Friday, 3 July 2009

From the Guardian -

hit counter script

Fears for the world's poor countries as the rich grab land to grow food

• UN sounds warning after 30m hectares bought up
• G8 leaders to discuss 'neo-colonialism'

The acquisition of farmland from the world's poor by rich countries and international corporations is accelerating at an alarming rate, with an area half the size of Europe's farmland targeted in the last six months, reports from UN officials and agriculture experts say.

New reports from the UN and analysts in India, Washington and London estimate that at least 30m hectares is being acquired to grow food for countries such as China and the Gulf states who cannot produce enough for their populations. According to the UN, the trend is accelerating and could severely impair the ability of poor countries to feed themselves.

Today it emerged that world leaders are to discuss what is being described as "land grabbing" or "neo-colonialism" at the G8 meeting next week. A spokesman for Japan's ministry of foreign affairs confirmed that it would raise the issue: "We feel there should be a code of conduct for investment in farmland that will be a win-win situation for both producing and consuming countries," he said.

Olivier De Schutter, special envoy for food at the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said: "[The trend] is accelerating quickly. All countries observe each other and when one sees others buying land it does the same."

The UN's food and agricultural organisation and other analysts estimate that nearly 20m hectares (50m acres) of farmland – an area roughly half the size of all arable land in Europe – has been sold or has been negotiated for sale or lease in the last six months. Around 10m hectares was bought last year. The land grab is being blamed on wealthy countries with concerns about food security.

Some of the largest deals include South Korea's acquisition of 700,000ha in Sudan, and Saudi Arabia's purchase of 500,000ha in Tanzania. The Democratic Republic of the Congo expects to shortly conclude an 8m-hectare deal with a group of South African businesses to grow maize and soya beans as well as poultry and dairy farming.

India has lent money to 80 companies to buy 350,000ha in Africa. At least six countries are known to have bought large landholdings in Sudan, one of the least food-secure countries in the world.

Other countries that have acquired land in the last year include the Gulf states, Sweden, China and Libya. Those targeted include not only fertile countries such as Brazil, Russia and Ukraine, but also poor countries like Cameroon, Ethiopia, Madagascar, and Zambia.

De Schutter said that after the food crisis of 2008, many countries found food imports hit their balance of payments, "so now they want to insure themselves".

"This is speculation, betting on future prices. What we see now is that countries have lost trust in the international market. We know volatility will increase in the next few years. Land prices will continue to rise. Many deals are even now being negotiated. Not all are complete yet."

He said that about one-fifth of the land deals were expected to grow biofuel crops. "But it is impossible to know with certainty because declarations are not made as to what crops will be grown," he said.

Some of the world's largest food, financial and car companies have invested in land.

Alpcot Agro of Sweden bought 120,000ha in Russia, South Korea's Hyundai has paid $6.5m (£4m) for a majority stake in Khorol Zerno, which owns 10,000ha in Eastern Siberia, while Morgan Stanley has bought 40,000ha in Ukraine. Last year South Korea's Daewoo signed a 99-year lease for 1.3m hectares of agricultural land in Madagascar.

Devinder Sharma, analyst with the Forum for Biotechnology and Food Security in India, predicted civil unrest.

"Outsourcing food production will ensure food security for investing countries but would leave behind a trail of hunger, starvation and food scarcities for local populations," he said. "The environmental tab of highly intensive farming – devastated soils, dry aquifer, and ruined ecology from chemical infestation – will be left for the host country to pick up."

In Madagascar, the Daewoo agreement was seen as a factor in the subsequent uprising that led to the ousting of the president, Marc Ravalomanana. His replacement, Andry Rajoelina, immediately moved to repeal the deal.

Concern is mounting because much of the land has been targeted for its good water supplies and proximity to ports. According to a report last month by the London-based International Institute for Environment and Development, the land deals "create risks and opportunities".

