Image of the Green Party’s Carla Denyer on BBC Question Time.
Following news of the Iranian attack on Israel and the involvement of UK aircraft in Israel’s defence, Green Party co-leader, Carla Denyer, has urged the UK not to be dragged into a Middle East war. She said:
“The Green Party condemns Iran’s attacks against Israel, which were targeted on civilian as well as military targets. This represents a concerning escalation of the current conflict in the Middle East. We call on all parties now to find ways to de-escalate this conflict, which risks spreading across the region.
“We are concerned by the use of British aircraft in the night’s events. We question why Britain should be involved in this confrontation, where there is a risk that we could become embroiled in a regional war. The record of Afghanistan and Iraq suggests that involvement in such conflict brings great risks, especially when the military and strategic objectives are unclear.”
Denyer also questioned at what level the decision to engage UK defence forces was made:
“I am deeply concerned about how this decision to deepen our involvement was made and in what further action the government proposes to involve UK armed forces. Britain’s military involvement must be scrutinised and debated by parliament. We should not allow ourselves to be dragged into a Middle East war.
“Wes Streeting says that if the NHS doesn’t change, it will die. But it is inadequate funding that has left our NHS in a poor state of health, not lack of reform.
“Between 2010 and 2019 the UK had a lower level of capital investment in health care and 18% lower average health spending than 14 EU countries.
“So to say that the public is paying a heavy price for failure is an insult to hard-working NHS staff, who are doing their level best despite being overworked and underpaid. It is the failure to invest adequately and pay staff properly that is at the root of dissatisfaction with the NHS.
“The public agrees. They don’t want endless reforms; neither do they share the Conservative or Labour appetite for creeping privatisation. They want the current model to work and to see the NHS available to everyone free of charge and primarily funded through taxes. A tax on the super-rich billionaires and multi-millionaires can provide the funds needed to fix our cherished NHS.
“The Green Party has never had any truck with the profit motive in health care and will continue to push for a fully publicly funded NHS.”
The Green Party has repeated its call for a full bilateral ceasefire, the release of all hostages, the suspension of arms exports to Israel, and for key players in the Netanyahu government to be held accountable for possible war crimes, six months on from the 7 October attacks by Hamas.
Image of the Green Party’s Carla Denyer on BBC Question Time.
Co-leader of the Green Party, Carla Denyer, said:
“This isn’t just a far away conflict that we have nothing to do with. By consistently refusing to call for a ceasefire and continuing to supply arms, the UK Government has been complicit in the deadly assault on Gaza by the Israel Defence Forces.
“Six months on from the horrific Hamas attacks on Israeli citizens, it is clear that the Netanyahu government’s response has been totally disproportionate. Over 33,000 innocent Palestinian civilians have now been killed, the majority of them women and children. This is not an act of self defence. As the UN’s Human Rights Council has resolved, the actions by the Israeli government are possible war crimes and crimes against humanity. Indeed, the UK Government itself has reportedly concluded secretly that Israel is breaking international humanitarian law.
“It is time for our Government to end their complicity and start leading efforts towards peace. They must finally call for a ceasefire, immediately suspend arms exports to Israel and back the UN Human Rights Council’s call for accountability for all violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law.”
In the six months since October 7th, the Green Party of England and Wales has called for:
A full bilateral ceasefire
The release of all hostages
A suspension of all arms export licences to Israel until the violence stops
The cessation of all military collaboration with Israel, including use of British bases by Israeli forces, and intelligence sharing
Targeted Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against individuals and institutions supporting or facilitating Israel’s occupation of Palestine
An investigation by the Metropolitan Police and Director of Public Prosecutions of war crimes committed against UK citizens, or where UK citizens are potential perpetrators
The UK government to use its position as a permanent member of the UN Security Council to vote for, rather than abstain on, ceasefire votes
Targeted sanctions against key individuals in the Israeli leadership, including travel bans and asset freezes on Israel’s government ministers
An end to occupation of the Palestinian territories
The UK government to return to international law being the benchmark for UK policy, and repair the UK’s international reputation as a defender of the international rules-based order.
A diver removes plastic waste from the sea floor in Hatay, Turkey on December 2, 2022. (Photo: Sebnem Coskun/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)
“Every minute, a garbage truck’s worth of plastic enters the ocean,” researchers said.
The amount of plastic waste littering the Earth’s ocean floors could be up to 100 times the quantity floating on the surface, according to a study published this week.
Researchers at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO)—an Australian government agency—and the University of Toronto in Canada found that up to 11 million tons of plastic are polluting the planet’s ocean floors, including microplastics and larger objects like fishing nets, cups, and bags.
