A third of bird species in the UK could be negatively impacted on by climate change according to research conducted for the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO).
The research is based on a regional survey of 68 species based on population change and the impact of climate change on routes to the UK taken by migratory birds and uses data gathered by the BTO since 1966.
Science Director at the BTO Dr James Pearce Higgins told the BBC ‘we can see from our evidence a reshuffling of bird species’ in which there are ‘some winners that are doing better and some losers that are not doing so well’.
Losing out in this climate lottery are migratory birds, the number of cuckoos visiting the UK has dropped by 80% over the past thirty years, other migratory birds such as swifts and turtle doves have also suffered.
Birds common to the northern uplands are also vulnerable, with the golden plover expected to be extinct in the Peak District by the end of the century.
The winners are birds that can benefit from the UK having warmer winters in recent years. These include buzzards and common garden birds such as robins and blue tits.
The decline in migratory birds is thought to be due to warmer summers meaning there are less invertebrates for them to feed on, the impact of climate change on the countries they visit on the way to the UK is also believed to be a contributory factor.
Speaking to the BBC naturalist Nick Baker said that birds are ‘amazing creatures, adaptable and resilient; but only up to a point’. He called for their habitat to be safeguarded to give them a ‘fighting chance’ at long term survival.
Also speaking to the BBC Dr Alex Bond senior curator of birds at the National History Museum suggested that other issues including ‘habitat fragmentation’ may have impacted on the decline of some species, but climate change was clearly ‘the big one’.
Going on to say that habitat restoration and conservation would help redress the balance; but warned many species may be in a ‘palliative care state’ because the ‘stopping climate change ship has more or less sailed’.
Birds and humans have coexisted for thousands of years winding their way into our art and culture from high poetry to cheery images of robins on Christmas cards. The findings of the BTO show they are also a useful barometer of the harm we are doing to the climate.
Those species that are under threat have been put in that situation by climate change created by humans. Ironically those that are thriving do so because we feed them in return for having them hopping about on our suburban lawns.
I would like to hope that these, as Nick Baker puts it ‘adaptable and resilient’ creatures can survive because our efforts at conserving their habitat will prove to be more than just palliative care.
The message behind the BTO research though is painfully clear, another reminder that time is running out to act on climate change. If we don’t then Spring and every other season may be silent.
Thursday, 5 September 2019
Monday, 26 August 2019
Has the private car come to the end of the road?
Last week a commons select committee reported that if we're serious about tackling climate change then it could be time to give up driving. Cue much wailing and gnashing of teeth.
White van man and his brothers and sisters in petrol were not happy. If the racket on the internet and radio talk shows is any guide, they will only surrender their steering wheels when someone prizes their cold, dead arm away from the open driver's side window.
Their anger is based in the fact that the private motor car has been sold to them as an icon of personal freedom for more than a century. The nagging question is though, have they and the rest of us been sold a massive and poorly house-trained pup?
My hometown of Stoke-on-Trent is a, mostly, linear city made up of six individual towns, it should be the ideal setting for a first-rate public transport system. What it's got though is an embarrassingly awful one, faced with that it is hardly surprising that driving looks like the best option nine times out of ten.
In many ways though it really isn't. Over its short history the private motor car has filled the atmosphere with pollution, caused us to cover ever more land with tarmac and contributed to rising levels of obesity.
In addition to all that having to own a car has saddled families that are struggling to make ends meet with another expense.
The truth is we might well all be a lot happier, healthier and maybe richer too if we consigned the privately-owned car to a museum. In which case why don't we?
There, as Shakespeare might have put it lies the rub!
Part of the problem is that we haven't yet properly grasped either the size of climate emergency waiting in the wings, or the radical measures needed to deal with it. Rather like the residents of Pompeii we keep telling ourselves that even though the volcano is smoking it hasn't erupted before, so it won't erupt now. Things didn't end well for them; they won't for us either.
There is also a staggering lack of imagination on the part of local and national government. Building a decent public transport system is undeniably costly in the short term and usually requires a significant leap of faith.
In a political culture where playing it safe is the order of the day and the accountants tend to hold the whip hand progress is often sluggish at best and sometimes nonexistent.
A sizable slice of blame has, alas, to rest with my own team, the environmental movement. Too often we talk in terms of what people mustn't do, demanding that the dress code for the promised land requires we all wear a hair shirt.
The fantasy world of autonomous ‘pods’ that replace the petrol hungry tin box on the average suburban drive might always be slightly out of reach. Even if it did come about knowing this country’s talent for making chaos out of the mundane it would only be a matter of time before the whole system was brought down by the wrong kind of snow or leaves on the line.