"Increased investment may bring benefits such as GDP growth and improved government revenues, and may create opportunities for economic development and livelihood improvement. But they may result in local people losing access to the resources on which they depend for their food security – particularly as some key recipient countries are themselves faced with food security challenges", said the authors.

According to a US-based thinktank, the International Food Policy Research Institute, nearly $20bn to $30bn a year is being spent by rich countries on land in developing countries.

ECO TOWNS DOWN

hit counter script

Who killed the eco-town?

How Gordon Brown’s vision for 10 carbon-neutral towns met its demise. Damian Arnold investigates

Eco-towns are dead. Architects, planners and developers alike are asking: who killed them?

Gordon Brown wanted to unveil plans for 10 carbon-neutral communities that would deliver up to 200,000 new homes on cheap government-owned land in the greenbelt by 2020.  The idea was that the eco-towns would be so enthusiastically received that they could simply be parachuted into existing local authority development plans and fast-tracked through the system so that building could get started as quickly as possible. Developers flocked to get involved in what they saw as a great commercial opportunity – all in the name of being green.

For better or for worse, this grand plan is not going to happen. What is going to happen is that, early next month, the government will announce, with great fanfare, the location of Britain’s first ‘eco-towns’. One that will definitely make the cut is Rackheath, a 3,500-home scheme on a former Ministry of Defence site in Norfolk. Another that is strongly tipped to come on stream is St Austell, a 5,000-home scheme on the site of a former china clay pit in Cornwall. Both proposals are local authority-led and are in existing development plans.

But these are not the brave new ‘Brown’s towns’ that were envisaged. ‘Rackheath and St Austell have some possibility of being built,’ said a source close to the eco-towns initiative. ‘Most of the others are absolutely dead in the water. You will never get a development of 10,000-plus homes anywhere in England and drop it out of the sky without a consultation process.’

So what went wrong? One person close to the scheme, who does not wish to be named, says: ‘It goes something like this. Someone told the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG): “Why don’t you propose greenfield sites in the middle of nowhere and call them eco-towns. It will be a great way of beating the system and getting over regional planning guidance”.’

The streamlined government approval was to have been the incentive for developers to invest in the considerable resources, such as transport links and renewable energy sources, needed to create a sustainable community. The reality has been very different. The past year has seen a wave of nimbyism break out from furious people living near to the 15-strong shortlist (which has since been cut to 11, see opposite) of proposed eco-towns. Most do not want new developments near them, however green they are. The number of e-petitions protesting against them on the Downing Street website has swollen from six to nine in recent weeks, with more than 7,200 people registering objections.

In Pennbury, Leicestershire, 11,000 signatures have been collected against the 15,000 homes proposed for nearby Oadby. Actress Judi Dench and Formula One driver Johnny Herbert are among the 6,500 people objecting to plans for 6,000 eco-homes in Middle Quinton. Tennis star Tim Henman’s father, Anthony, is leading the charge in Oxfordshire against the 15,000 new homes planned for Weston Otmoor.
‘We expect between 10,000 and 15,000 signatures… and we have not had a single negative comment against what we are trying to do,’ Henman said.

You can add to this some damning reports, such as the financial viability report carried out by the DCLG, published in March, and reports by the 12-strong Eco-Towns Challenge Panel, appointed by the same government department, which pointed to the risibility of calling developments ‘eco-towns’, when they would effectively be car-dependent communities in the middle of the countryside, with little chance of attracting the massively expensive public transport infrastructure required.

HTA Architects director Ben Derbyshire agrees: ‘DCLG made it clear at the beginning that eco-towns would not go through normal planning procedures, but the goal posts have changed. The government is not offering any planning incentives at all.’

Red or Dead fashion label founder and successful housing developer, Wayne Hemingway, who sat on the government’s Eco-towns Challenge panel, adds that eco-towns will now have to be delivered as part of the local planning process.

He says: ‘After the bankers did their worst on the economy without any regulation, any idea of short-cutting the process has gone. It would provoke an outcry. People are now questioning everything.’

