year despite being the third most popular destination for Britons in 2016.

With Sterling plummeting 13% against the US dollar and dropping 9% against the euro since the EU referendum vote last June, we are seeing a notable uplift in UK tourists opting to holiday at locations at home. Others will be vacationing at home at home, so to speak, in that they are not going to any resort or anything of that nature.

We have seen that stay-at-home staycations have become very popular over the last couple of years ever since the Great Recession and austerity in Britain and this could be seen in the local Parks with a serious increase of visitors.

We have seen an almost a 25% year-over-year increase in people opting for staycations in the UK this summer rather than going abroad and over half the people are planning shorter trips for less than three days. That trend has seen an increase of almost 10% over the previous year.

For some, as mentioned, opting for a staycation at UK destinations (and even altogether at home) is closely tied to the unfavorable exchange rate between Sterling and Euro since the Brexit vote but, in my opinion, it has also a great deal to do with lack of cash flow, so to speak, as many workers who would have traveled to destinations on the European mainland just cannot really afford to do so.

Other concerns, no doubt, are those of security and the ever increasing restrictions of what you can and cannot take with you on an aircraft nowadays, with regards to terrorism concerns. Check-in rimes are getting longer and also the check-out, so to speak, on the other end. And on the way back you have a repeat performance creating hassle and stress which almost requires another holiday to get over it.

Personally I cannot think of any better kind of holiday, vacation, than staying at home and spending it there.

© 2017

UK government pledges bold ambition for electric cars

Government reaffirms UK’s commitment for almost all cars and vans to be zero emission by 2050 at Paris COP21 conference.

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

On December 3, 2015, the UK government has continued to lead global efforts to cut vehicle emissions at the international climate conference in Paris.

The UK was one of 13 international members of the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Alliance to sign a commitment to promote cleaner motoring and slash transport emissions, alongside Germany, Holland, Norway and California. It includes an agreement to make all passenger vehicle sales zero emission vehicles by 2050.

Transport Minister Andrew Jones said: “The UK already has the largest market for ultra-low emission vehicles in the EU, and the fourth largest in the world and today’s pledge reaffirms our commitment to ensuring almost every car and van is a zero emission vehicle by 2050.

“Electric cars are greener and cheaper to run and we are making them more affordable, spending more than £600 million between 2015 and 2020 to support the uptake and manufacturing of ultra-low emission vehicles here in the UK.

“By leading international efforts on this issue, we are playing our part in helping achieve greenhouse gas emission reductions of more than 1 billion tonnes per year across the world by 2050.”

The ZEV Alliance formed in September this year with the ambition to increase the global uptake of greener vehicles through international co-operation.

As well as the UK, members include Germany, the Netherlands and Norway in Europe; California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont in the United States; and Quebec in Canada.

All very nice words and ambitions but no one seems to even look at the problems actually facing electric vehicles. One of them is the rarity of the materials from which the batteries are made and two the fact that fossil fuels will still be needed for the manufacture of the vehicles, as well and especially for the extraction of the rare earths and other raw materials. Thus to actually call them zero-emission vehicles is also rather misleading in the extreme.

None of the governments, NGOs, and what-have-you are, unfortunately, willing to state that motoring, especially the personal motoring with the private motorcar, whether infernal combustion engine or electric motor, is not going to be able to continue and also that electric vehicle technology will not make tractors, combine harvesters, and road haulage trucks feasible. While it does work for small delivery trucks running around our towns and cities the large road haulage of 35 or even 50 tonnes as now envisaged for trucks just is not possible with electric battery-powered motors.

The future of transportation, private, agricultural, and haulage will actually be a re-visitation of the past and I am sure the reader will well know what I mean. However, maybe I must spell it out for the government agencies and NGOs... it is the horse and the bicycle.

If it would not be that sad the way governments and NGOs are being affected by the ostrich syndrome and trying to keep the masses in the dark it would actually be funny and laughable but, alas, it is not.

© 2015

Poverty is now a way of life for many again

The scourge of modern day poverty in Britain

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

The Tories have for a long time, under various administrations, intended to bring the country back to Victorian values; to the Victorian era more like. And to all intents and purposes they are succeeding.

We have today an epidemic in the Britain, a scourge in our communities, and this epidemic and scourge is called poverty. Taboo, however, does make it difficult for sufferers to admit that this epidemic affects them. Millions are being condemned by a food poverty that has reached the level of a ‘health emergency’ while Government policy merely fans the flames of this national scandal. At least 1.3 million people, adults and children, in Britain live in poverty and this is a national disgrace for a nation that is rated as the 11th richest country in the world. A country with a GDP of $2,375 trillion.

The poverty that we see today differs somewhat from poverty from the past. We may not see the squalor and hardship as yet that was seen prior to the creation of the welfare state but the effects of poverty still hit extremely hard. One definition of poverty is: “People are said to be living in poverty if their income and resources are inadequate as to preclude them from having a standard of living acceptable in the society in which they live.”