The truth is that though things are looking had humans have the intelligence and the resilience to turn the situation around. We are more than capable of creating a society that is greener fairer and better for everyone.
As it happens, I don't own a car; but it I did that is the sort of world I'd happily give it up to build.
White van man and his brothers and sisters in petrol were not happy. If the racket on the internet and radio talk shows is any guide, they will only surrender their steering wheels when someone prizes their cold, dead arm away from the open driver's side window.
Their anger is based in the fact that the private motor car has been sold to them as an icon of personal freedom for more than a century. The nagging question is though, have they and the rest of us been sold a massive and poorly house-trained pup?
My hometown of Stoke-on-Trent is a, mostly, linear city made up of six individual towns, it should be the ideal setting for a first-rate public transport system. What it's got though is an embarrassingly awful one, faced with that it is hardly surprising that driving looks like the best option nine times out of ten.
In many ways though it really isn't. Over its short history the private motor car has filled the atmosphere with pollution, caused us to cover ever more land with tarmac and contributed to rising levels of obesity.
In addition to all that having to own a car has saddled families that are struggling to make ends meet with another expense.
The truth is we might well all be a lot happier, healthier and maybe richer too if we consigned the privately-owned car to a museum. In which case why don't we?
There, as Shakespeare might have put it lies the rub!
Part of the problem is that we haven't yet properly grasped either the size of climate emergency waiting in the wings, or the radical measures needed to deal with it. Rather like the residents of Pompeii we keep telling ourselves that even though the volcano is smoking it hasn't erupted before, so it won't erupt now. Things didn't end well for them; they won't for us either.
There is also a staggering lack of imagination on the part of local and national government. Building a decent public transport system is undeniably costly in the short term and usually requires a significant leap of faith.
In a political culture where playing it safe is the order of the day and the accountants tend to hold the whip hand progress is often sluggish at best and sometimes nonexistent.
A sizable slice of blame has, alas, to rest with my own team, the environmental movement. Too often we talk in terms of what people mustn't do, demanding that the dress code for the promised land requires we all wear a hair shirt.
The fantasy world of autonomous ‘pods’ that replace the petrol hungry tin box on the average suburban drive might always be slightly out of reach. Even if it did come about knowing this country’s talent for making chaos out of the mundane it would only be a matter of time before the whole system was brought down by the wrong kind of snow or leaves on the line.
The truth is that though things are looking had humans have the intelligence and the resilience to turn the situation around. We are more than capable of creating a society that is greener fairer and better for everyone.
As it happens, I don't own a car; but it I did that is the sort of world I'd happily give it up to build.
Thursday, 15 August 2019
New group encourages men to speak about their struggles with mental health issues
“We’re nobody special, just two blokes who are tired of seeing men killing themselves”.
I’m sitting in an upstairs room at the base of Changes, a charity offering peer support to people living with mental health issues in my hometown of Stoke-on-Trent. Gathered around on the sagging sofas are half a dozen other men, all of them, like me sipping coffee and looking a little uncomfortable.
Out of more than six thousand suicides recorded in 2013 78% involved men, according to the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey one in eight males in the UK, 12.2% of the population, showed symptoms of a common mental health problem (source: The Mental Health Foundation).
Despite the size of the problem and its obvious social impact it isn’t something we talk about. Thanks to generations of social conditioning out stiff upper lips stay firmly closed.
This is something Ron and Craig, the likeably blokish duo behind Men Unite, a support network that began on Facebook and is now expanding into the real world want to change.
They might just do it too; in a matter of months their group has grown from a handful of friends to more than a thousand members in sixty-seven countries.
Both men spoke with genuine honesty about their own brushes with mental distress.
Craig talked about struggling with drug addiction and the troubles that follow on from it, debt, deceit and, for him, a short spell in prison. He has since rebuilt his life and career.
Ron, the owner of a successful construction business, spoke about how earlier this year he had found himself standing on a bridge next to the nearby Britannia Stadium on the point of jumping. “Best f*****g view in the city” he jokes, an example of the gallows humour men are programmed to use to mask their emotions.
What he says strikes a chord with Chris*, a softly spoken man who, until tonight has never spoken openly about his struggles with mental distress. He describes how despite having a good job and a happy family life depression hit him with a sucker punch a little over a year ago.
Sam*, spoke about how he had ‘struggled with depression’ all his life and as a result been bullied at school. Through volunteering with Changes, he has found recovery and a way to help others.