As a result, the eco-towns initiative is dead – it no longer stacks up financially and developers are pulling out. Shadow housing minister Grant Schapps says: ‘The government’s own assessments admitted that only three of the proposals will be viable without public subsidy, thus requiring the taxpayer to bail out private developers.’

Brian Waters, director of planning at HTA, who led a group of architects, developers, engineers and bankers in a ‘delivery consortium’ to look at eco-towns with a view to forming partnerships to build them, confirms that his group has lost interest.

He says: ‘We have given up on the government’s failed eco-towns exercise, because the original prospectus has changed. We were given to understand that the planning process would be different, but that will not be the case. We are now looking at the international market place, such as settlements in Libya.’

The eco-towns’ delivery consortium, which includes practices such as Conran Architects and HTA, property agent Savills and developers Argent and Grosvenor, will not be getting involved commercially in any projects that come forward, he says. Which begs the question: how did the idea of fast-tracking these greenfield developments ever gain credence in the first place?

The Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA) has come under scrutiny. It lobbied strongly for the eco-towns and also happens to include in its subscribed membership many of the developers who went on to bid for them. The TCPA was put in charge of setting the sustainability standards for eco-towns, for which it has received a considerable amount of money from the government – although the charity maintains it has had no involvement in the ‘choice of processes nor potential locations’.

The TCPA has also been accused of an alleged conflict of interest, since some of its leaders acted as consultants to eco-town bidders. Their involvement is unusual as an organisation that has always prided itself on the importance of local consultation. The distinguished planner and TCPA member, Peter Hall, is known to be very uncomfortable that eco-towns could be fast- tracked through the planning system.

In response to the allegations, he TCPA said it had ‘called for a full, public, local inquiry to be held into any eco-town proposal not already allocated in a develop­ment plan’, and that ‘due process [was] vital to the programme’.

With the eco-towns policy in tatters, the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) is now expected to take over the eco-towns program at some point in the next six months. Senior figures at the HCA are reported to have been very unhappy with the agency’s lack of involvement in the process thus far.

Should it assume control of the initiative, it is expected to bring in new sites, some of them in urban areas, such as Barking Riverside, that are already in local plans.

TCPA chief executive Gideon Amos shrugs criticism of eco-towns aside and hails the initiative as a ‘marvellous opportunity’ to deliver a new paradigm for housing design.

He says: ‘One of the advantages of building these new settlements is that there is more space available. It should be possible to make much more imaginative use of green space and to build really high-quality houses and gardens that are really attractive to families.

‘Clearly there has been a lot of opposition, but those who are in favour of eco-town initiatives are not always the ones who shout the loudest. We have formed a group, including Help the Aged, Shelter and the TUC, representing 14 million people, which supports the eco-towns programme. We are still very hopeful that the policy will deliver and that up to five will be announced next month.’

Meanwhile, Hemingway reckons that, even if it was only Rackheath that came forward as an eco-town exemplar, the exercise would still have been a worthwhile one. He says: ‘Just one eco-town would be great.
If you want to change something for the better, you need one great exemplar that is deliverable in order to change people’s hearts and minds.’

RIBA president Sunand Prasad agrees. He says: ‘Although it has taken longer and although, understandably, there are fewer of them that are going to happen now because of the credit crunch, fundamentally the principle of eco-towns can be effective.’

Ironically, however, it is the flawed ‘principle’ of the eco-town that has led to its demise or damnation. According to the tenets of sustainability, eco-towns never really existed as a viable or truly green proposition in the first place. As Design for Homes director David Birkbeck says: ‘There is no such thing as an eco-town in a field in the middle of rural England.’