Poverty has a horrendous effect in the UK but this is exasperated by a Government that has no interest in combating poverty, in fact, it is near fatal to appear poor as it makes the Government want to kick you.

Today’s Government has a mantra of ‘making work pay’. They tell a story of shirkers vs. skivers, a narrative that informs us that people living in poverty do so due to them being feckless, workshy individuals languishing in the bed all day watching repeats of the Jeremy Kyle show. But the rhetoric doesn’t match the stats.

In 2011/12 there was 1.3 million people living in poverty in the UK and over half of these people were in employment. How in the name of the Big Man above did we end up in a situation where so many people in our fantastically rich country are living in poverty while in employment?

One of the reasons is Income Inequalities. The UK’s Gina coefficient, a method to measure income inequalities between nations, is now higher than at any time in thirty years.

This is reinforced by data showing that, in the last decade, the poorest 10% of our nation have seen a fall in their ‘real income’ after deducting housing costs which is in sharp contrast to all other sections of our population.

In layman’s terms, it means that after adjusting for inflation, the poorest 10% of the UK have had less income that they did 10 years ago while everyone else has seen a rise in their income.

What makes matters worse is the Government’s attack of the welfare state which is removing the protection that people had from the blight of poverty. Their attacks, under the auspices of reforms, has linked to the rise in the use of foodbanks and homelessness. Their system of unwarranted and senseless sanctions has literally take food from the tables of our children which an extra 600,000 children being thrown into absolute poverty by Governmental policy.

So what do the Conservatives do when they are confronted by the facts? Kent Council commissioned an official report which concluded that the rise in foodbanks and a rise of homelessness being linked to the Government’s welfare reforms. After looking at all the evidence the report concludes that these rises were due to ‘welfare reform as no other alternative explanatory factor is yet apparent’.

Did the ruling Conservatives at Kent council at Kent Council act on this report? No, they attempted to suppress this report as they did not like the report’s conclusion.

So we live in an unequal country where the poorest become poorer and the wealthy become richer. But there is an alternative. There is a better way so that we can have a democratic nation based on equality and fairness which I will write about in future post.

It has to be said, however, that there is poverty and then there is poverty. And while this may sound a little too cryptic I will try to explain.

What is perceived by many today as “poverty” is a reduction of what they have been used to and the problem is that many, I am afraid to say, are not prepared to forgo some things that are not necessities and needs but only wants. Many also are unable to manage the money that they have and spend it unwisely.

Do you really have to have cable TV (pay for) or TV at all? Do you have to have take out meals almost every day of the week? And the list of questions could go on and on. Fact is that that is exactly, I am afraid to say, the way some of the poor behave.

I am not trying to lessen the fact that, according to the way the index is used, people are poor and some are even poorer than that, but there are times when people also must blame some of their own actions for the fact that they are short of money and not try to shift the blame onto others, onto circumstances and especially the government, even though the latter has a great deal to answer for.

© 2015

UK government supports solar for Africa, slashes subsidies at home

I received two interesting press releases over the weekend.

The first, from Power for All—a campaign aiming for universal energy access through renewables—was jubilant: Power for All receives UK support for Africa's poor to achieve energy access through distributed renewables. The second, from UK solar installer Solarcentury, not so much:Government’s proposed £7m budget for solar equivalent to subsidising Hinkley Point for just two days (Hinkley Point refers to anew, massively subsidized and Chinese-built nuclear reactor in the works for South West England).

With the UK's Department for International Development throwing its weight behind solar for rural communities in Africa, you'd think the government would also be pushing renewables as the wave of the future at home too. After all, from Morocco targeting 50% renewables within the next 5 years and the world's biggest utility breaking up with fossil fuels, there does appear to be increasing momentum behind a decarbonization of the world's energy system. What government could possibly want to be left behind?

Read more here.

Jeremy Corbyn: the green Britain I want to build

We need a renewable energy revolution, an end to fracking, no new nuclear power, efficient homes, and the break up of our energy cartels, writes Jeremy Corbyn, All that, and strong protection for wildlife and oceans, no TTIP trade deal with the US, clean air to breathe, and massive investment in public transport. Is there anything not to like?

The Labour movement and environmental movement are natural allies.

We are fighting for the same thing: for society to be run in our collective interests and those of our protecting our planet.

Promoting the well being of our planet, its people and ecosystems must be at the heart of the Labour Party's vision of a fairer, more prosperous future.

There is an electoral dimension. To win, we must show we have a modern vision of an innovative country that has a new idea of prosperity and success.

Our collective aspirations must lie with a greener vision of Britain. And we must reach out to those voters who care deeply about the environment if we are to build the electoral alliance we need.

Climate change is a threat to our very existence. Tackling climate change will only be effective if social justice is at the heart of the solutions we propose. Pope Francis recently said:

"We are faced not with two separate crises, one environmental and the other social, but rather with one complex crisis which is both social and environmental. Strategies for a solution demand an integrated approach to combating poverty, restoring dignity to the excluded, and at the same time protecting nature."

Read more here.