The message behind the Men Unite ‘project’, if it can be call that, it is early days and both Ron and Craig would, I’m sure, be the first to admit, are still very much flying by the seat of their pants, is one of solidarity. They don’t want to be victims whining about their troubles; they want to find a way to live with them without being overwhelmed.
That is why they are working with Changes, MIND, Staffordshire Police and the NHS to help men develop ways to be open about the challenges they face and of supporting each other to move on into recovery.
Later over coffee I speak to Sue*, a full-time worker with Changes, “things would be so much easier if men spoke about their feelings” she says, adding, “maybe the people here tonight will start that process”.
She has a point, author Mark Green writes about the ‘man box’, the tight space cultural expectations require men to pack their emotions into allowing them a drastically limited range of expression
This has serious consequences for our physical and mental health, leading to addiction, depression, violence and social isolation. The impact of these can be seen on a societal level too, with men transferring the emotional pain they cannot express into crime, domestic violence and suicide.
Men Unite is still in its salad days, when attracting members is easy and anything seems possible. Being viable in the long-term is a more difficult road paved with bureaucracy and potential disappointment as the pace of growth inevitably slows down to something more manageable.
Their aims are honest, even noble, ones and they are seeking to attain them with a cheerful irreverence that is manly in the best possible way. For the good of half the population in need of a voice to speak about its pain it is to be hoped they succeed.
*Some names used in this article have been changed in the interests of confidentiality.
Thursday, 8 August 2019
The gamble made by the council in becoming a property developer might not be a game worth the candle.
Two events over resent weeks have demonstrated the disconnect between the ambitions of those holding power inside the Civic Centre and the experience of ordinary citizens.
Stoke-on-Trent City Council recently announced plans to demolish Gordon House on Kingsway in Stoke town centre. The land it occupies will then be turned into a courtyard enhancing the entrance to the nearby Spode site.
Earlier this week Pochin, the company building the Clayworks apartment block and the Hilton Garden Inn in Hanley went into administration. Work on both sites has been halted, Richard Ingram a partner at developers Genr8 told the Sentinel on Tuesday the company was ‘implementing a plan to ensure the successful delivery of both sites’
How long it might be before work resumes is up there with the length of a piece of string as one of life’s great imponderables.
The decades immediately after the war were not glorious ones for the design of British cities. Grand statements of civic pride built by industrialists during the Victorian era were swept away by a tide of modernism, along with whole neighbourhoods built to house their workers.
In their place came a townscape of concrete blocks, some reaching for the sky, others squatting close to the ground under flat roofs. The results were seldom happy with shoddy workmanship and a lack of consideration for the people who would live in them causing problems almost from day one.
Tower blocks weren’t the ‘streets in the sky’ their architects imagined, instead they became breeding grounds for alienation and social division. Shopping centres built from concrete crumbled into dereliction becoming eyesores avoided by all but the dispossessed.
It is hardly surprising that Ian Fleming named the villain in one of his James Bond novels after Arno Goldfinger, a leading advocate of high rise living. Locally it doesn’t cause you to do a double take to find out that the former Hanley bus station opened in 1967 ended its days as the set for a zombie film.
It is ironic then that the fate of Gordon House, an undistinguished bit of sixties architecture, should be so significant. In other circumstances its demise would be if not something to celebrate, then certainly no cause to mourn.
As it happens though Gordon House is home to several successful businesses, the council has offered to help them relocate to other sites in Stoke town, but the owners fear they won’t survive the move. They have good reason to be apprehensive, Kingsway is one of the few parts of Stoke where there is a guarantee of passing trade.
The ongoing tribulations up at Smithfield are a reminder of the risk the council took when it decided to dip not so much a toe as a whole leg into the murky waters of property development.
The council put down £6.9 million of its, meaning our, money down in the form of a loan to developers Gener8 to build the Hilton Garden Inn. Ever ebullient council leader Abi Brown told the Sentinel that despite the current difficulties the council ‘expect the final works to be completed and for the two sites to be fully delivered’.
Optimism can be a dangerous thing when it is applied without thought. Anyone who knows about the travails of the nearby bus station site, or who has seen the half-built student flats next to the Jubilee Baths in Newcastle will be aware that when property developments go wrong; the tend to go massively wrong.
By investing so much public money in a single project the council have behaved with worrying naivety. Their actions are like those of a novice player with a large bag of money sitting down at a table of card sharps hoping to learn about poker.