How they fare:

1 Rackheath, Norfolk

The community of 3,400 homes – the smallest proposal – is a partnership between Barratt Strategic and local authorities in Norfolk. The scheme, on a disused airfield next to an existing village of 1,400 people, is the only one with a Grade A rating for sustainability.
Status: Safe bet

2 St Austell, Cornwall

This scheme of 5,000 homes by
St Modwen Homes and the Bird Group has a good chance of getting the go-ahead, despite the fact that it would have a development deficit of £60 million to £190 million and would need heavy public subsidy to succeed, according to a viability study by the DCLG.
Status: Worth a flutter

3 North-West Bicester, Oxfordshire

In opposing the proposed eco-town at Weston Otmoor nearby, Cherwell District Council has come up with an alternative called North-West Bicester (Cherwell). The scheme has since been included on the DCLG shortlist and has been given a ‘B’ rating for sustainability.
Status: Worth a flutter

4 Pennbury, Leicestershire

The 15,000-home proposal near Oadby has attracted much local opposition, including a protest march and a petition signed by 11,000 people.
Status: Long shot

5 Middle Quinton, Worcestershire

A complaint against the advertising for a proposed ‘eco-town’ at Middle Quinton, near Stratford-upon-Avon, has been upheld by the Advertising Standards Authority, which said advertising for the scheme was ‘likely to mislead’. Judi Dench, John Nettles and former Formula One ace Johnny Herbert are among the 6,500 people objecting to plans for 6,000 eco-homes here.
Status: Long shot

6 Weston Otmoor, Oxfordshire

This scheme for 15,000 homes is predicated on an east-west rail link between Oxford and Cambridge and free public transport to Oxford and Bicester for residents. Studies found that this would cost between £530 million and £590 million. It was given only a ‘C’ rating for sustainability.
Status: Long shot

7 Rossington, Yorkshire

Plans for a 15,000-home eco-town on a former coalfield have been watered down to 5,000 homes. The development could end up with a funding shortfall of up to £45 million. The companies behind the scheme say their proposals need ‘a lot more discussion’ with the government.
Status: Long shot

8 Rushcliffe, Nottinghamshire

The proposed eco-town of 6,000 homes on the former RAF Newton site is a partnership of Defence Estates, The Crown Estate and Newton Nottingham. The local council has voiced concern that the site at RAF Newton is unsuitable for an eco-town.
Status: Long shot

9 Whitehill Bordon, Hampshire

A community of 5,500 homes would be built on a Ministry of Defence site in the Hampshire countryside, but a local campaign against the proposal has gathered pace. It claims that a ‘large slice of the ancient and peaceful parish of Headley has been earmarked for inclusion in the Whitehill Bordon eco-town’.
Status: Long shot

10 Ford, West Sussex

The proposal for up to 5,500 homes on 87 per cent greenfield land at Ford would need large public subsidies, according to a government report. The scheme has attracted robust opposition. A petition objecting to the eco-town has reached 6,500 signatures. Duncan Goodhew, the Olympic Gold Medalist, has become the latest well-known face to lend his support to the protest campaign.
Status: Long shot

11 North-East Elsenham, Essex

A proposal to create up to 8,000 new homes near Saffron Walden is opposed by Uttlesford District Council. It said in a statement in April: ‘Claims made for sustainability and deliverability have not been submitted to rigorous scrutiny.’ Campaigners say that almost the entire population of the villages of Elsenham and Henham (around 3,000 people) is against building the development.
Status: Long shot

12. Coltishall, Norfolk

13. Curborough, Staffordshire

14. Leeds City Region

15. Manby, Lincolnshire

16. Marston Vale, Bedfordshire

17. Hanley Grange, Cambridgeshire

These sites have already been withdrawn from the current shortlist of eco-towns

Status: Dead ducks

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

  • Print
  • Email
  • Save

Related images

Wednesday, 1 July 2009

hit counter script

Letters

The impact of supermarkets on sustainable food production

I was disappointed by the suggestion that supermarkets, and Tesco in particular, were supporting illegal deforestation of the Amazon rainforest (Report, 21 June). The recent Greenpeace report rightly highlights the negative impact of beef production on the Amazon region, where illegal cattle farms are linked to deforestation. We recognise the importance of the Amazon for the crucial role rainforests play in addressing climate change and are full members of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, as well as signatories to the moratorium on soy from the Amazon biome.

