The Thin End

We have argued in previous articles that growth and world trade are driving forces for climate change. Unless this driver is understood and dealt with, then talk of containing global warming is simply hot air. Politicians need to lead in efforts to get voters to realise that our lifestyles must change. If we want to tackle climate change and protect our future on the Earth, societies will need to adopt a degrowth model, in which we consume less, and use fewer materials and resources. Given how reliant we are on the growth model, this won’t be an easy transition. Now, two researchers in the UK and Sweden have been awarded the latest Atlas Award for examining this current and growing debate on the strategy to tackle climate change from the degrowth angle. The article by Dr Milena Büchs, University of Leeds, UK and Prof. Max Koch, Lund University, Sweden, appeared this month in Futures , published by Elsevier. While degrowth doesn’t mean going back to a prehistoric way of life, it does

Labour has rarely been kind to the party's former leaders.   The memberships, or activists at least, are quick to slate them as 'traitors'.  Decades later, the view is different. This was certainly so with Harold Wilson who was despised on the right of the party and abandoned by the left.  Labour tends to over-state its failures and minimise its successes.   Now we look back and see how successful Wilson was in the circumstances of his time. This has also been so with Tony Blair.  The record of Tony Blair's government is remarkable by any standard.  His sin, for the left of Labour, was that he hunted with the hare and the hounds.  He set out to make capitalism work better.  It was a laudable aim and his achievements were considerable. Blair's government massively increased funding of the NHS and waiting lists and times tumbled.  It made inroads in reducing child poverty with targetted policies.  It reduced pensioner poverty.  It put more police officers on the

Is the BBC biased politically? Yes, of course, it is. Is it intentional? That is difficult to say. All our media is biased, and sometimes significantly so. Look at the press. There are good reasons for most of it being called the 'Tory Press'. It backs the Tory party: The Daily Telegraph, The Sun, The Express, The Times, all blasting away, telling us how dreadful a Corbyn government would be. Corbyn's sin is to be too left-wing, which means he wants to bring about a fundamental change in the balance of power and privilege in British society. He wants to tackle the very inequalities of opportunity that run through our society in education, in work and in social justice. To achieve that he must challenge the elite. This means he lies outside the box of 'neutrality', and being 'neutral' means being anti-Corbyn. Corbyn challenges the yardsticks by which success is determined. Success, for Corbyn, would be to tackle poverty and inequality. Success for the

What is clear from the opinion polls is that the majority of voters do not want a Boris Johnson-led government. The Tories have flatlined at 42%. The message from the opinion polls is that you should make sure your vote counts if you want to stop Boris. If you want to protect the NHS, then you will need to stop Boris. If you want significant progress on tackling greenhouse gas emissions and protecting the environment, then Boris must be denied a majority. If you wish for action on child poverty and an end to the misery of austerity, then as a voter you will need to make sure your vote counts to deny Boris Johnson a majority in parliament. The polls show Labour is closing down the Tory lead, but with just a few more days to polling, it might not be sufficient. Votes are needed where they can impact on the parliamentary arithmetic. This is why voters in the key marginals matter. The Observer today published a poll checker so that voters can see how best they might vote if the

When I was growing up in the 1950s we didn't have Television. One or two of my school friends had one, and we would go round to their house after school and watch a bit of television with a tea of bread and jam. It was just a bit of TV. Mostly we played outdoors - running around playing cowboys, or reenacting exploits in WW2. The more I think back, I realise just how much more active we were as children in all types of weather. We never seemed to do things standing still. We now know that our lifestyles at an early age impact on our health and wellbeing in later life. Adhering to a healthy lifestyle at age 4 years is associated with a decreased risk of overweight, obesity, and abdominal obesity at 7 years, according to a study published in Pediatric Obesity . The study assessed five lifestyle behaviours—physical activity, sleep duration, television watching, ultra-processed food consumption, and plant-based food consumption—in 1,480 children when they were 4 years of age. Limi

Boris Johnson is running from an interview with Andrew Neil on BBC.  He also strangely avoided an interview on Channel 4, the climate debate, and is also declining interviews on ITV. The truth is, we are not seeing that much of Boris Johnson.  He prefers the set-piece photo opportunity, spending more time talking to infants than to voters.   On several occasions when he has met voters, they have taken him to task over the Tory record in government. It is little wonder he is avoiding debate. In Andrew Neil's interview with Nigel Farage, the point was rightly made by Farage that Boris Johnson's Brexit 'deal' was not being debated in the election.  Indeed, although Boris likes the slogan 'getting Brexit done', he avoids talking about his deal. There are good reasons for this.  It is a bad deal.  He knows it, and Farage tells him it is.  It is a bad deal whether you want to remain in the EU or leave it.   It is yet another issue about which Boris Johnson wou

Did Boris Johnson campaign against Early Prisoner release as he claims? Boris Johnson has claimed that when campaigning to be re-elected Mayor of London in 2012, he opposed the early release of prisoners.  Is this yet another example of Boris being economical with the truth? His manifesto for the 2012 manifesto, Fighting Crime In London, said nothing about early release. Of course, like most politicians, he sounded tough on crime.  Sentences aren't harsh enough, he said.  This always goes down well with voters, who also believe that to be the case.  But nothing on early release. He does say that there are too many prisoners serving short sentences, and it would be better if they were not in prison.  Prison, he said, does them no good.  He said: "I also believe that there are too many people going to prison on short sentences, which just make them more likely to offend. By contrast those convicted of serious violence spend too little time in gaol. It is time to pu

When it comes to crime in politics, it is easy enough to sound tough.  The honest answers usually seem 'soft'.  So, come general elections we expect to hear a tough talk on crime. Tony Blair found a beautiful message in 1997: "Tough on crime; touch on the causes of crime."  It encapsulated the need to tackle crime at its roots, rather than simply deliver tough sentences. It is perhaps inevitable that crime, once again,  hits centre stage with London Bridge Terrorist attack.  Here was a man, a convicted terrorist,  who had been released early.   The Tories seized the moment to lay blame on Labour and the Criminal Justice Act, 2003.  This, they said, set in train the early release process that led to the release of ..... It is a diversionary tactic from the scrutiny of a justice system and policing struggling through underfunding for nearly a decade of Tory rule. Boris Johnson bottled out of the proposed interview with Andrew Neil on BBC television. Still, when