Two things are worryingly likely to happen. The council will force the businesses trading from Gordon House to move and probably bring about their closure in the process. A cash funnel will be set up to get things moving again up at Smithfield with we the public promised that short term financial pain will bring long term gains, with the payment date set for the twelfth of never.
If so, the council will be acting rather like those sixties believers in a ‘brave new world’ who covered so much of the real one with concrete. Their vision, be it of building utopia or making a killing on the property market, has blinded them to harsh reality.
Stoke-on-Trent is a city with serious social problems that it is struggling to overcome, as I wrote last week, we need to do so by fixing problems like the lack of a decent public transport network first. This isn’t glamorous and it certainly won’t be quick; but if we don’t success will always be just out of reach.
Only when they have finally done so should the council be thinking about building luxury hotels. Even then they should still go into the process with their eyes open and a firm grip on the purse strings.
Stoke-on-Trent City Council recently announced plans to demolish Gordon House on Kingsway in Stoke town centre. The land it occupies will then be turned into a courtyard enhancing the entrance to the nearby Spode site.
Earlier this week Pochin, the company building the Clayworks apartment block and the Hilton Garden Inn in Hanley went into administration. Work on both sites has been halted, Richard Ingram a partner at developers Genr8 told the Sentinel on Tuesday the company was ‘implementing a plan to ensure the successful delivery of both sites’
How long it might be before work resumes is up there with the length of a piece of string as one of life’s great imponderables.
The decades immediately after the war were not glorious ones for the design of British cities. Grand statements of civic pride built by industrialists during the Victorian era were swept away by a tide of modernism, along with whole neighbourhoods built to house their workers.
In their place came a townscape of concrete blocks, some reaching for the sky, others squatting close to the ground under flat roofs. The results were seldom happy with shoddy workmanship and a lack of consideration for the people who would live in them causing problems almost from day one.
Tower blocks weren’t the ‘streets in the sky’ their architects imagined, instead they became breeding grounds for alienation and social division. Shopping centres built from concrete crumbled into dereliction becoming eyesores avoided by all but the dispossessed.
It is hardly surprising that Ian Fleming named the villain in one of his James Bond novels after Arno Goldfinger, a leading advocate of high rise living. Locally it doesn’t cause you to do a double take to find out that the former Hanley bus station opened in 1967 ended its days as the set for a zombie film.
It is ironic then that the fate of Gordon House, an undistinguished bit of sixties architecture, should be so significant. In other circumstances its demise would be if not something to celebrate, then certainly no cause to mourn.
As it happens though Gordon House is home to several successful businesses, the council has offered to help them relocate to other sites in Stoke town, but the owners fear they won’t survive the move. They have good reason to be apprehensive, Kingsway is one of the few parts of Stoke where there is a guarantee of passing trade.
The ongoing tribulations up at Smithfield are a reminder of the risk the council took when it decided to dip not so much a toe as a whole leg into the murky waters of property development.
The council put down £6.9 million of its, meaning our, money down in the form of a loan to developers Gener8 to build the Hilton Garden Inn. Ever ebullient council leader Abi Brown told the Sentinel that despite the current difficulties the council ‘expect the final works to be completed and for the two sites to be fully delivered’.
Optimism can be a dangerous thing when it is applied without thought. Anyone who knows about the travails of the nearby bus station site, or who has seen the half-built student flats next to the Jubilee Baths in Newcastle will be aware that when property developments go wrong; the tend to go massively wrong.
By investing so much public money in a single project the council have behaved with worrying naivety. Their actions are like those of a novice player with a large bag of money sitting down at a table of card sharps hoping to learn about poker.
Two things are worryingly likely to happen. The council will force the businesses trading from Gordon House to move and probably bring about their closure in the process. A cash funnel will be set up to get things moving again up at Smithfield with we the public promised that short term financial pain will bring long term gains, with the payment date set for the twelfth of never.
If so, the council will be acting rather like those sixties believers in a ‘brave new world’ who covered so much of the real one with concrete. Their vision, be it of building utopia or making a killing on the property market, has blinded them to harsh reality.
Stoke-on-Trent is a city with serious social problems that it is struggling to overcome, as I wrote last week, we need to do so by fixing problems like the lack of a decent public transport network first. This isn’t glamorous and it certainly won’t be quick; but if we don’t success will always be just out of reach.
Only when they have finally done so should the council be thinking about building luxury hotels. Even then they should still go into the process with their eyes open and a firm grip on the purse strings.