Labour's demise in British 2015 General Election

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

The reason Labour did so badly is down to at least three reasons.

One being that they made a mistake backing the No Campaign in Scotland

Two that they have moved so far away from the true values of the original Labour party that the working class no longer feels them to be their home

Three that they have refused to entertain a referendum on UK membership in the EU (NO2EU has been part of some of the Trade Union message for some time now and Labour has completely lost it there) claiming that – and openly saying that – that the people of the UK cannot be trusted with that question and that it is up to politicians to make that decision.

But there are also a number of other reasons and one of those is that people are selfish in the extreme in Britain nowadays, ever since the Thatcher era.

Time and again I hear some people say “What has Labour ever done for me?” or when one suggests to them to join a Trade Union “What have the Unions ever done for me?” without stopping once to think what Labour under Clement Attlee did in creating the welfare state, the National Health service, and the unions by bringing them the five-day working week, paid holidays, and such like. Some even go as far as to say “Oh well, I get those benefits even if I am not in a union”.

The problem is selfishness in the extreme and people also vote according to which party promises them personal benefits. But in the words of J F Kennedy we should not ask what our country can do for us but what we can do for our country. Instead of looking out for only what we can gain from this or that personally it is time that we looked out also for those less fortunate for we could be the next one losing out job and thus our home and be dependent on the no longer existent, if the Tories get their way, welfare state.

However, the truth be told, the Labour Party no longer is the party of the working class even though, unfortunately, many of the working class still seem to believe that. There is almost not a single MP left from that party who has ever done an honest day's work at the coal face, in a factory, a shipyard, or in the fields and forests.

Those that are now being put forward for leadership are also no better in that respect. None of them have a clue as to the working class and its problems, coming from privileged backgrounds and in the main having been privately educated. Furthermore they are drifting further and further to “the right” and are becoming just pink Tories.

The British working class (and in all honesty not only the working class of Britain) needs new leadership and the Labour Party or the Social Democratic Party (in the case of Germany, etc.) does not cut the mustard.

It is also time that the Unions cut their ties with the Labour Party. The Unions do not need Labour but Labour the Unions. Without the Unions the Labour party is nothing. Labour, however, has forgotten that and the very fact that the Unions gave it life.

To the majority of the working class in Britain the Labour Party is but the other side of the Tory coin and that seems to be a fact, unfortunately, which can also be seen in that they were prepared to use basically the same austerity measures proposed by the Tories and also were hellbent to continue the British Independent Nuclear Deterrent (may I laugh) in the form of the Trident submarines. The cost for the renewal of those alone could pay is more than the proposed austerity measures but no, it has to be kept. Sure it has to be kept because the master, the USA, who actually command that “independent” nuclear deterrent, says so.

It is time for the British working class to wake up and – one – understand that they are not millionaires or even billionaires in waiting but simple wage slaves as long as they do not have control over the means of production and – two – that the Labour Party was only intent on creating capitalism with a human face and no socialism, where the workers do own the means of productions, etc. And today Labour does not even want to know the word socialism in any shape or form. They have become a party for the bourgeoisie and now longer – if ever they did – represent the proletariat.

Furthermore it is time for the British working class to take matters into their hands and to rise from their prisons of starvation into which the Tory “masters” intend to toss them, once again, and overturn the tables of the moneychangers.

But, alas, the British working class has been lulled to sleep by promises of being able to aspire. Aspire to what? We can all aspire but getting there in the current climate to fulfill our aspirations, whatever they may be, is all but a dream.

The Labour Party is dead and has been on its deathbed for some time and now it is time for the working class and with the Trade Unions in the lead, maybe, to bury the poor thing and give birth to a proper organization of the working class, by the working class, for the working class, and bring about a system where all will be the winners, including the Planet.

© 2015

UK solar growth stalls following government subsidy cuts

Large solar power farm development largely stopped following April cuts, new figures show, and smaller farms will be hit next

The amount of solar power being installed in the UK has largely flatlined since the closure by the government of a subsidy scheme in April, even before a new round of subsidy cuts has taken effect.

Official figures released on Thursday show that large-scale solar farm developers rushed to connect to the grid in March to get in before the government excluded farms larger than 5MW, enough to power 2,500 homes, from its renewable obligation (RO) scheme.

But installations largely trickled to a halt after April, when the payments were stopped for new farms.

Read more here.

This should come as no surprise to anyone and was the aim of the game of the Tory regime under David Cameron. Having said that we must also consider that large solar farms, in the same as large wind farms, will not cut the mustard as to getting off fossil fuel and nuclear energy. Renewables themselves will not permit us to continue with “business as usual” and hoping that we can grow the economy – a stupid idea anyway – at the same time. We must reduce our electricity consumption and also have every home and building to be a power generating plant. But they don’t want that either. Their agenda is more nuclear power. Ed.

Will by 2025 over half of the UK population be dead?

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

In the time between 2015 and 2025 just under half of Germany's population is estimated to die and more than half of that of Britain, according to forecasts by Daegel.com.