“We know that millions of tons of plastic waste enter our oceans every year but what we didn’t know is how much of this pollution ends up on our ocean floor,” CSIRO senior research scientist and study co-author Denise Hardesty said in a statement. “We discovered that the ocean floor has become a resting place, or reservoir, for most plastic pollution, with between 3 to 11 million tons of plastic estimated to be sinking to the ocean floor.”
"Every minute, a garbage truck's worth of plastic enters the ocean."
Study leader Alice Zhu, a doctoral candidate at the University of Toronto, said that “the ocean surface is a temporary resting place of plastic so it is expected that if we can stop plastic entering our oceans, the amount would be reduced.”
“However, our research found that plastic will continue to end up in the deep ocean,” Zhu stated. “These findings help to fill a longstanding knowledge gap on the behavior of plastic in the marine environment.”
“Understanding the driving forces behind the transport and accumulation of plastic in the deep ocean will help to inform source reduction and environmental remediation efforts, thereby reducing the risks that plastic pollution may pose to marine life,” she added.
The study is part of CSIRO’s Ending Plastic Waste program, whose goal is “an 80% reduction in plastic waste entering the Australian environment by 2030.”
Humans produce approximately 440 million tons of plastics annually, or roughly the combined weight of every person on the planet. Plastic pollution harms not only the environment and ecosystems, but also human health and economies.
Plastic use is expected to double by 2040. Negotiations on a global plastics treaty have made little progress amid lobbying by the fossil fuel and petrochemical industries.
The Institute of Economic Affairs has its headquarters on Lord North Street, Westminster. Credit: Des Blenkinsopp (CC BY-SA 2.0)
A senior figure at the influential Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) think tank contributed to a new documentary that spread numerous myths about climate change.
Stephen Davies, an academic who has worked in educational outreach roles at the IEA since 2010, appeared several times in Climate The Movie: The Cold Truth – a new film directed by climate science denier Martin Durkin.
In the documentary, Davies claims that climate activists want to impose an “austere” life on ordinary people. “Behind all the talk about a climate emergency, climate crisis” is “an animus and hostility towards” working-class people, “their lifestyle, their beliefs and a desire to change it by force if necessary,” he says.
According to the website Skeptical Science, which debunks climate misinformation, Climate The Movie contains more than two dozen myths about climate change. The film suggests that we shouldn’t be worried about greenhouse gas emissions, because plants need carbon dioxide. “We’re in a CO2 famine,” one interviewee claims.
The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s foremost climate science body, has stated that carbon dioxide “is responsible for most of global warming” since the late 19th century, which has increased the “severity and frequency of weather and climate extremes, like heat waves, heavy rains, and drought”.
Climate The Movie producer Thomas Nelson told DeSmog that “I see the misguided fight against carbon dioxide as being as crazy as fighting against oxygen or water vapour, and I think scaring innocent children about this is deeply evil”.
The IEA said that “Steve firmly believes that climate change is happening and carbon emissions are having an impact. His view that climate policy imposes costs, particularly on working-class communities, is entirely mainstream. IEA publications and spokespeople have supported action on climate change, including carbon pricing.”
A screenshot of Stephen Davies of the Institute of Economic Affairs in Climate The Movie: The Cold Truth. Credit: Climate The Movie / YouTube
In 2018, Greenpeace’s investigative journalism unit Unearthed revealed that the IEA had received funding from oil major BP every year since 1967. In response to the story, an IEA spokeswoman said: “It is surely uncontroversial that the IEA’s principles coincide with the interests of our donors.”
The IEA also received a £21,000 grant from U.S. oil major ExxonMobil in 2005.
The IEA has extensive influence in politics and the media. It was pivotal to Liz Truss’s short-lived premiership as prime minister, and has boasted of its access to Conservative ministers and MPs. During the year ending March 2023, the IEA appeared in the media on 5,265 occasions, a figure 43 percent higher than its previous peak in 2019.
The group has also received donations from a number of philanthropic trusts accused of channelling funds from the fossil fuel industry and helping to support climate science denial groups. The IEA is a member of the Atlas Network – an international collaboration of “extreme” free market groups that have been accused of promoting the interests of fossil fuel companies and other large corporations.
It’s not known if the IEA has received funding from BP since 2018.
The IEA is a prominent supporter of the continued and extended use of fossil fuels. The group has advocated for the ban to be lifted on fracking for shale gas, calling it the “moral and economic choice”. The IEA has also said that a ban on new North Sea oil and gas would be “madness”, has criticised the windfall tax imposed on North Sea oil and gas firms, and said that the government’s commitment to “max out” the UK’s fossil fuel reserves is a “welcome step”.