Thursday, 1 August 2019
Stoke needs to put all the pieces in place to complete the regeneration jigsaw.
Hanley park is set to benefit from a multi-million-pound makeover with improvements to the pavilion and boathouse and the conversion of a former bowls pavilion into a cafe.
Louise Hodgeson of Caterleisure Group, the company behind the project, told the Sentinel " we are delighted to be coming to Hanley Park, which is a fantastic venue with enormous potential".
As someone who has known and enjoyed Hanley Park since childhood, I'm quite pleased to see them pitch up myself.
Like many people born in the surrounding area I have fond childhood memories of what we always called 'the big park'. Sunny seventies afternoons spent splashing about in the paddling poor or riding in a cart pulled by a friendly shire horse called Samson. An adventure that is, sadly denied children growing up in our health and safety conscious world.
I also have less happy memories of the thirty years of neglect that turned the park into a place you sometimes wouldn't want to visit in daylight. Things have improved over the past decade, but this is the extra push the park needed to get back to its best.
I feel a little less certain about the new hotel and apartments being built just up the road on the Smithfield site. While it is an undeniably positive sight to see cranes on the city's skyline, property speculation is a dangerous game for a local authority to be playing.
Things are looking more hopeful than they did a few years ago, although I can't share the Tigger style enthusiasm of council leader Abi Brown as she repeatedly claims that 'Stoke is on the up'. We are moving in the right direction, but there are still some important pieces missing from the regeneration jigsaw.
The largest and most important of these is the absence of a decent public transport system. Without one the newly refurbished Hanley Park could end up being an island in a sea of congestion; building a luxury hotel is all very well, but the people the council want to stay there will not welcome being stuck in a big-standard traffic jam whenever they step outside.
The message that without a decent transport system Stoke will stay forever on the edge of the prosperity party never quite makes it through to the incumbents of the Civic Centre.
They are massively proud of having secured millions of pounds in government funding to refurbish the area around Stoke station, but this does nothing to improve bus and train services that don't play nicely together. During the recent local elections, a prominent Tory councillor told me that it would be nice to have an integrated transport system like Nottingham, but Stoke is a poor city and businesses couldn't, meaning wouldn't, stump up the cash.
I'd say that's exactly why we need one, the current outdated shambles actively discourages investment. As for businesses stumping up their share of the cost. There will be complaints at first, as there were in Nottingham and other cities, until they realized what a good job it does of attracting investors and customers.
Logistically building an integrated public transport system in Stoke-on-Trent is entirely possible. In fact, as a linear city you could say we have the ideal conditions for building one. The vital element missing is a little imagination on the part of the council.
Building an integrated public transport system would also help to slot into place another piece of the regeneration jigsaw, giving all six towns a slice of the prosperity pie. At present the rising tide lifts only the good ship Hanley, leaving the rest of the fleet pretty much beached.
Better busses and trains and the eventual return of trams to the city’s streets wouldn’t just bring in visitors and investment, it would make it easier and cheaper for local people to get around too. This would leave them with more money in their pockets that could be spent with local businesses.
Sprucing up a much-loved local landmark is a good thing for the council to be doing, particularly one that allows people to enjoy nature in the heart of the city. Building hotels and fancy apartment blocks is a brave statement of optimism about the future.
Any jigsaw though is the sum of all of its pieces, not just the shiny ones that most easily catch the eye. The dull grey-blue ones making up the sky or the sea are just as vital, because without them the full image can never be realized.
The same is true when it comes to regeneration. Until we have a public transport system fit for the twenty-first century Stoke-on-Trent will only ever be halfway towards really being ‘on the up’.
Louise Hodgeson of Caterleisure Group, the company behind the project, told the Sentinel " we are delighted to be coming to Hanley Park, which is a fantastic venue with enormous potential".
As someone who has known and enjoyed Hanley Park since childhood, I'm quite pleased to see them pitch up myself.
Like many people born in the surrounding area I have fond childhood memories of what we always called 'the big park'. Sunny seventies afternoons spent splashing about in the paddling poor or riding in a cart pulled by a friendly shire horse called Samson. An adventure that is, sadly denied children growing up in our health and safety conscious world.
I also have less happy memories of the thirty years of neglect that turned the park into a place you sometimes wouldn't want to visit in daylight. Things have improved over the past decade, but this is the extra push the park needed to get back to its best.
I feel a little less certain about the new hotel and apartments being built just up the road on the Smithfield site. While it is an undeniably positive sight to see cranes on the city's skyline, property speculation is a dangerous game for a local authority to be playing.
