Holyrood to take defining climate decision

At 5pm tonight the Green MSPs will vote against the Scottish Government’s revised annual climate change targets under the Climate Change (Scotland) 2009 Act. The Act requires these targets to be set by Monday 1 June, (1) just four days away, and Ministers’ initial proposals were rejected nine days ago by the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee. (2)

Those original proposals would have seen a target for no change at all this year, followed by just 0.5% reductions for 2011 and 2012. Ministers have come back with an increase of 0.5% in 2012, taking that year’s target to 1.0%. Scottish Ministers will also make this small improvement not through new action to tackle climate change, but simply by accounting differently for existing peatland restoration plans.

These targets also go against a clear pledge made by the SNP in their 2007 Holyrood manifesto, which promised “mandatory carbon reduction targets of 3% per annum”. (3)

Patrick Harvie MSP said:

“The Scottish Government has now definitively failed the climate test, and at 5pm it will therefore be up to Parliament to sort out Ministers’ mess. It is intensely disappointing for Holyrood to find itself in this position. Many at home and abroad were impressed last year by Scotland’s Climate Change Act and the promise it held out that strong clear emissions targets would be set.

“This is a difficult position for us to find ourselves in. The Act is important for the environmental movement more widely, and we never wanted to have to vote against the first ever annual emissions targets set under it. However, there will be an enormous price to pay if Parliament accepts a flatline target this year and little better for the years after. Members would be accepting a vacuum where there should be a vision, and giving this SNP administration licence to carry on with their failed business-as-usual policies. In this context, a vote rejecting the SNP proposals at 5pm would be a direct instruction from Parliament to Ministers to go back and return with something more meaningful.”

Notes

1. See the Act, Part 1, section 4 (2) (a)

2. See item 3 in the Committee’s minutes.

3. Page 29 of the SNP manifesto stated: “In government we will introduce a Climate Change Bill with mandatory carbon reduction targets of 3% per annum and also set a long-term target of cutting emissions by a minimum of 80% by 2050 ? above the UK target of 60%.”

Why I’m sick of everyone basking in the glow of consensus

This week, the Climate Change Committee at Holyrood did something important. It rejected the Scottish Government’s proposed climate change targets.

For background, this is the first batch of annual targets which are required under the Climate Change Act, the legislation which was passed last year with unanimous support by MSPs of all parties, and which the SNP have been trumpeting as “world-leading” ever since. The long term aim of an 80% cut in our emissions by 2050, and a staging post of 42% by 2020, are still in place. But the SNP wants to leave it a few years before it gets under way – with an almost flatline trajectory until half way through the next term of the Scottish Parliament.

In response to the Committee’s decision, the SNP have suggested an extra 0.5% cut in 2012.

There are plenty of reasons to reject this second version too. It represents a slackening off since the Act was introduced, given the track record of roughly 1% annual cuts. It would lead to a bigger total ‘cumulative emissions budget’ over the period, which is the important number to control if we want to reduce our impact on the climate. If defers responsibility to the next Government, which in turn would have an excuse to do exactly the same thing, regardless of its political complexion. It fails to make any effort to “lock in” the reduced emissons which are likely to have taken place due to the recession. Finally, the ‘extra’ effort will really only mean changing the way that the emissions inventory is calculated, to include work on peatland restoration which would have been happening anyway.

But there are risks to simply throwing out the whole batch of targets. As Duncan McLaren from Friends of the Earth Scotland argued recently, it’s a tricky question strategically for those of us who want more radical action but know that the Government isn’t ready for that. Should we accept targets we know are wrong, and keep pushing Ministers to go further, or throw them out leaving the Government in breach of the legislation (there’s a June deadline for these targets to be set) and with no clear way forward?

For me, this is just one more reason to think that the cosy language of consensus has served its purpose.

It was great to see that those who dispute the science on climate change, or who simply don’t care about it as an issue, had no Parliamentary impact when we were dealing with the Bill. This is divisive stuff in some countries, but we got 100% backing for the long term action that’s needed.

But in reality, we have no consensus on what to actually do differently. I believe that radical action to change our economy and society are not only mandated in the face of climate change and peak oil, but socially worthwhile in countless ways. Others say that economic growth can last forever and that the free market remains king. I believe that we must challenge overconsumption which undermines the health of people and of the planet – others say that higher retail sales are an unremittingly good thing. I believe that we need to localise much of the economy and help people to travel less, while others say that we must always build more ‘connectivity’ for the sake of the economy. (It’s worth noting that these targets will come back to the Chamber for a final vote on the same day as a Bill to approve the additional Forth Road Bridge!) I believe that demand reduction and renewable energy must be the foundation of our energy system, while others have faith in carbon capture and storage, or in nuclear power.