The Greenpeace report alleges that two Brazilian suppliers, JBS and Bertin, source cattle from illegal farms in the Amazon region and then ship the beef products to southern Brazil for further processing. We have made it clear to our suppliers that the use of beef from illegally deforested regions is unacceptable and we are working with them to ensure that no illegal beef is used in our products. We have also sought and received assurances from both companies that the beef products they supply to Tesco from the Sao Paolo region have not been made using cattle from the Amazon. Leather is sold on the open market and is more of a challenge, but we are working to see what progress can be made.
Lucy Neville-Rolfe
Executive director, corporate and legal affairs, Tesco

On Saturday night prime time TV, Tesco announced in its advertisement it was proud to offer a £2 chicken, half-price cheddar cheese and free cream with strawberries, it then claimed it offered more and cheaper products than one of its main rivals. I wonder how many British Farmers choked on their Saturday night supper at that claim.

Cheap food offers by Tesco and the like are destroying a sustainable agricultural and food industry. In the long-term these offers won't benefit the consumer. Cheap food is not and never has been sustainable. The world's agriculture is at a point where it soon won't be able to produce enough food to feed the expanding world population. If farmers in the developing nations could profit from their toils, then they would produce most of the food to feed not just themselves, but enough to sell at a profit to feed others. We hear calls for overseas development aid, yet farmers are expected to feed the rest of us at a discount for the benefit of the developed world's consumer.

More and more of our food is being imported. Much of our home-produced food has been produced at an unsustainable price to help this Labour government's aim of controlling inflation. Farmers have had to absorb higher production costs and cope with excessive regulation. They have had to guarantee a supply to the supermarkets, only to see their products undercut by cheaper brands. The demands of the likes Tesco can't for ever be met by its suppliers.
David Brookes
Uttoxeter, Staffs

Tuesday, 30 June 2009

hit counter scriptAvaaz usually sends about one email per week, offering a chance to take quick action on an urgent global issue. If you received this message in error, or would prefer not to receive email from Avaaz, click here to unsubscribe

Thank you for adding your voice to our petition to investigate and regulate factory farms and uphold global health safety standards.

With 200,000 signatures, the petition will be delivered to UN Dr Margaret Chan, Director-General of WHO in Geneva with a herd of cardboard pigs.

We will add a pig with every thousand signers. To make the message more powerful tell your friends and family by sending them the following link or the Email below:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/swine_flu_pandemic/97.php?cl_tta_sign=18da1f48ec99593ae525e9109a6bf032

Thanks again for your help,

Alice, Pascal, Graziela, Paul, Ben, Paula, Brett, Luis, Ricken, Iain, Margaret and the Avaaz team

------

Here's the full Email from Avaaz:

Dear friends,

No-one yet knows whether swine flu will become a global pandemic, but it is becoming clear where it came from – most likely a giant pig factory farm run by an American multinational corporation in Veracruz, Mexico.(1)

These factory farms are disgusting and dangerous, and they're rapidly multiplying. Thousands of pigs are brutally crammed into dirty warehouses and sprayed with a cocktail of drugs -- posing a health risk to more than just our food -- they and their manure lagoons create the perfect conditions to breed dangerous new viruses like swine flu. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) must investigate and develop regulations for these farms to protect global health.

Big agrobusiness will try to obstruct and scuttle any attempts at reform, so we need a massive outcry that health authorities can't ignore. Sign the petition below for investigation and regulation of factory farms and tell your friends and family and we will deliver it to the UN agencies. If we reach 200,000 signatures we will deliver it to the WHO in Geneva with a herd of cardboard pigs. For every 1000 petition signatures we will add a pig to the herd:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/swine_flu_pandemic/97.php?cl_tta_sign=18da1f48ec99593ae525e9109a6bf032

Last week the flu was all that we talked about -- Mexico has been nearly paralysed and across the world leaders halted air travel, banned pork imports and initiated drastic controls to mitigate the spreading virus. As the threat shows signs of subsiding the question becomes where it came from and how we stop another outbreak.