Things are looking more hopeful than they did a few years ago, although I can't share the Tigger style enthusiasm of council leader Abi Brown as she repeatedly claims that 'Stoke is on the up'. We are moving in the right direction, but there are still some important pieces missing from the regeneration jigsaw.
The largest and most important of these is the absence of a decent public transport system. Without one the newly refurbished Hanley Park could end up being an island in a sea of congestion; building a luxury hotel is all very well, but the people the council want to stay there will not welcome being stuck in a big-standard traffic jam whenever they step outside.
The message that without a decent transport system Stoke will stay forever on the edge of the prosperity party never quite makes it through to the incumbents of the Civic Centre.
They are massively proud of having secured millions of pounds in government funding to refurbish the area around Stoke station, but this does nothing to improve bus and train services that don't play nicely together. During the recent local elections, a prominent Tory councillor told me that it would be nice to have an integrated transport system like Nottingham, but Stoke is a poor city and businesses couldn't, meaning wouldn't, stump up the cash.
I'd say that's exactly why we need one, the current outdated shambles actively discourages investment. As for businesses stumping up their share of the cost. There will be complaints at first, as there were in Nottingham and other cities, until they realized what a good job it does of attracting investors and customers.
Logistically building an integrated public transport system in Stoke-on-Trent is entirely possible. In fact, as a linear city you could say we have the ideal conditions for building one. The vital element missing is a little imagination on the part of the council.
Building an integrated public transport system would also help to slot into place another piece of the regeneration jigsaw, giving all six towns a slice of the prosperity pie. At present the rising tide lifts only the good ship Hanley, leaving the rest of the fleet pretty much beached.
Better busses and trains and the eventual return of trams to the city’s streets wouldn’t just bring in visitors and investment, it would make it easier and cheaper for local people to get around too. This would leave them with more money in their pockets that could be spent with local businesses.
Sprucing up a much-loved local landmark is a good thing for the council to be doing, particularly one that allows people to enjoy nature in the heart of the city. Building hotels and fancy apartment blocks is a brave statement of optimism about the future.
Any jigsaw though is the sum of all of its pieces, not just the shiny ones that most easily catch the eye. The dull grey-blue ones making up the sky or the sea are just as vital, because without them the full image can never be realized.
The same is true when it comes to regeneration. Until we have a public transport system fit for the twenty-first century Stoke-on-Trent will only ever be halfway towards really being ‘on the up’.
Thursday, 18 July 2019
Local government is eight electoral cycles away from achieving gender balance.
A century on from women winning the vote local politics in England is still a long way away from representing both genders equally.
At the local elections held in May this year 8410 councilors were elected in England, just 34% of these were female. On 14% of councils female councilors are outnumbered three to one by male colleagues.
There has been a small increase in representation since the 2015 local elections. Out of the three main parties the percentage of female Labour councilors has risen to 40% from 37%; for the Tories the number has gone up from 26% to 30%; the Liberal Democrats remain unchanged on 33%.
Smaller parties also show variable levels of representation, 44% of Green Party councilors are women, compared to 20% for Ukip. Out of 2686 Independents elected 28% are women.
The Fawcett Society, a leading campaign group on women's issues, has published data suggesting it could take another 32 years to achieve a gender balance.
Over the past two years the Fawcett Society has worked with the Local Government Information Unit and Women2Win to produce three reports on local government reform. This latest report was produced in partnership with Democracy Club.
Democracy Club is an online based organization that works to improve access to information about the democratic process and identify ways of improving voter engagement.
All three reports found that female councilors are held back by structural and cultural barriers within the local government system as currently organized.
Fawcett Society chief executive Sam Smethers said that although national attention was currently focused on Brexit a shortage of women on local councils meant 'vital issues like cars for older people, planning decisions and council tax will continue to be decided by men'.
The Fawcett Society is calling for the three main parties to do more to engage women in local government by setting targets to improve representation. They also want to see more data gathered on candidate diversity and better availability of childcare and disability support.
Sam Smethers said that with most seats going to incumbents at the last election 'the space for change is limited, all of the parties need to set out their plan of action to change this; now'.
At a time when the protracted dispute over Brexit and rising levels of inequality are creating social and political tensions it is more important than ever that local and national government is representative.
The findings of the Fawcett Society, backed by those of other campaign groups, show that that is far from the case.
This, as Sam Smethers says means decisions that impact on the lives of everyone are taken disproportionally through the viewpoint of a single gender. The result can only ever be an increase of the structural inequalities that are proving so dangerously divisive.