It was useful to talk of consensus on the issues we did agree on. But it’s time to recognise that we have no consensus on how to reach those long term targets, or even on how quickly to get started. That’s not a defeat for the climage change debate – it’s just the next stage in that debate when the different ideas must be argued about openly and tested against the science. I might lose some of those arguments, and I might win some, but endlessly patting ourselves on the back for the legislation we passed a year ago and basking in the glow of a false consensus won’t take us forward.

NEWS RELEASE – Taser pilot should be scrapped

Today’s revelations from Amnesty International that the decision by Strathclyde police to issue tasers to untrained officers is potentially illegal (1) should lead to an immediate halt to the programme, Greens argued. Amnesty International has received legal advice that the pilot scheme has failed to secure proper Ministerial authorisation for the arming of non-specialist officers, given that tasers are covered by the same legislation as other firearms.

Patrick Harvie MSP said:

“We accept that there are situations where armed police must be deployed, but this pilot scheme for regular officers in Strathclyde to have tasers is both inappropriate and potentially illegal. As the legal opinion obtained by Amnesty International shows, tasers are firearms, and as such can only be bought with Ministers’ explicit approval, a safety check which has not been sought by Strathclyde Police.

“The public have a right to know that armed police can be called upon in extreme circumstances, but they must also know that firearms are only being used lawfully and by properly trained officers. These are potentially lethal weapons, and must be managed responsibly. It is now time for this pilot to be halted, and for Ministers to accept that a fully armed police force would be a step in the wrong direction. The future use of tasers in Scotland must be kept within proper control.”

Notes

1. For more information on this, including a summary of the legal opinion obtained, please contact Amnesty International on 0131 313 7010

Our big, open offer – free membership to LibDems & Labour!

SCOTTISH GREEN PARTY RELEASE

The coalition deal announced last night between the Tories and the Lib Dems should be a wake-up call to their supporters, the Scottish Green Party today said. Likewise, the failure of Labour to work in good faith with other parties to prevent this outcome means they share responsibility for what comes next.

The Scottish Green Party today issued an invitation to Lib Dem and Labour activists and voters come and join the Greens and to campaign for real democratic change, real action to tackle poverty, and real action on climate change. A year’s free membership of the party will be available to anyone leaving the Liberal Democrats or the Labour party, an offer that will run over the next fortnight until midnight on Wednesday 26th May. (1)

Patrick Harvie MSP said:

“This is an extraordinary decision by the Lib Dem leadership, and thousands of their activists and voters will feel heavily betrayed today. Many explicitly campaigned as the best way to keep the Tories out of power, as a party of radical change and a party of principle, and they have now been completely let down by Nick Clegg and his top team. These members and supporters did not work hard over the last weeks and months to see their party become a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Tories.

“Likewise, Labour tore itself apart at the last moment, at a point when it could have made a difference and blocked this right-wing alliance. Labour voters were desperate to avoid a Tory adminstration, but the self-indulgent MPs they elected would rather fight each other in a leadership contest than stand up for progressive government.

“We would therefore like to make a big, open and comprehensive offer to Lib Dem and Labour supporters to come now and talk to the Greens instead. Many former Lib Dem members have already found a long-term home with the Greens, including former Lib Dem Councillors. Thousands of Labour supporters will be unable to stomach this decision to hand power to David Cameron, and it’s time for them to consider backing the Greens too. That’s why we’re today offering a year’s free membership to everyone cutting up their Labour or Lib Dem membership cards.

“With the election of Caroline Lucas as the UK’s first Green MP, we’ve shown that radical Green politics can also win popular support at all levels. We are also a truly democratic party, our members set policy in public at conference, and we can be relied on not to sell out. Above all we would never deliver power to the Tories, a party still alien and unacceptable to most Scots. This Lib Dem-Tory deal is the final confirmation that those wanting change will always be failed by the three big parties at Westminster, and today’s decision will put Labour and the Lib Dems under extraordinary pressure here in Scotland.”

Councillor Martin Ford, former Lib Dem Councillor and now member of the Scottish Greens, said:

“This deal will dismay many in the Liberal Democrats who have campaigned tirelessly for PR and against the Tories – only to find that their party has now delivered the exact opposite, no PR and a Tory government. While I accept that there were no easy options for the Liberal Democrats, many of their members and supporters will see today’s outcome as the worst of all possible worlds.”

What a star – Caroline Lucas MP!

Caroline Lucas MP

Well what a night. It was one of very mixed emotions for us at the Glasgow count, with Green candidates experiencing the same squeeze felt by others across the UK. But if we felt low at the count, that was all forgotten around six am when we saw the image above, and realised that the long-awaited Westminster breakthrough had happened.

Back in Glasgow, I have to admit to being disappointed, though not surprised, that the mood for change so quickly turned into a pattern of defensive or tactical voting. It’s entirely understandable, and I don’t blame anyone for doing whatever it took to make a Tory government less likely. But any First-Past-the-Post election is tough for smaller parties, and one with such an uncertain result was doubly so.

