Amazon environment activists killed

From this article that reports the murder of 2 prominent Amazon rain forest environmental activists it becomes clear that Brazil eased legislature on de-forestation of this important region of the world.

The Prince’s Rainforest Project raises awareness of the international importance of some regions of the world for the whole planet.

I think that countries who hold such international treasures,such as rainforest should be subject to an international panel of experts before they can make any legislation that affects those internationally important assets such as rainforest. The status of the Amazon rainforest will affect this whole planet and the earth warming we are already subjected to. Brazil now eased laws on deforestation. If each country in that region allows similar laws, we could see the disappearance of the Amazon rainforest within decades and that could have devastating results for the planet.

I am not sure why not more pressure is being put on World Health Organisations or other similar bodies to found an International organisation that has input on countries, making it compulsory to seek international approval before national legislation can be changed.

We are definitely sitting all in the same boat, I mean on the same planet and national sovereignty must come second when planet’s needs are overriding.

Green pressure on the Blues

Of course since the Conservative Party changed the logo from a flame to a tree, the emphasise became not only pictorial but also contractual a green agenda. The Conservatives promised to become the greenest government ever and that no doubt got them a lot of tactical votes from the Green Lobby.

The government since made some very unpopular moves in wanting to sell off publicly owned forests, which had to be withdrawn, there is now a query on energy and carbon management.

What I did not know about is the existence of a Green Investment Bank but that just shows how little that has been promoted over the general media. I read about it in a BBC article that explains how the green lobby wrote a letter to the Prime  minister that was signed by no less than 15 leaders of environmental organisations including Christian Aid, Green Peace and Oxfam.

I think that any future government will stand or fall on green issues as this affects our quality of life and environmental sustainability needs to be built in. I think that Prince Charles is the one voice not to forget about this as he shows great understanding of the issue with his rainforest project.

One of the biggest issues is of course energy and the government currently favours nuclear energy, which many are doubtful about, which is confirmed by the problems Japan had in a recent earth quake. Yet Britain is not prone to earth quakes but our near neighbour Spain, recently suffered an earthquake of considerable strength.

Of course anything new is expensive because it is not mass produced. What however has to be credited to this government is the fact that people have less money to spend and that must have a direct effect on the environment because if people buy less consumer goods less carbon is produced in making and transporting goods.

I thought that Germany is a leader on environmental policies and it remains to be seen what public pressure can achieve in the UK. So far very little has changed in the long-term policies of housing providers, yet there is a glimpse of preparation for earth warming because the government is moving some of its agencies up north.

What is of course an important consideration, is the freedom of movement we call can enjoy as built in human right. That of course reflects on the burning of fossil fuels for the moment and energy prices again will be high on the agenda. I think that the swith in fuel habits is a painful one and industry is little prepared and the people have not got the cash to purchase those new, environemntally friendly vehicles; neither is the infrastructure in place to use battery driven cars, e.g. charging points.

I read about a new vehicle that works mainly on air, that is the one that interests me the most.  See an overview here.

This scum doesn’t deserve university places

Off with their heads“, is what left-wing radical demonstrators shouted at Prince Charles and Camilla when they drove through the West End in the Royal Limousine. They frightened the Royals by breaking the car windows, shouting the most threatening slogans from the French Revolution when the Jacobins shouted the same, when Royals where carted to the gallows en-mass to be beheaded.

This proves conclusively to me that those university fee demos are organised and led by left-wing radicals who want to abuse the situation to make propaganda for their sickening cause. Such scum should be barred from attending university whether with or without higher fees.

It is well beyond Freedom of Expression when such cowardly slogans are shouted in conjunction with threatening behaviour and damage to property that would frightened someone severely, especially when trapped in a car that has the windows smashed.

This is intolerable violence that should never happen again.

BBC is not what it used to be(ep)

I am concerned about an article I found on the BBC news website where the beep reports that a High Court judge criticised Prince Charles.