The US-Information Service DEAGEL.COM, which has a rather military appearance, has on its website pages with forecasts for the population of most of the countries in the world and in their 2015 forecast they predict a fall in population numbers for the USA in the next ten years, that is to say up to the year 2025, from 319 million to 65 million. For Germany it is a drop from 81 million to 48 million and for Britain a drop from almost 64 million to less than 23 million, which, in the case of the UK is a drop by 65%.

Demographically can this not be explained by the normal aging process and subsequent loss of people through the common way of dying of old age and that of emigration. Such drastic reduction in population historically only came about in conjunction with long periods of war and the diseases that occurred under the population that was ravaged by such wars.

If we are to look at the forecast for the GDP the figures they also are rather alarming, where for the UK the forecast is a fall from USD 2,855,000 Million to just under 255,000 million, a drop of 91%, which would make the UK worse in GDP than Peru.

Either Daegel.com has a strange and maybe faulty crystal ball or they know something that most of us don't know and that the powers-that-be, but should not be, want to keep from us all.

http://www.deagel.com/country/forecast.aspx

© 2015

UK government plans for ancient woodlands get the axe

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

It is a great relief to learn from the Independent that Ex-Environment Secretary Owen Paterson's proposed biodiversity offsetting scheme has been dropped by the Government.

The scheme would have allowed developers to build on ancient woodlands provided that they plant new trees elsewhere.

As most of us know, I am sure, a newly planted woodland would take hundreds of years to mature into a biodiverse area, so this was a ridiculous proposal from the outset.

This was the selfsame Minister of the Environment who also stated that there was no problem with the HS2 high-speed train line cutting through ancient woodlands as the government would simply move those woods to elsewhere.

This also, once again, brings to the fore the uselessness of the Forestry Commission for it should have immediately advised the then Secretary of State that his idea was absolutely ridiculous in the same as way his statement about moving woodlands. But they did nothing. Another proof that Britain needs a Ministry of Forests whose task it is to protect and oversee the proper management of forests and woodlands.

© 2015

Conservation Solutions Can Improve Water Quality For Millions of Britons

New scientific findings indicate that Bristol and Glasgow could achieve a ten percent reduction in sediment from its water supply by investing in watershed conservation

Arlington, VA — Britain’s water quality is under unprecedented pressure from high nutrient and sediment levels due to increasing populations, climate change and environmental degradation. With urban water use on the rise, securing an adequate and clean water supply is an urgent challenge.

The “Urban Water Blueprint” released today by The Nature Conservancy, in partnership with the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group and the International Water Association, provides an in-depth analysis of 2,000 drinking sources (rivers, forests and other ecosystems from which water comes from) serving over 500 large and medium sized cities. This includes the 100 largest cities in the world, representing nearly 1 billion people. Collectively, these cities represent $21.8 trillion in economic activity, or 48 percent of the global urban GDP.

Preventing water from becoming polluted can often be more cost-effective than treatment. The analysis finds that one in four cities would see a positive return on investment from investing in watershed conservation.

Bristol and Glasgow have been identified in the “Urban Water Blueprint” as cities that could reduce sediment and nutrients from their water sources by ten percent through incorporating conservation solutions and subsequently lowering their water treatment costs by an average of five percent.

“This analysis answers for the first time, the fundamental questions of what investments can be taken to incorporate nature in the delivery of clean water and the quantitative value of these actions for water managers,” said Giulio Boccaletti, The Nature Conservancy’s global managing director for water.

“Cities that invest in watershed conservation can no longer be the rare exception; rather such investments need to become a regular part of the toolbox for water managers. For this to happen, people living in cities need to understand where their water comes from so that city and water managers can support measures that will often be implemented outside of metropolitan areas.”

The “Urban Water Blueprint” not only identifies the water risks facing large cities around the world, but analyzes the potential for five conservation strategies that have proven performance and wide applicability across natural and working (agricultural) landscapes. The strategies include Forest Protection; Reforestation; Agricultural Best Management Practices; Riparian Restoration; and Forest Fuel Reduction.

Each strategy is evaluated on how effectively it reduces sedimentation and nutrient pollution in the 2,000 watersheds that were analyzed.

Forest protection and reforestation have been identified as the best conservation strategies for both British cities. The analysis identified that Glasgow has the highest potential for sediment and nutrient reduction from its watersheds and Bristol a medium potential on sediment reduction.

“We found that watershed conservation can be both an economical viable and environmentally sound investment for developed and developing cities alike,” said Robert McDonald, senior scientist at The Nature Conservancy and one of the lead authors of the report. “What’s so exciting is that cities that embrace both the engineered and natural solutions to securing adequate and clean water supplies can not only meet future demand, they can literally reshape surrounding landscapes for the better.”

“IWA sees the growing strategic importance of connecting cities to their watersheds, and water utilities as pivotal players in making the various inter-dependencies work. Watershed conservation solutions will increasingly need to become mainstream options for water utilities and cities for enhancing water security” Tom Williams, director of programmes, at The International Water Association.

