lord of the blog

« A voice from the past! | Main | Message for Will »

Thursday, August 23, 2007

Heathrow and the Climate Camp

I sent the following letter to the Guardian yesterday. They published it with the exception of the comment about George Monbiot being rather too fond of calling people who he dislikes and who disagree with him "liars and hypocrites". (See penultimate paragraph).

Dear Editor,

I gather George Monbiot thinks a new political movement has emerged from the climate camp. I beg to differ.

A group of them turned up at my house in Acton dressed as clowns, face paint, funny noses etc. Some proceeded to lay a table cloth on my apology for a lawn and make jam sandwiches. Others decorated my house and garden with, amongst other things, plastic tape, a sock on a stick (helpfully labelled “wind sock”) and writing on the path saying “no third runway”. For some inexplicable reasons this was written with short pieces of string.

They expressed surprise when I suggested they weren’t taking climate change seriously. When asked why they felt it necessary to dress up and put on funny voices (why do some young men like to imitate the voices of young girls? There could be a PhD in this!) They said they didn’t want to frighten me!

My frustration is that climate change is very serious and so are the jobs of 70,000 workers at Heathrow and the 500,000 working in the aviation industry.

George Monbiot who is fond of calling those who disagree with him liars and hypocrites might like to consider the possibility that most of us think climate change is serious but we don’t necessarily think that he and his entertaining acolytes have the right solution.

As for a new political movement can I suggest George as the new play leader?

Yours sincerely,

Clive Soley Lord Soley of Hammersmith, Campaign Director, Future Heathrow.

Hi Clive,

So you met CIRCA (Clandestine Insurgent Rebel Clown Army), that was lucky. Your garden was one of 5 options considered for the day of mass action...we almost move the whole camp into your garden but we didn't know how much land the property is on and practicalities won out.

As for taking climate change seriously. The camp for climate action takes it very seriously, that does not preclude the use of humour.

One very serious thing that you could do is to start lobying for the closure or downscaling of airports.

Heathrow is a greater carbon source than around 2/3rds of the planets nations. Aviation expansion when place against govornment co2 targets can be seen to use up our whole carbon budget by 2050. A single flight can increase your personal emissions by more than the amount that many people in the developing world use in an entire year. Giving up a car in favour of public transport is a big move...increasingly popular in london...but this might save 2tons of carbon dioxide compared to a similar qauntity for a return trip to say the south of spain.

Climate change is serious, it is killing people, tens of thousands, now. Giving up flying is not a gracious act or one of piety it is behaviour in line with basic moral standards. Flying is an attack on the poor of the world. They have a right to be free from human induced climate change caused increasingly by the top few percent of the worlds rich and there binge flying. You do not call avoiding hitting someone a nice thing to do or an act for do gooders it is just not right to assault people. Ditto for air travel.

Calvin: I have sympathy for the climate change protestors and applaud their efforts to bring attention to the issue, including their methods of direct action. I also don't see the importance of the continual increase in airport capacity in a region of the country that is suffering economic overheating (just look at the crazy house prices in London).

But giving up flying just won't happen. People will not listen to you, despite all the climate threats. And in a democracy, you can't order the entire population to do something they don't want to do. There are plenty of immigrants in this country - my wife is one - who want to go back to their home countries to visit relatives. It is just impossible to get the train to Bangladesh or Australia. People also want to travel and see different countries and in my mind it is good to expand your horizons. That said, I see no point in flights from Stansted to Charleroi, when it is as quick and easy to travel by train from London to Brussels. Certain short-haul routes (particularly domestic flights) should be halted, although I'm not sure whether this will have a dramatic effect and such a measure should be combined with investment and price subsidies in rail.

Perhaps some form of limitation on growth in air travel combined with reductions in carbon emissions from other areas - industry, power generation, construction, vehicles, etc - and carbon offsets could bring about carbon neutrality. But there is a dangerous lack of urgency by the British government and complete recklessness by the Chinese and Indian governments, who preside over economies that have contributed to a massive increase in carbon emissions. If you go to any large Asian city, you will be staggered by the scale of pollution - children in these cities have the lungs of chain smokers and are more exposed to carcinogens than children living in the region of the Chernobyl fall-out. Any solution to climate change has to be a global solution and unless this is achieved, whatever happens at Heathrow will be irrelevant. We can all stop flying in the UK, but there will be 50 times as many Chinese and Indians flying regularly in the near future. It's time the airport protestors took their arguments to a global level and seek practical and real solutions (not just vague promises) that balance environmental needs with economic growth and the desire and requirement to travel.