I do not think one can interpret the words of the judge as criticism on Prince Charles. The quote from the BBC website is this: ”

The judge said both CPC Group and Qatari Diar “were faced with a very difficult position once the Prince of Wales intervened in the planning process”.

“His intervention was, no doubt, unexpected and unwelcome,” he added.

Well Prince Charles is, just as his spokes person says entitled to express an opinion and it is up to others to accept it or not. There was obviously no contractual obligation to consider Prince Charle’s opinions. We all have the right to object to planning applications when our local council writes them out so why should Prince Charles not have a right to remark on architecture of planned buildings.

It is more than ridiculous that the BBC reports the quotes from the judge as criticism but if they are then I am losing my faith in British justice completely. Where has Britain gone to to criticise an opinion by the heir to the British Throne?

We can read at paragraph 9 of the judgement the following “he Prince of Wales and the Emir were not, however, the only influential people to dislike RSHP’s proposals for the Chelsea Barracks site. A spirited campaign against the proposals was undertaken by the “Barracks Action Group” (“BAG”), also known as the “Chelsea Barracks Action Group”, and by the Belgravia Residents’ Association (“BRA”). More importantly, the Mayor of London, Mr Boris Johnson, (the “Mayor” or “Mr Johnson”) at various stages, both personally and through his officers at the Greater London Authority (“GLA”), expressed his concerns about the proposals. It is worth noting immediately, however, that the Mayor’s concerns were not the same as the Prince of Wales’s concerns. The Mayor thought the scheme was repetitive and lacked variety, whilst the Prince disliked its modernity and was looking for something more traditional.”

There was quite a wide-ranging opposition to the architecture of the planning application for the Chelsea Barracks. But reading the quote from the BBC in the judgement in paragraph 21, I could not say it was meant to be a criticism on Prince Charles but a mere matter of fact that it was seen as unwelcome by the company.

It is really sad to see that an opinion of Prince Charles, who does an immense amount of good work, could be taken to sue someone for breach of contract.  There should be a clause in business contracts that overwheloming public opinion can render a probject doubtful and gives reason to abandon or delay a contract. We’ve seen it with the Heathrow expansion, there were thousands of people against it and it took intervention from the government to stop the building of another runway.

I take the legal action as a sign that some companies take the environemtn and public opinion as secondary issues and put business first. But what would be do if we had to live in horrible surroundings just so that someone can fulfill a contract?

Prince Charles is a wonderful Prince, he cares so much about the environment and his Rainorest project is second to none.. He has s deep understanding of the issues that affect our planet today and tries to improve the situation.

Almost all the girls

Having read in today’s East End Life that the Queen honoured a considerable number of Tower Hamlets residents, I am pleased to see that several of those are woman. Pleased because we are, here in Tower Hamlets presented with a high proportion of Muslims, who, if they are less moderate promote the suppression of women in a sexist way. It is important to provide a counter-balance. Though I do not suggest that this is the Queen’s motive when honouring so many women in this area.

The selection of honorees is essential a diplomatic masterpiece. The birthday honours are a work of art that includes racial, religious and social harmony and women’s emancipation.

I am currently participating in a Magic Me project and did not know it was based in Bethnal Green. The benefits of inter-generational work is beyond doubt a very great one. Susan Langford has found a niche to bring generations together.

That Catherine Myers, executive head of the Catholic Bishop Challoner school got her award shows there are no religious grudges and excellent education is honoured regardless of religious allegiance. (Well, at least if it doesn’t alienate our own culture, my impression).

Honestly I didn’t know that Sue Griffiths was one of the first women fire fighters and now even leads a whole station, wow. I still do not regret my own decision to give up engineering and become a mum.

There are 3 Muslims that got a birthday honour award from the Queen in Tower Hamlets*, one is Chief superintendent Dal Babu, who now works in Harrow, Mockbul Ali, who advises the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on Islamic issues and one female lawyer by the name of Shanaz Ahmed, for services to immigrants.

Personally I would like to see much more emphasis on environmental work and recognitions for this. For example the Prince’s Trust does the most important work in connection to rainforest preservation, local employment opportunities. Also Prince Charles’ work on architecture plays a very important role in that respect.