"Access to clean and adequate water supplies is a critical issue facing global mayors, and one made more pressing as cities grapple with the impacts of climate change. The research released today shines a spotlight on the need for urban watershed conservation strategies, and paves the way for cities around the world to share knowledge and implement viable solutions," said Seth Schultz, director of research, measurement & planning at C40.

About The Urban Water Blueprint

The “Urban Water Blueprint – Mapping Conservation Solutions to the Global Water Challenge” was made possible through generous contributions from Ecolab through its Foundation, Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide Foundation, and 100 Resilient Cities – Pioneered by The Rockefeller Foundation.

The “Urban Water Blueprint” has an accompanying website as a tool for city and water managers to evaluate the condition of drinking watersheds and the potential impact that conservation strategies, such as reforestation and agricultural best management practices, can have on water quality.

Displaying new information on more than 2,000 watersheds and 530 cities, the Blueprint provides science-based recommendations on where these strategies are most cost-effective. This data, along with detailed case studies of cities that have successfully adopted watershed conservation, can serve as a guide for city and water managers planning future infrastructure investments that include both engineered and natural infrastructure, as well as a learning tool for the one billion people living in the featured cities.

The Nature Conservancy is a leading conservation organization working around the world to protect ecologically important lands and waters for nature and people. To date, the Conservancy and its more than one million members have been responsible for the protection of more than 119 million acres worldwide. Visit The Nature Conservancy on the Web at www.nature.org.

The Cities Climate Leadership Group (C40) is a network of large and engaged cities from around the world committed to implementing meaningful and sustainable climate-related actions locally that will help address climate change globally. C40 was established in 2005 and expanded via a partnership in 2006 with President William J. Clinton’s Climate Initiative (CCI). The current chair of the C40 is Rio de Janeiro Mayor Eduardo Paes; the 108th Mayor of New York City Michael R. Bloomberg serves as President of the Board. To learn more about the work of C40 and our Cities, please visit www.c40.org, follow us on Twitter @c40cities and like us on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/C40Cities.

The International Water Association (IWA) is a global reference point for water professionals and a source of knowledge, experience and leadership for sustainable urban and basin-related water solutions. IWA members come together from across the water profession to share knowledge, experience and know-how that deliver solutions to the most pressing global water challenges. The strength of IWA lies in the professional and geographic diversity of its members: we are represented in 130 countries through 10,000 individual and 500 corporate members, including scientists from across many disciplines, economists, accountants, social scientists, and managers and leaders among those professions. www.iwa-network.org

Source: The Nature Conservancy

Charity builds "Lego-style houses" to tackle UK rent crisis

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

One of Britain's leading housing charities has come up with a novel way to beat London's housing crisis, in the form of “Lego-style” housing. Though they say housing crisis and the government does neither London nor the UK has a housing crisis, nor a homelessness one; all the UK has is an empty homes crisis.

Y: Cube, developed by the YMCA, offer 26 square meter prefabricated “studio” apartments that can be easily built almost anywhere.

According to the charity, the housing blocks provide everything from clean water to central heating, making them the ideal home for people working in London unable to afford the capital's rent. And that problem was created by one of the previous government, namely the Thatcher regime, when it more-or-less forced the councils to divest themselves off their social housing stocks.

One unit costs around £30,000 to build, and are let for £140 per week, making the units 65 percent cheaper than standard London accommodation.

The units were developed with Roger Strik Harbour, an award winning architect partially owned by Baron Rogers of Riverside, which specializes in functionalist structures.

Closely resembling the red hotels found on a Monopoly board, the units can also be stacked in a tower in order to save space and fit more residents.

“The average disposable income going on housing now is going on fifty percent. People are having to make huge compromises, they're having to share flats, share houses. Ideally, what people want is their own front door,” YMCA Director of Housing and Development Andy Readfearn has said.

“So there's a massive, massive gap and what we want to do is begin to address that, challenge the sector to provide choice and give hope to people.

“You have to innovate, you have to bring different people to the market. Y: Cube is our solution. This allows us to procure accommodation quickly, we can keep these rents really low so everyone benefits,” he added.

Such solutions come as homelessness is spiking across the UK.

According to the Combined Homeless and Information Network (CHAIN) database, 112,070 people declared themselves homeless between 2013-14, while the number of people sleeping rough in London grew by more than 70 percent, to 6,437 people.

Other reports suggest one in three Britons are just one pay check away from homelessness, as wages at the bottom end of the economy continue to stagnate.

Shelter, another homeless support charity, estimate more than 90,000 children in the UK are without a permanent home, the highest number of homeless children since 2011.

The biggest scandal, as already mentioned, is the fact, though, that there are homeless people, individuals and families, while at the same there are thousands upon thousands of empty homes, not to speak of other empty properties that groups of people would be happy to turn into homes themselves, that are allowed to decay, that are not even on the empty homes register as they are waiting for the right time and price to be sold off to developers, including and especially council homes.