The IEA is part of the Tufton Street network – a cluster of libertarian think tanks and pressure groups that are in favour of more fossil fuel extraction and are opposed to state-led climate action. These groups are characterised by a lack of transparency over their sources of funding. The IEA does not publicly declare the names of its donors.
“From Brexit to Trussonomics, the IEA has consistently peddled and promoted destructive and damaging policies,” Green Party MP Caroline Lucas told DeSmog. “Yet perhaps nothing will prove more dangerous long term than the stream of climate denialism and calls to delay action that have been pouring out of Tufton Street for many years.
“Clearly the IEA is now ramping up its climate culture war and the Conservative Party has been following suit. The cross-party consensus on climate action we used to have in Parliament is under strain like never before.”
The IEA and Stephen Davies were approached for comment.
Climate The Movie
During the documentary, Davies suggests that action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is being used to limit the freedom of individuals. He claims that climate activists want to impose “a much more austere simple kind of lifestyle” on people “in which the consumption choices of the great bulk of the population are controlled or even prohibited.”
Davies adds that: “What you have here is a classic example of class hypocrisy and self-interest masquerading as public spirited concern. You could take these kinds of green socialist more seriously if they lived off grid, they cut their own consumption down to the minimum, they never flew. Instead you get constant talk about how human consumption is destroying the planet but the people making all this talk show absolutely no signs of reducing their own.”
The documentary also features an interview with Benny Peiser, the director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) – the UK’s leading climate science denial group. Peiser has previously claimed that it would be “extraordinary anyone should think there is a climate crisis”, while the GWPF has expressed the view that carbon dioxide has been mischaracterised as pollution, when in fact it is a “benefit to the planet”.
The film was favourably reviewed by commentator Toby Young in The Spectator magazine, who described it as “a phenomenon”. Young has previously said that he’s sceptical about the idea of human-caused climate change.
The IPCC has stated it is “unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land”, while scientists at NASA have found that the last 10 years were the hottest on record. Earth’s average surface temperature in 2023 was the warmest since records began in 1880.
The IPCC has also warned that false and misleading information “undermines climate science and disregards risk and urgency” of climate action.
The documentary also features Claire Fox, a member of the House of Lords who was nominated for a peerage by former prime minister Boris Johnson in 2020.
Fox used the documentary to claim that, by tackling climate change, people will be forced to pay more “to simply live the lives that they were leading”.
She suggests that supporters of climate action are trying to “take away what we consider to be not luxuries but necessities.”
The UK’s Climate Change Committee, which advises the government on measures to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, estimates that the combined policies will cost less than one percent of the country’s national output.
The Office for Budget Responsibility, the UK’s independent economic forecaster, has also said that “the costs of failing to get climate change under control would be much larger than those of bringing emissions down to net zero”.
Claire Fox and the GWPF were approached for comment.
A Charitable Cause?
The IEA is a registered charity, meaning that it receives generous tax breaks.
The group justifies this charitable status partly on the basis of its educational outreach programme, which aims to “equip tomorrow’s leaders with a deep understanding of free market economics”.
The IEA claims that: “Our aim is to change the climate of opinion in the long term and our work with students is a key part of this.”
In the year ending March 2023, the group claimed to have engaged with 3,500 students and 1,200 teachers via its seminars, internships and summer schools.
Formerly the IEA’s head of education and now a senior education fellow, Davies is a senior member of the group’s outreach programme. He is the first person listed in the IEA’s student speakers brochure, which advertises the IEA staff members who are available to speak at schools or universities.
The brochure also lists the IEA’s chief operating officer Andy Mayer, who has said that the government should “get rid of” its target of achieving net zero emissions by 2050, which he called a “very hard left, socialist, central-planning model”.
The non-profit Good Law Project recently made a complaint to the Charity Commission about the IEA, claiming that the libertarian group had breached charity rules. Namely, the Good Law Project claims that the IEA is in breach of rules stating that charities must avoid presenting “biased and selective information in support of a preconceived point of view”.
The Charity Commission rejected this complaint, stating that: “We have assessed the concerns raised and have not identified concerns that the charity is acting outside of its objects or the Commission’s published guidance.”
Good Law Project campaigns manager Hannah Greer told DeSmog: “It won’t be a surprise to anyone that the IEA is cementing its role as a major mouthpiece for climate change scepticism. It’s a huge scandal that the IEA is still allowed to peddle fringe views under the guise of being an ‘educational charity’ while benefiting from taxpayer subsidies.
“This has been allowed to happen because we have seen alarming and unambiguous regulatory failure from the Charity Commission – who have been presented with evidence of how the IEA is flouting charity law, but have chosen to look the other way.”