What I would like to see is honours for architects that develop housing in crowded areas that can create its own energy and town hall administrations that support such projects.

*Sorry if I forgot anybody as I do not have the full list before me at the moment.

The real effect of Labour rule

UK jobless figures have risen again. The number of people out of work rose by 43.000 to 2.5 million in the months of November, December 2009 and January 2010. That is the highest figure since 1994. That is the reality of the situation and all of Gordon Brown’s smooth talking and sincere promises are words down the pan and flush just as easily. I very much hope that in fact we flush Gordon Brown down the pan together with his Labour government on May 6th. 2010.

Whilst in the North East, West Midlands, Northern Ireland and London unemployment went down, it stayed the same in the South West but went up everywhere else, accumulating in an overall rise of unemployment.

The World economy is in a state of imbalance because we read just 2 days ago, also on the BBC that the food imports into the UK seriously deplete the water levels of the third world countries producing it.  We manage to keep everybody else busy but not ourselves. All those UK unemployed are unable to produce the food we need.

Well in the early stages of our civilisation we did have something called the three plot land management. Each householder had 3 plots of land allocated to the property and on it they grew their own food and surplus was of course sold. The 3 plots were planted in turn with different crops as not to deplete the ground of nourishment, so one plot was one year planted with clover, then with wheat and then with beetroot or left bare for animals to graze, I say this because we grew our own food at some time and now activities have parted ways, in that some regions of the globe just occupy themselves with intellectual, financial and artistic activities like we do and that is something especially encouraged by Labour, some parts of the world now do mainly manufacturing and that would be China and India (and some others) and some just grow food and that are some tropical countries, South America and the like.

Whilst we complain here in the UK that the population density continually grows, because obviously many immigrants enjoy getting away from swinging the trowel in the fields, our farm land decreases along with the population increases and we depend on food imports.  This is acknowledged by the fact that the number of people in the UK that are economically inactive also rose by 110.000 to 21.5% of the population. Those are people that study instead of looking for work. That is something also encouraged by Gordon Brown and his Labour government, that the UK should go into educating instead of work. And Yvette Cooper proudly pronounced that this is what the government actually expected. Work and Pension Secretary Yvette Cooper, said the figures were in line with the government’s expectations. I would call it making the best of a desperately bad situation by putting on the rose-tinted glasses. By the way I always wear blue-tinted contact lenses.

She then follows on to say: “That’s why it is so important that we keep increasing the support for the unemployed, but also that we sustain the overall support for the economy.” Yet what she should have said is that we drastically need to improve our economy.

Theresa May the Shadow Works and Pensions Secretary is more realistic because she knows that our local families need local jobs to keep their families going and earn and income instead of just trotting down to the job centre to sign on the dole. It does not help us that we just cash our weekly dole checks, go to the supermarket, purchase the food that has been flown in from somewhere else and then slump in front of the TV to eat it.

It would not be possible now to allocate each family a strip of land and let them grow their own food but those that can grow their own food would help reduce the import requirements of food but then again those unemployed most likely do not have the land to grow their own food. Here on our inner London estates we have some initiatives to grow food in tubs on housing estates but the amount of food produced is only a very tiny fraction of the food actually needed.

Well, here in London we are lucky that our unemployment rate fell and we do not need the local manufacturing industry because we are mainly busy with the financial industry and of course the Olympics keep a lot of people busy but the Olympics will be over in 2012.

In another interesting article I read that the UK needs to find a new world role but that is only defined in the military sense, yet it is most apparently also important in the economic sense. If we could bring those 2 areas together that would help to find a solution. In Afghanistan we see that the food related problem is outweighed by farmers growing merely poppies for drugs. One day the world leaders will have to come onto one big table and discuss those matters as part of a world council perhaps to allocate resources around the world for the best of all, reducing and in fact diminishing outright trends to grow crops for drug production and use land in a constructive manner.

Labour has not managed to make any qualitative long-term good impact on world developments but merely lingers on, borrowing money to supply those that are out of work and just about keeping us from starvation.