But if the bad news was bad, I have to say that the good news was very very good! The top target seats were always going to be Brighton Pavilion and Norwich South, and my visits to both constituencies showed me just how well organised, dedicated, and basically fabulous our campaigners were there. Norwich didn’t go our way this time (though we did help get rid of the odious Charles Clarke!) but as you can see above the Brighton team has made history – Caroline Lucas is the UK’s first ever Green MP!

Caroline’s victory is great news for positive campaigning; it’s great news for the profile of Greens at UK level; but it also send some other important signals.

It should kill off the idea that people won’t vote for Green ideas during a recession. Quite a few media pundits have been telling this story for some time now, and it’s always been rubbish. People do need to have confidence that voting Green can actually get people elected, and in Brighton that message was received loud and clear. When that happens, there is an appetite for Green politics!

It should silence those who say that fair voting systems are a bad idea because they might let the BNP in – today’s high turnout has stopped them in their tracks, and it’s a great contrast with last year’s Euro election, where they slipped through on a lower vote than before, purely as a result of the collapse in the bigger parties’ vote. With three small parties targeting like mad for this election, it was the Greens, not BNP or UKIP, who were given a vote of confidence. Fascists don’t get in because of the wrong voting system – they get in when ‘mainstream’ politics fails.

Finally, and most importantly for us here in Scotland, Caroline’s historic result should give us confidence for the Holyrood election which is just a year away. We were squeezed badly in a tight election in 2007, losing most of our MSPs. Whatever the shape of the next UK Government I can’t see things being so close up here in 2011. There are two key factors which worked against us last night – the justified fear of a Tory Government, and the First-Past-the-Post system. Neither of these factors will apply next year – nobody will entertain the serious prospect of the Tories making progress in the Holyrood election, and voters are now very familiar with the freedom that the Scottish Parliament voting system gives them. We’ll be presenting Green candidates with a real prospect of winning and making a difference in politics, just as Caroline did in Brighton.

Her breakthrough should be a real signal to Scottish Greens – not to take anything for granted, but to look forward to a year’s solid campaigning (after catching up on a little sleep of course) and a determined push to build the party’s membership, fundraising, and local activism.

Greens reject bankers’ scaremongering

The Scottish Greens today condemned city traders’ plans to open futures trading at 1am on Friday, and bankers’ warnings about the consequences of a balanced Parliament. (1) The majority of European countries use fairer electoral systems, and there is no evidence that coalition government leads to worse economic management. Basic democratic principles mean a diverse electorate should be represented by a diverse Parliament, not an over-powerful majority administration elected with a minority of the vote. (2)

Patrick Harvie MSP said:

“This is frankly a pathetic attempt to intimidate the public, the very people who are already paying the price for a failure of historic proportion by the so-called talent in the city. It’s the norm in most European countries to have balanced parliaments, and for David Cameron’s old school chums in the city to threaten to do even more damage to the economy if the public have the nerve to vote for what they believe in is simply disgraceful.

“Every voter who remembers the contempt these selfish bankers showed for the public will refuse to be bullied by them now. It’s time to tax the speculation they rely on, and to pull the plug on the casino banking model that got us into this mess. We won’t see this country’s building societies, co-operatives or credit unions spending all night trying to undermine democracy, and the bankers should think twice before doing so in the wee small hours of Friday morning.”

Notes

1. The LIFFE announcement is here:
www.euronext.com

2. In 2005 Labour won 55% of the seats with just 35% of the votes. See:
www.electoral-reform.org.uk

Funny financing

Still no sign of a detailed planning application for the Buchanan Galleries expansion as the developer and Glasgow City Council try to figure out how to pay for it in the depressed financial climate.

Their hoped for answer?  Tax Increment Financing.

In simple terms, the Council would borrow £80 million to pay for the development, with the intention that this be repaid by Buchanan Partnership Ltd over time, from the rental of the newly created commercial space. This would amount to the Council taking out a commercial loan to bankroll a private development and securing the massive debt on the city’s hard-pressed tax payers. This absurd financing method is quite common in the USA but has not been used in Scotland to date.

Last month, I questioned John Swinney, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth about this form of financing.  I asked him what criteria the Scottish Government would use for the approval or rejection of local authority proposals to employ TIF.  Mr Swinney replied that “any decision on local authority proposals to use tax increment financing will be made on a value for money basis. Scottish Futures Trust have been asked to develop a set of criteria to inform this assessment process.”

I also tried to persuade him that this scheme is wildly irresponsible, since it essentially gambles public money (which should be spent on protecting public services) on the developer’s ability to fill the new shopping space with paying tenants – while shops are lying empty across the city centre and many local shopping areas. If the Council wants to support genuine local businesses and strong communities across Glasgow it shouldn’t start with another new ‘mall’ in the city centre.

I look forward, with a slightly sinking feeling, to finding out whether the business case bring put together by council officials will be enough to persuade ruling councillors and the Scottish Government that an £80 million bank loan, that would further increase Glasgow’s dependency on the multinational retail giants, can be made to look the least bit sensible.