The government, and, I am afraid to say, housing charities in the main, are harping on about the lack of (affordable) homes and the need to, therefore, destroy the countryside to build more homes.

The truth of the matter is, however, that not more new homes are needed but old ones need to be made habitable and rented out to those that need them. But there is no money in for the boys and no backhanders for the politicians, central and local alike, and civil servants.

Only new home building attracts tax relief from government for the home builders and thus it is why also self-build is rather discouraged in Britain and it all has to be built by building companies. Self-builders also don't give nice little handouts to politicians and civil servants, whether in money or in kind; companies, on the other hand, who are being awarded, or hope to be awarded, such government contract, on the other hand, do give such incentives to those “helping” them.

A change of system is needed in order for all to live in decent homes that they can afford.

© 2014

Need for more trees confirmed by Forest Facts Summary as businesses urged to go green

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Recent statistics that have been released by the Woodland Trust reveal just how quickly Britain’s natural resources are depleting. Produced by the Forestry Commission, the findings, published on 25th September 2014, revealed that the UK is one of Europe’s least wooded countries with only 13% forest cover. The damning statistics urge businesses to choose sustainable choices and ‘go green’ to promote accessible eco-friendly choices .

Key points garnered from the latest report highlight that only 44% of England’s woodland is sustainably managed meaning that over half of England’s forests are at risk from being continuously depleted.

Those latest statistics from the Woodland Trust are a mixed bag. There are some positive developments but we have a long way to go. At present, we are not protecting enough of our forests and woodland in this country. As the least densely covered country in Europe, it is essential that we develop sustainable, environmentally-conscious choices when selecting the products we consume and purchase in day to day life.

Worryingly, not enough businesses are going green, though we hope that these recent statistics will motivate companies to reconsider their professional values and work in conjunction with the environment, rather than against it.

If we want trees to remain a sustainable resource, then we must care for them. We are at a point of no return where we can no longer continue to ravage our natural landscape as we have been. We must rebuild Britain’s forests and woodlands and manage them properly.

Too often, however, woodland management, including coppicing, is seen by people in some quarters as destruction of our woods and forests. This is not the case, though. Non-management, on the other hand, will lead to the total destruction of many of our woods.

If we want our woodlands and forests in Britain (and elsewhere) to continue to thrive then proper sustainable management of the old style, the style or styles that have been practiced for millenia, must be brought back into practice.

Often, when the talk is about protecting our woodlands and forests what is meant by many proponents is to stop all management and all activities and “return the wood” to Nature. And while this sounds very great the truth is that that is the death penalty for many of those woods and forests that have been managed. Without management they will become a wilderness that will benefit no one, not even wildlife.

We must be careful that protecting our forests and woodland in this country does not become a mantra for not doing anything and leaving those forests and woodlands to their own devices. Firstly we would not have any homegrown timber and secondly it would lead, in fact, to the destruction of the very forests and woodlands we mean to “protect”.

© 2014

'Parliament makes decisions, not the people'; Peers say

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

This is the way the British government, the Commons, the Lower House – also thinks. The people cannot be trusted with referendums, whether on the EU or other, or with anything else. Parliament, the master, knows what is best for the slaves.

Just by way of explanation Peers is a term used for collectively for the members of the House of Lords, Britain's Upper House in Parliament and Members of Parliament are those in the House of Commons, the Lower House or Lower Chamber.

Therefore we can see that the British system is not a democracy, and that not even by a long shot. In a democracy the people rule or, if there is a parliament, which there should not be, then all power emanates from the people, and neither is the case here and nor do the parliamentarians in Britain think that it should be so.

As far as they are concerned is that as they are elected we, the people, have thus surrendered to them our power and after they are “in office” we must shut up for the next four or five years, depending on the length of the parliamentary term.

In fact, this is very well laid out in the German term for voting, that of “Stimme abgeben”, which could be translated as it should be, and not into casting one's vote, as “to cede one's voice” or to “give up one's voice”, and that is exactly the way it is being seen by our so-called representatives, namely that once we have taken part in the game of elections we have given our voice to them and have to remain silent as now they have the say on our behalf.

Make no mistake, folks, that is exactly how it is and pans out and it is for that very reason that they do what they had planned anyway, regardless of what they stated in their election manifesto. They know that the voters have abdicated their power, their voice, to them in the election process. The only ones who do not know that fact are the voters, the electorate. They have no idea as to what games are being played and that so-called democratic elections are but for show to keep them, the people, quiet and in the belief that they have a choice of how they are being government, while being told that they are free people.

And don't think that it is any different in other so-called democracies. Not one iota except, maybe, in Switzerland being an exception where plebiscites have to be held for any major decision, almost, to be taken by government. But in all cases there is still the state and the government and that is where the problem lies.

© 2014

Government council cuts are punishing the most vulnerable

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Mass scale cuts to council budgets will lead to the death of local government and heap punishment on the most vulnerable, as ministers announce a further 2.9 per cent cut in funding for 2014/15, warns Unite, Britain and Ireland’s largest trade union.