We can look forward to a second TV debate of the 3 main party leaders soon in that respect and the “Make love not war” attitude of the Liberals is sure to fail Nick Clegg on that occasion. Unfortunately today we do yet have that desired international cooperation of all leaders from each and every single country to work together to produce constructive negotiations at the “Round Table”. In the ideal world the President of Afghanistan would stem out poppy production on the vast fields of Afghanistan and get his farmers to grow food crops instead and there would be international agreement on Nuclear disarmament, we would not have guerilla groups that try to destroy.

What is really needed is a stock take of all the resources on this planet, especially the natural ones, taking account of people’s cultures develop an international consensus on which peaceful development of the world’s resources can take place,a s we really are all in the same boat, I mean on the same planet.

The two best suited persons organisations to do so are Prince Charles on one hand with his Rain forest project and HSBC bank on the other who have the local knowledge around the world in respect of people’s cultures in a business context.

One of the main and biggest conflicts to affect the planet are the Islam and Christian religion fighting it out between each other who dominates the world. As school children we learn how Hannibal led his elephants over the mountains of Spain to invade our lands or we learn about the Christian Knights invading Muslim countries and that conflict is still alive today. As soon as we all stop to strive for world “domination” and opt for peaceful tolerance instead the better.

The economy has lately been the biggest driving force for peace and we need to make sure that we can build on that essential corner-stone of international dialogue and build support for our populations. Yet this Labour government has not been able to strike the right balance and help us here in Britain but shifted emphasis elsewhere.  The last chance we’ll have as a planet is when the Earth warming is going to bite us harder and we’ll have to learn to work together to save us all.

Is time on our side?

Royal Coat of Arms

Royal Coat of Arms

The case for hereditary Peers, should be made just by thinking how much time we spend these days electing, selecting, de-selecting, re-electing, more seats in the lower house, the upper house, Europe, councils.

We spend more time on the actual selection process than on the work those elected persons have to do. Each time an administration changes, administrative processes also change. New laws, new regulations.

Scandals of those in office and why they have to go and further elections.

Whilst we have much more pressing things to think about, like economy, jobs, prices, standard of living, earth warming, international conflicts and peace, and I could go on to a very long list indeed.

These constant changes are very exciting to us all, we stand glued to our computer screens, TV, newspapers to digest the latest changes, read about company directors that go into retirement with too much pay.

Most of those problems are caused by short term office terms, being elected in other words.

Had we still hereditary Peers that would be one less thing to worry about, one less thing that constantly changes and something we could rely on to work regardless. Hereditary Peers, do not run off, they have their estates often since centuries and they inherited not only land and money and titles but also knowledge and attitude and responsibility.

I’ve had enough of the constant chopping and changing and new labour made more changes than are probably good for us and they keep on changing, posts, ministers, Lords, laws.

I can’t see what is wrong with inheritance as that is the most natural occurrence, we all have parents and inherit what they left us. Why does Labour constantly try to dismantle family values. Children grow up better in families and they need them.

Hereditary Peers have a lifelong obligation to keep their subjects content and cuold not afford to be reckless as they cannot run away with a pension and some retirement pay. They stay were they are, their children then have the same responsibilities and therefore Hereditary Peers are under more pressure to make sensible decisions than any of the short term politicians are.

If we would not have to spend so much time constatnly electing new people we could spend more time on the things that really matter. Our lifestyle currently is more stressful. Set traditions that do not constantly change help community cohesion and are the best method to prevent crime.

The areas of the world that at one time were part of the British Empire. Current British overseas territories are underlined in red.

I do not understand how the Queen or a King is supposed to function properly when their social circle the Peers, Barons, Marques etc.

When Britain was run by the Royals Britain was bigger and happier, the economy functioned better too.

The Prince’s Rainforest Project

Please watch this video about the good work the Prince’s Rainforest Project does trying to protect our rainforests and save them from destruction. Destroying the rainforests is costing us the earth.

Blog Stats

  • 53,791 hits