There is also a case to be made that a more gender equal legislature in both local and national politics would change the way the system operates. Hopefully this would see a change in the language of politics away from conflict towards conciliation and reasonable compromise.
The benefits of change are clear; as are the risks inherent in retaining a status quo that has outlived its relevance. What is much less clear is how a local government system battered by austerity and where parties often struggle to find candidates of either gender can find the impetus to bring it about.
At the local elections held in May this year 8410 councilors were elected in England, just 34% of these were female. On 14% of councils female councilors are outnumbered three to one by male colleagues.
There has been a small increase in representation since the 2015 local elections. Out of the three main parties the percentage of female Labour councilors has risen to 40% from 37%; for the Tories the number has gone up from 26% to 30%; the Liberal Democrats remain unchanged on 33%.
Smaller parties also show variable levels of representation, 44% of Green Party councilors are women, compared to 20% for Ukip. Out of 2686 Independents elected 28% are women.
The Fawcett Society, a leading campaign group on women's issues, has published data suggesting it could take another 32 years to achieve a gender balance.
Over the past two years the Fawcett Society has worked with the Local Government Information Unit and Women2Win to produce three reports on local government reform. This latest report was produced in partnership with Democracy Club.
Democracy Club is an online based organization that works to improve access to information about the democratic process and identify ways of improving voter engagement.
All three reports found that female councilors are held back by structural and cultural barriers within the local government system as currently organized.
Fawcett Society chief executive Sam Smethers said that although national attention was currently focused on Brexit a shortage of women on local councils meant 'vital issues like cars for older people, planning decisions and council tax will continue to be decided by men'.
The Fawcett Society is calling for the three main parties to do more to engage women in local government by setting targets to improve representation. They also want to see more data gathered on candidate diversity and better availability of childcare and disability support.
Sam Smethers said that with most seats going to incumbents at the last election 'the space for change is limited, all of the parties need to set out their plan of action to change this; now'.
At a time when the protracted dispute over Brexit and rising levels of inequality are creating social and political tensions it is more important than ever that local and national government is representative.
The findings of the Fawcett Society, backed by those of other campaign groups, show that that is far from the case.
This, as Sam Smethers says means decisions that impact on the lives of everyone are taken disproportionally through the viewpoint of a single gender. The result can only ever be an increase of the structural inequalities that are proving so dangerously divisive.
There is also a case to be made that a more gender equal legislature in both local and national politics would change the way the system operates. Hopefully this would see a change in the language of politics away from conflict towards conciliation and reasonable compromise.
The benefits of change are clear; as are the risks inherent in retaining a status quo that has outlived its relevance. What is much less clear is how a local government system battered by austerity and where parties often struggle to find candidates of either gender can find the impetus to bring it about.
Wednesday, 10 July 2019
Stoke council voters to back a climate emergency motion, but is it too little too late?
Members of Stoke-on-Trent City Council approved a motion to declare a Climate Emergency at the meeting of the full council held at the Civic Centre on 4th July.
The motion was proposed by Labour members Candi Chetwynd and Jane Ashworth and called on the council to take clear steps to address the climate crisis.
These included setting up a Climate Change Liaison Group, divesting pension funds held by the council from investments in fossil fuels and working with neighbouring authorities on carbon reduction projects.
The motion also called for the council to take ‘proactive steps to include young people and the public’ in developing a plan of action.
The point about the necessity of tackling climate change now was made with customary eloquence by environmentalist Sir David Attenborough from the stage of the Glastonbury festival the weekend before.
Unsurprisingly for a national treasure expounding on one of the hottest topics of the day he got an ovation louder than the one given to Kylie. Louder too than the one Jeremy Corbyn got in 2017.
There rests the problem, just because an issue is at the forefront of the public consciousness at a given moment, it doesn’t always follow that something will get done about it.
What Labour were doing on that scorching hot Thursday afternoon last week was to introduce a motion that would bring the council, business, campaign groups and most importantly, the public together to tackle climate change.
Moving the motion Councillor Ashworth said that the city and the rest of the country had to ‘listen to scientists’ when they warned about the dangers posed by climate change or risk ‘spiralling into a climate catastrophe’.
Seconding Councillor Chetwynd said that climate change was a ‘monster of our own making’, posing the greatest threat to our society and that the ‘time for action is now!’
Who could disagree with that? The ruling Conservative and Independent group, that’s who.
