Skip to main content

Sluggish approach to an Ocean Treaty?

As the first round of UN negotiations towards a historic UN Ocean Treaty draws to a close, Dr Sandra Schoettner of Greenpeace’s global ocean sanctuaries campaign has criticised the 'sluggish' response of key countries.

Our oceans are our life support system.  The ocean ecosystem produces half the oxygen we breathe.  The oceans absorb carbon dioxide and play a vital role in containing global warming.  We need to protect our oceans.  This is why a new international treaty is needed.

Turtle in Pacific Ocean courtesy of Greenpeace


But not all countries are coming on board with the vigour required.

Oceans belong to us all

Greenpeace says oceans beyond national boundaries "belong to us all" and need urgent international protection.

For the first time in history, this shared responsibility could be enshrined in law with a Global Ocean Treaty.

Over the past two weeks of UN negotiations, many countries from Africa, Pacific and Caribbean islands, Latin America and Europe have eagerly set about drafting the text of the treaty. 

They know just how acute the threats facing our oceans are and how fast they need to move to get an agreement from states by the deadline of 2020.

We need a treaty 'with teeth'


But Greenpeace warns that some governments are "lacking in vision and ambition." 

It points to countries like Norway, Russia, and Iceland, and says  

it’s disappointing to see the US, Australia and New Zealand being sluggish. Our oceans are in crisis and simply can’t wait while countries drag their feet.

To safeguard wildlife, tackle climate change and ensure food security for billions of people, we need to protect at least 30% of our oceans by 2030. 

We need to see a Global Ocean Treaty which has real teeth and allows us to create a network of ocean sanctuaries around the world. The future of our oceans depends on this treaty.



Subscribe to The Thin End






Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The
Post a Comment
Read more

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba
7 comments
Read more

The Herring Song

For all the fish that are in the sea, the herring is the fish for me!  These are the words of a song my mother used to sing, and the whole family would join in the chorus.  But how many fish are in the sea?  Estimates of the numbers of fish in the oceans vary, of course. How could it be an exact measure? One figure given by scientists places the number of fish in the ocean at 3,500,000,000,000.  That is a lot of fish?  So, what about 'the fish for me', the herring? Archaeologists counting herring bones  along North America's west coast recently found evidence that herring that had been abundant for thousands of years.   Like so many, they are in decline due to overfishing.  Herring collapse has signifcant knock-on effects both for humans and for ecological balance.  Over time, there have been serveral periodic collapses.  Sometimes the recovery has been slow.  Herring is the fish for me could be a standard for seabirds, With loss of fish such as herring, the seabird populat
Post a Comment
Read more