Smithfield Corporation, the largest pig producer in the world whose farm is being fingered as the source of the H1N1 outbreak, denies any connection between their pigs and the flu and big agrobusiness worldwide pays huge sums of money for research to argue that biosafety is ensured in industrial hog production. But the WHO has been saying for years that 'a new pandemic is inevitable'(2) and experts from the European Commission and the FAO have cautioned that the rapid move from small holdings to industrial pig production is in fact increasing the risk of development and transmission of disease epidemics. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warn that scientists still do not know the extent that infectious compounds produced in factory farms affect human health.(3)

Studies abound of the horrific conditions endured by pigs in concentrated large-scale operations, and the devastating economic impact on small farmer communities of bloated large-scale operations.(4) Smithfield itself has already been fined $12.6m and is currently under another federal investigation in the US for toxic environmental damage from pig excrement lakes.(5)

But even with all of this damaging evidence, a combination of increased global meat consumption and a powerful industry motivated by profit at the cost of human health, means that instead of being shut down - these sickening factory farm operations are propagating around the world and we are subsidising them (6). In the wake of this swine flu threat, let's hold industrial pig producers to account. Sign the petition for investigation and regulation:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/swine_flu_pandemic/97.php?cl_tta_sign=18da1f48ec99593ae525e9109a6bf032

If we resolve this global health crisis boldly by reassessing our food consumption and production, and urgently calling for an inquiry into the impact of factory farms on human health, we could put in place tough farm practice rules that will save the global population from future animal borne lethal pandemics.

http://www.avaaz.org/en/swine_flu_pandemic/97.php?cl_tta_sign=18da1f48ec99593ae525e9109a6bf032

in hope,

Alice, Pascal, Graziela, Paul, Brett, Ben, Ricken, Iain, Paula, Luis, Raj, Margaret, Taren and the whole Avaaz team

(1) Biosurveillance report tracing the disease to the Smithfields farm: http://biosurveillance.typepad.com/biosurveillance/2009/04/swine-flu-in-mexico-timeline-of-events.html
Reports on the link between the Mexican factory farm and the flu:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/for-la-gloria-the-stench-of-blame-is-from-pig-factories-1675809.html
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-fg-mexico-flu28-2009apr28,0,1701782.story
http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=can-swine-flu-be-blamed-on-industri-09-05-01
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227063.800-swine-flu-the-predictable-pandemic.html?full=true
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/swine-flu-outbreak----nat_b_191408.html

(2) WHO pandemic information
http://www.euro.who.int/influenza/20080618_19

(3) FAO, EC and CDC reports on the risks of industrial farming on public health
FAO and CIWF and http://www.cdc.gov/cafos/about.htm

(4) CIWF and PETA video reports of the disgusting conditions for animals in factory farms and the disease ridden manure swamps:
CIWF and PETA

(5) Reports on Smithfield's animal welfare and environmental damage
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/for-la-gloria-the-stench-of-blame-is-from-pig-factories-1675809.html

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/press/releases/new-report-highlights-the-trouble-with-smithfield-article03132008

http://avaazimages.s3.amazonaws.com/SmithfieldJan08.pdf

(6) Reports on UK tax payers subsidising factory farms http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/agriculture/farming/5225298/Taxpayers-forking-out-700-million-for-factory-farming-in-England.html


ABOUT AVAAZ
Avaaz.org is an independent, not-for-profit global campaigning organization that works to ensure that the views and values of the world's people inform global decision-making. (Avaaz means "voice" in many languages.) Avaaz receives no money from governments or corporations, and is staffed by a global team based in Ottawa, London, Rio de Janeiro, New York, Buenos Aires, and Geneva. Call us at: +1 888 922 8229 or +55 21 2509 0368

Click here to learn more about our largest campaigns.