They went about if not killing the motion, then certainly robbing it of some much-needed oomph through a few, seemingly minor, but strategic changes of wording in an amendment tabled by Councillor Daniel Jellyman.
He spoke about the need to meet the twin challenges of growing the local economy and protecting the environment. The changes he proposed included re-naming the liaison group to make it a ‘commission’ that would ‘hear evidence’ from the public and removing the call for the creation of a plan for Stoke-on-Trent to become carbon neutral in favour to one for ‘addressing climate concerns’.
Despite disapproving looks from several on the Labour benches, including the proposer, the motion was duly passed.
That, you might be tempted to say is a good thing. After all, isn’t it more important to act on climate change than worry about the wording of the call to do so?
Up to a point, however in politics language is hugely important and can often be a barrier to turning good intentions into constructive actions.
Anyone who has ever been involved with a public consultation knows that the gulf between those running it ‘hearing’ evidence from the public and listening to what they say is huge. Particularly if what the public has to say is likely to make things awkward for major corporations with campaign donations to invest.
Addressing climate concerns, rather than coming up with a plan of action allows enough wriggle room to see that nothing beyond publishing a report few people will bother to read gets done.
It is one of the quaint traditions of local government that each meeting of the full council begins with prayers. Last week the cleric leading them called on councillors to act with responsibility on climate change because we hold this world in trust for future generations.
Even allowing for hyperbole if half of what scientists say about the speed and severity of climate change is true; then the time for such self-serving foolishness is long past.
In these doubting days I’m not sure how many people in the chamber last Thursday believe in a higher power. I for one though would say amen to that.
The motion was proposed by Labour members Candi Chetwynd and Jane Ashworth and called on the council to take clear steps to address the climate crisis.
These included setting up a Climate Change Liaison Group, divesting pension funds held by the council from investments in fossil fuels and working with neighbouring authorities on carbon reduction projects.
The motion also called for the council to take ‘proactive steps to include young people and the public’ in developing a plan of action.
The point about the necessity of tackling climate change now was made with customary eloquence by environmentalist Sir David Attenborough from the stage of the Glastonbury festival the weekend before.
Unsurprisingly for a national treasure expounding on one of the hottest topics of the day he got an ovation louder than the one given to Kylie. Louder too than the one Jeremy Corbyn got in 2017.
There rests the problem, just because an issue is at the forefront of the public consciousness at a given moment, it doesn’t always follow that something will get done about it.
What Labour were doing on that scorching hot Thursday afternoon last week was to introduce a motion that would bring the council, business, campaign groups and most importantly, the public together to tackle climate change.
Moving the motion Councillor Ashworth said that the city and the rest of the country had to ‘listen to scientists’ when they warned about the dangers posed by climate change or risk ‘spiralling into a climate catastrophe’.
Seconding Councillor Chetwynd said that climate change was a ‘monster of our own making’, posing the greatest threat to our society and that the ‘time for action is now!’
Who could disagree with that? The ruling Conservative and Independent group, that’s who.
They went about if not killing the motion, then certainly robbing it of some much-needed oomph through a few, seemingly minor, but strategic changes of wording in an amendment tabled by Councillor Daniel Jellyman.
He spoke about the need to meet the twin challenges of growing the local economy and protecting the environment. The changes he proposed included re-naming the liaison group to make it a ‘commission’ that would ‘hear evidence’ from the public and removing the call for the creation of a plan for Stoke-on-Trent to become carbon neutral in favour to one for ‘addressing climate concerns’.
Despite disapproving looks from several on the Labour benches, including the proposer, the motion was duly passed.
That, you might be tempted to say is a good thing. After all, isn’t it more important to act on climate change than worry about the wording of the call to do so?
Up to a point, however in politics language is hugely important and can often be a barrier to turning good intentions into constructive actions.
Anyone who has ever been involved with a public consultation knows that the gulf between those running it ‘hearing’ evidence from the public and listening to what they say is huge. Particularly if what the public has to say is likely to make things awkward for major corporations with campaign donations to invest.
Addressing climate concerns, rather than coming up with a plan of action allows enough wriggle room to see that nothing beyond publishing a report few people will bother to read gets done.
It is one of the quaint traditions of local government that each meeting of the full council begins with prayers. Last week the cleric leading them called on councillors to act with responsibility on climate change because we hold this world in trust for future generations.
Even allowing for hyperbole if half of what scientists say about the speed and severity of climate change is true; then the time for such self-serving foolishness is long past.
In these doubting days I’m not sure how many people in the chamber last Thursday believe in a higher power. I for one though would say amen to that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)