Posted on

What are your priorities?

Boris’ Priorities

Last week Boris Johnson posted on my Facebook page telling me his priorities for the country and asking me for mine. Apart from wondering who had funded this marketing campaign, I was deeply disturbed by the underlying message: his top priority, highlighted in bold and set apart, way above any other priority was to deliver Brexit by 31st October.

I am disturbed at the thought that a prime minister of our country could put, as his top priority – far above any concern for the health, safety and well-being of our citizens, driving through a controversial political decision that many believe will be deeply damaging to our country, and one to which a substantial proportion of the citizens of the country, and their representatives in parliament are opposed.

These past few weeks it has felt as though dark clouds have gathered over our land. Events in Westminster convey a sense of a few unscrupulous men[1] seeking personal power and wealth regardless of what that might mean for our country and for ordinary people.

So what do I think should be the top priorities for our government at this time?

In no particular order, here are my top five:

  • Ensuring that the most vulnerable members of our society can afford a decent basic standard of living;
  • Reducing the gross inequalities in wealth and privilege that exist in our society;
  • Providing affordable and accessible housing for all;
  • Tackling climate change and environmental damage;
  • Reversing the impact of years of austerity and ensuring that teachers, police officers, social workers, doctors and nurses have the resources they need to do their jobs well.

 

To achieve that will inevitably mean higher taxes for those who are financially well off (and I recognise that includes me); it will mean addressing the tax-avoiding activities of individuals and corporations; it will mean substantial investment in public services and housing; it will mean investing in renewable energy and public transport and putting a halt to environmentally damaging projects such as the expansion of Heathrow and HS2.

And therein lies the rub – all of those threaten the wealth, privilege and comfort of those with the money and power who seem to be influencing our current government.

Having received, unsolicited, a post of Boris Johnson’s priorities for our country, I thought I might take the opportunity presented by his survey to tell him what I thought the government’s priorities should be. But, in order to take part in the survey, I had to agree to the Conservative Party using the information I provide to keep me updated via email, online advertisements and direct mail about the Party’s campaigns and opportunities to get involved. That is not something I want to agree to, nor, I suspect, will most others who do not share Boris Johnson’s views. So when, in a few weeks’ time, the prime minister says that the results of his survey of the nation’s views overwhelmingly support his drive to get us out of the EU at all costs, once again, this will be based on biased and distorted data.

[1] it does seem to be men – white, wealthy and public-school-educated – whoops, that describes me, too.

Posted on

Adventures of an armchair activist: Going green-er… gingerly (1)

Going Green-er…

Last week’s UN report on biodiversity and ecosystems, together with the 2018 IPCC report on global warming have dramatically highlighted the damaging effects that we are imposing on our planet. Greta Thunberg and the leaders of Extinction Rebellion are surely right in emphasising that this is the most pressing issue for all of us: politicians, corporate leaders, and individual citizens alike.

So it seemed an appropriate place to start in my deliberations on how to live ethically in an exploitative, unjust, consumerist world.

I am so grateful for the beauty and goodness of our world, and the privilege I have in being able to enjoy that beauty. I long for others too – both now and in the future – to be able to enjoy and appreciate this goodness, and for the destruction and exploitation that has devastated so much of our planet to be rolled back.

And yet, as a wealthy consumer living in one of the wealthiest nations of our world, I have to acknowledge that – in spite of the small steps I have taken to reduce my carbon footprint – I am really more a part of the problem than the solution.

…gingerly

I recently calculated my carbon footprint and my conservative estimate came out at 7.69 tonnes of CO2 per year – higher than the reported UK average of 6.50 tonnes (although I note that other sources put this at closer to 10 tonnes), nearly double the global average of 4 tonnes, and four times the required target of 2 tonnes.

 

So what are we doing about it? What could we be doing? And where is it that we are struggling?

  • The biggest contributor to our carbon footprint is flying. Lois and I both do it: to visit family and friends abroad; for work and conferences; to support others living and working in challenging circumstances. Neither of us enjoy it: the long waits in airport departure lounges and arrivals halls; the uncomfortable seats and tray food; the jet lag; and most of all, the knowledge that with every flight we are contributing to the destruction of our planet. But still we do it. We do what we can to offset our flying by buying carbon credits, but recognise that can never undo the damage we are doing. We try to limit our flying: not using a plane if there is an alternative transport option; limiting our flying to visiting family and friends; cutting down the number of such trips; avoiding international conferences where possible; and taking holidays in this country rather than abroad. And yet, we chose a cross-national marriage, our families are spread across four countries and our friends even wider, and we do want to prioritise our relationships. So we will continue to struggle with this. Is one long-haul flight per year acceptable? Is seeing grandchildren just once a year enough? Should I turn down invitations to international conferences on environmental grounds?

 

  • Other forms of transport make up our next biggest contribution. Here, perhaps we are taking some worthwhile steps (literally) by walking, cycling (me), and taking public transport when we can, rather than driving. Last year, we passed on our diesel estate to Joe and bought a smaller, hybrid car. Perhaps we should have gone fully electric, but the cost, patchy infrastructure, and limited second-hand market all put me off doing so at this stage. So we try not to use the car unless we have to, tend to drive at 60-65 rather than 70-75mph, and avoid heavy acceleration and braking. We are privileged, living where we do, that I can get into town by bike in 20 minutes, or the University in 30; that we have 4+ buses an hour going from outside our door to Coventry or Birmingham; and that we have such a good rail network from Coventry and Birmingham International. But it does frustrate me that rail travel is such an expensive (and time consuming) option. Travelling to Nottingham to see Esther and Rob would take 2 ½ hours and cost around £50 by train, compared to 1 hour and about £5 by car; further or more remote excursions increase dramatically in both time and cost. So, do we go further in our efforts to travel sustainably? Should we aim to ultimately get rid of our car? Do we sacrifice efficiency and cost (both of which we can afford) for the sake of sustainability?