Many of the country’s most deprived councils will bear the brunt, with Liverpool city council facing a 62 per cent cut in funding between 2010 and 2017. Local government workers, who have already suffered a £3,544 cut in pay since 2010, will be pushed deeper into poverty as they are forced into a jobs versus wages tussle.

Unite, Britain’s biggest union, fears that by 2015 there will be little local government left after a 43 per cent real terms cut in funding in the five years since 2010. Cuts of this scale will lead to the complete demolition of services including care for the frail and elderly, children services, support for vulnerable families and youth services.

Despite the huge pressures faced by councils, Unite appeals to councils not to slash before thinking, but to work with unions to find savings and to protect service quality.

Responding to the government’s provisional local government financial settlement, published on December 18, 2013, Fiona Farmer, Unite national officer, said: “This government is presiding over the complete meltdown of local services. Ordinary hardworking people are, again, the ones being battered by the loss of the services they rely on to educate and care for their families.

“This is a shamelessly political settlement which rewards wealthy Tory councils and punishes the less well off.

“In some of the country’s most deprived areas, including the prime minister’s Oxfordshire constituency, services such as care for the frail and elderly, support for vulnerable families, children’s centres, sexual health services around teenage pregnancy and Connexions services, have already been shut or are threatened with closure. The wealthy Tory shires continue to escape relatively unscathed.

“The government will be gambling on the public blaming local councils for service cuts, but it is wrong; the public understand where the real blame lies - at the door of the communities and local government secretary, Eric Pickles.”

Unite is Britain and Ireland’s largest trade union with 1.4 million members working across all sectors of the economy. The general secretary is Len McCluskey.

In spite of warnings such as this by the leaders, so to speak, in the labor movement the British Labour Party has stated that it will continue, should it win the 2015 elections, which cannot come too soon, with the austerity measures and cuts.

While it is true that the finances of the United Kingdom are rather in disarray and the country is heavily indebted to the bankers of the world there are savings and cuts that can be made elsewhere and which would be real cuts in expenditure and not to vital services.

Alone abandoning the stupid idea of a nuclear deterrent which is laughable in the extreme would save billions upon billions which could be better used elsewhere and that is just for starters. Abandoning ideas of wars in countries where we have no business of being would be another great saving that could be made, not that the generals and warmongers would like this idea and neither the industries whose “vital interests” might be abandoned if we did.

The brief of our armed forces is the “defense of the realm” and the realm, last time I checked, does not include Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, or any other country. It also does not include Bosnia and such like. It ends with the territorial waters of the United Kingdom and may, if we so want, include Gibraltar and the Islas Malvinas and other so-called dependents.

Let's look at savings there and to creating a peaceful country that regards the sovereignty of other countries and to a green economy which could create masses of jobs and give us energy and food security and much more.

© 2013

Walking the breadline - the scandal of food poverty

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

In 2012 half a million people in the UK depended on emergency food aid. The single most common reason for people to need food aid is that their benefits have been changed, delayed or stopped.

The explosion in food poverty and the use of food banks is a national disgrace. It undermines the UK's commitment to ensuring all its citizens have access to food – one of the most basic human rights – along with access to water, not that the Con-Dem coalition regime under David Cameron would know anything about human rights.

We urgently need action to stop our benefits system making people destitute. We need a national investigation into how this is happening but first of all we need to give people enough money so they can feed themselves and their families and on top of that we must ensure that basic foods are at an affordable price. In other words, basic healthy food stuffs need to be at a price that everyone, even those with a low income. From everyone according to his or her ability and to everyone according to his or her need, but then again that is not something that the British government would understand, and not even a Labour one.

The poster that is going with this campaign is already, it would appear, upsetting Number 10 and Ian Duncan Smith and this is a good sign that it is hitting the points it should.

It is an absolute scandal that in Britain, the country that is number eleven of the richest places in the world with a GDP of over $ 2 trillion food poverty, and poverty in general, is allowed to be so prevalent.

PLEASE read, share & download the report produced by Church Action on Poverty http://t.co/AmiUsO5NFb

Watch the VIDEO: http://t.co/lxMx6CLR8K

© 2013

Plastic bag 'tax'

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

In October 2013, after the gods only know how long, it was announced that the government has at long last decided to follow the lead of some other countries by introducing a charge, albeit a paltry 5 pence, which is about 8 cents Euro and about the same in US money, for plastic bags from 2015. Better late than never I suppose but one can but asked what (a) has kept them that long and (b) why will it almost two years before the levy will be introduced.

Now, in a way that only politicians can, they appear to have completely confused a simple issue by – firstly – making biodegradable bags exempt, which will clearly do nothing to prevent bags littering our environment, and – secondly – by exempting retailers with fewer than 250 employees.

The problem with biodegradable shopping bags is that they are still plastic and the biodegradable part to this is rather a questionable one as well. Very much in the same way that we keep hearing abut bio-plastic, that is to say, yes, plastic made from bio-matter. And even if it is so-called compostable and biodegradable (only in commercial composting plants, however) it is still plastic and much of the plant-based plastic in fact is neither compostable nor anything else but PET. But, according to some in the recycling industry, cannot be recycled in the same way as oil-based PET.