 

  • When we set up Breathing Space a year ago, we deliberately chose a place on the outskirts of Coventry so it would be accessible by public transport. We have the advantage of regular buses to outside our front door combined with a sense of peace in the garden, and countryside walks from our doorstep. We encourage others to travel sustainably to Breathing Space. The reality is, however, that most of our visitors come by car, even those who live in Coventry (and we would probably do the same if it were us visiting somewhere else in the city). We don’t apologize for having no parking available on the property and will install a bike rack once the access ramp is completed, but is there more we could do to promote green-er travel among the users of Breathing Space?

 

  • And we have voted (in both local council and European elections) for the Green Party – a party that clearly has greener transport policies in its manifesto, and has done for years. But could we be doing more to lobby the government to incentivize train travel? to not build more airports but actually close a couple? to fund cycleways within towns?

 

So there we are – struggling to travel sustainably; succeeding in some aspects and failing in others; wrestling with the dilemma of balancing family relationships with green living.

What about you? Are there ways you have managed to cut down on environmentally damaging travel? Do you struggle with the same dilemmas as us? Do you have any suggestions that we could take up? Add your comments to the blog or join in a conversation on Facebook…

 

 

Posted on

Low Carbon and Loving It

For many years now I have struggled with the reality that, in spite of all my rhetoric of justice, compassion and humility, my affluent western lifestyle is inherently unjust, damaging and unsustainable. In the face of the inconvenient truths of climate change and global inequalities, the tiny steps we as a family have taken to live simply and sustainably appear miniscule.

So I have been both challenged and encouraged by Mark and Tom Delaney’s inspiring book, Low Carbon and Loving It. The Delaney’s are a remarkable family whose totally radical lifestyle has sat with me like an uncomfortable stone in my shoe: a stone that nevertheless challenges me to keep walking and try just a little bit harder. Mark and Cathy have spent most of the past two decades living in tiny one-roomed homes in Indian slums, bringing up their two boys, Tom and Oscar, in conditions which I know I could never cope with. In doing so, they have successfully managed to reduce their carbon production from the Australian average of 23 tonnes CO2eq to much closer to the Indian average of 2.3 tonnes.

Mark and Tom’s book describes something of their journey in achieving this. They set out, in a very readable manner, the science of climate change and why we need to take is so seriously. And they provide lots of practical suggestions of how we, in the affluent west, can take steps to reduce our unsustainable carbon footprints and contribute to a more just and sustainable world.

Few, if any, would ever have the courage to follow in their footsteps (I know I couldn’t), but all of us can do something. And, as Mark and Tom point out, it is imperative that we do, if our children and grandchildren, and – more significantly – the billions of people across the world who have no choice in their lifestyles, are to have a future to look forward to.

As Lois and I have moved to Allesley and set up Breathing Space, Low Carbon and Loving It has inspired us to do bit more to make our home, our retreat centre, and our lifestyles just a little more sustainable. Our hope is that others, too, will come alongside us in doing so.

Low Carbon and Loving It is available in both paper and kindle editions on Amazon:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Low-Carbon-Loving-Adventures-sustainable-Australia/dp/0648247708

 

Posted on

The health costs of energy inefficient housing: once again, it is the poorest who pay the highest price

The process of moving house has enlightened me about the Energy Performance Certificate (EPC): a measurement of the energy efficiency of a building, and a legal requirement for all properties being sold or rented (yet another advantage of our EU membership, apparently).

Energy Performance Certificates

The EPC gives a grade, from A to G, on how efficient the building is, how much it costs to heat and light, and what its carbon dioxide emissions are likely to be. It also gives suggestions on how the energy efficiency could be improved.

epc
Our current home has an EPC grade of D (about average for the UK), uses about 36,000 kWh of energy for heating each year, and produces about 9.1 tonnes of CO2. The house we are buying is somewhat worse, being in band E. It uses about 23,000 kWh (being a smaller property), but produces about 11 tonnes of CO2.

However, for an investment of around £20,000 we could improve that to band C, cut our CO2 emissions by a third, live more comfortably in a warmer home, and cut our energy costs substantially.

We can afford to do that.

 

Energy Vulnerability

Not so those on low incomes or state benefits, who suffer a triple whammy. People living in either private rented or public housing are more likely to be living in energy-inefficient properties; they are more likely to experience energy vulnerability and be unable to pay their electricity or heating bills; and they have no control over improving the energy efficiency of their homes, while the private landlords have no incentive to fork out the capital to do so, and the austerity-driven local councils are unlikely to prioritise this over other more pressing demands.
Frustratingly, though, this isn’t just about feeling good about doing our bit to help tackle climate change, nor even about feeling a bit more warm and comfortable during the winter months. Living with energy vulnerability has a direct impact on our health. Last week I attended a seminar exploring the health costs of energy inefficient housing in the UK and France. The authors pointed out that people living in homes in bands F and G have an overall higher mortality, as well as substantial risks of ill-health, not to mention the impact on lost days at work, and for children, poorer educational outcomes.

Conversely, a relatively small investment now in improving the energy efficiency of our public and private rented housing could have huge impacts on the NHS budget, not to mention the very real impact on the lives of those who can’t afford to stay warm.

 

End Fuel Poverty

According to the End Fuel Poverty Coalition, 2.35 million households in England are living in fuel poverty. Surely it doesn’t need to be that way?