But back to the issue of the plastic one-time shopping bags. The first thing is that the bags should be at least charged at 10 pence at least in order for people to remember to bring their own reusable shopping bags and secondly, as said before, I cannot understand why (a) so-called biodegradable bags are exempt and retailers with fewer than 250 employees. I am totally lost as to what difference the number of employees of a retailer makes to the use of shopping bags.

Once again inconsistency, incomprehension and confusion reign! In fact, I believe the government has, once again, lost the plot (if ever they had any).

© 2013

92% of Britain is undeveloped says Lord Wolfson

Therefore we must develop at least some of the the countryside into garden cities.

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Obviously the noble Lord does not eat and thus does not need farms nor does he breathe and thus does not need air purified by trees. Assuming however that he does eat it is the countryside whence the food cometh and we cannot carry on assuming that someone else can provide the food, as seems to be the believe also of some ministers. Some of them, not so long ago, stated that we do not need farming in Britain as we can buy all our food from abroad and yes, it was a member of the Conservative Party.

The countryside provides food, employment, housing and environment and while you can improve all of those it does not mean that you substitute one for the other.

Lord Wolfson, head of the clothing retailer Next in the UK and a major contributor to the Conservative Party says that we need more new garden cities and they must be built on countryside land as the countryside is underdeveloped and empty.

We trapped ourselves in tight urban areas giving ourselves the impression that there is no countryside left, he said, and continued to say that the reality is that 92% of Britain is undeveloped but we don't just see it.

Lord Wolfson then further stated that there is an enormous amount of land that could be developed into beautiful garden cities, not urban jungles. According to him those areas of the countryside are empty and unproductive and of no use. I would say he needs to get out more and get a life.

Those areas would be more bio-diverse than the agriculture that they would be replacing.

Lord Wolfson is offering a quarter of a million Pounds to whoever comes up with the best plans for a new garden city (or should that, maybe, read cities) in Britain.

Whilst the majority of the country may be undeveloped that does not mean that it should all be developed,. But that appears to be something that Lord Wolfson has in mind.

A lot of the agriculture and the countryside management that goes on in the countryside is a good use of land and we must away from the feeling that just because there is no development going on there.

Lord Wolfson does seem to be alluding also that the 92% of the underdeveloped countryside is available to be exploited for development which is a total fallacy and as stupid as the people who he showers money upon.

Garden cities could have a lot to offer as far as housing is concerned as long as they are planned and developed in line with the needs of the countryside and the environment. Otherwise you just create another block of unsustainable housing.

However, when it comes to housing we do NOT need more homes. We have more than enough empty homes and properties that could be turned into homes all over the country. In fact, there are enough homes to house the homeless of this country, those of Eire and of one or two other smaller EU nations and still have room to spare.

The idea of garden cities fail in the provision of housing as they would be built to the detriment of the existing settlements, no doubt, and thus the existing settlements would be left – as derelict often and with all the problems that they have – that is to say as they are in favor of new developments and this is not sustainable in the same way as the idea that the last Labour government floated of Eco-Towns was another one of those silly ideas that would have benefited builders and developers and no one else.

Instead we must redevelop our existing settlements and make them more livable. We must build viable communities and while garden cities are one way a much better way is to actually turn our existing settlements into such viable communities. Build on what we already have rather than design and build new settlements in the middle of nowhere with the need for all the infrastructure and everything else that goes with it. Making the existing communities more sustainable and making them into places where people actually want to live (and work).

We have already once had so-called garden cities but some of them were basically Legoland of the real world designed on the drawing board and then plonked into the countryside with little or no consideration of the people in the countryside and also for the people that were moved to those new cities.

The problem with garden cities or so-called eco-towns plonked into the countryside is that they also need infrastructure, such as water, gas, electricity and roads leading to them and would add even more to the commute that we are – I thought – want to get rid off.

In order to do the latter, however, we must either move the jobs to where people live or have people move again to where the jobs are and, while living in the country is great, if you work in the city that's where your home should be also. Leave the countryside and the living therein to those who actually also work there.

Britain does not have a housing crisis. That is utter baloney. Britain has an empty homes crisis and many of those homes are, in fact, local authority ones that are being earmarked for destruction and “redevelopment”, as in the case of the Ocean Estate in Stepney and the Robin Hood Estate in Poplar. And those are but two examples of many that could be listed.

Thus we do not need new garden cities and ideas such as those – except in order to make money for the builders – but we need to have the existing homes refurbished and the areas in which they are located made more livable and improved. A much better and cheaper option and also a much more environmentally friendly one.

It is very worrying that some of the members of our government have absolutely no idea as to the way things are in real life and that also includes the one who, when challenged as to the ancient woods that are threatened with destruction in the path of HS2 states that there is nothing to worry about. The government would just move the woods. In which parallel universe do those people actually live?

© 2013