Don't forget to check out our Facebook and Myspace and Bebo pages!
You are getting this message because you signed "Swine flu: investigate and regulate" on 2009-05-07 05:20:08 using the email address timwaygood@btconnect.com.

To ensure that Avaaz messages reach your inbox, please add avaaz@avaaz.org to your address book. To change your email address, language settings, or other personal information, go here, or simply go here to unsubscribe. To contact Avaaz, please do not reply to this email. Instead, write to info@avaaz.org. You can also call us at +1-888-922-8229 (US) or +55 21 2509 0368 (Brazil)

If you have technical problems, please go to http://www.avaaz.org

Open Letter

hit counter script
Dear Fellow Occupant of Earth,

We are Agrarian Renaissance. We exist to help reconnect people, land and food.

The idea (in reference to a Chatham House report from last year) is: if what seems to be an impending global food crisis is not 'just a blip', and if we want to avoid social, economic and environmental 'breakdown', then we must choose between 2 potential futures...
1/. rapid technological innovation to make industrialised, linear, input dependent agriculture somehow sustainable
2/. the ushering in of a 'new era' of ecological, complex, non-linear, cyclical agriculture.
This is actually a non-debate. Ecological farming could be feeding the world already (I can prove it, but want to remain brief).

Despite 'sustainability' innovations, the impacts and inputs of industrial agricultural systems are only going up.

So, we are trying to do all we can to take action to create that 'New Era'... it entails a new agrarianism, a reconnection (and then redoubled interconnection) of people, land and food... that means a massive cultural shift, amounting to a full renaissance... hence Agrarian Renaissance...

There are billions of pounds in subsidies, and the fortunes of the largest supra-national corporations in the world, behind the linear agro-industrial status quo... but already implementing the alternative are endless isolated pockets of practical action and clear thinking, actively demonstrating what is clearly a better way... we already have a strong group of committed individuals and organisations engaged with Agrarian Renaissance, across a dizzying range of specialisms and interests...

If you are at all interested to find out more about what we're trying to do, you'd be more than welcome to visit Church Farm - the place where the idea for Agrarian Renaissance first germinated, and the pilot farm for the project...

All the best,

A League of Gentlefolk

More Good Talk

hit counter script

Sustainability and/or 'green growth'

Major world economies aim for "green growth" as the way out of the crisis

25/06/2009 - The world’s main economies are looking to “green growth” as the way forward out of the current crisis, opening up new prospects for climate-change negotiations ahead of the 15th Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP15) in Copenhagen in December.

Ministers from 40 countries, representing 80% of the world economy, discussed the crisis and where next at the OECD's annual ministerial meeting in Paris. Participants included the 30 OECD member countries plus five countries that are candidates for membership, Chile, Estonia, Israel, Russia and Slovenia, and five major economies with which the OECD has a policy of ‘enhanced engagement’ -- Brazil, China, India, Indonesia and South Africa.

In a Declaration on Green Growth signed by all 30 OECD countries plus Chile, Estonia, Israel and Slovenia, ministers tasked the OECD with developing a Green Growth Strategy bringing together economic, environmental, technological, financial and development aspects into a comprehensive framework. A first report will be delivered to the OECD’s next Ministerial Council Meeting in 2010.

Watch the press conference

>> Read the ministerial conclusions http://www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2009doc.nsf/LinkTo/NT00004882/$FILE/JT03267276.PDF

>> Read the declaration on green growth http://www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2009doc.nsf/LinkTo/NT00004886/$FILE/JT03267277.PDF

>> Read the discussion paper Green Growth: Overcoming the Crisis and Beyond

>> Visit the meeting website

http://www.oecd.org/document/63/0,3343,en_2649_201185_43164671_1_1_1_1,00.html

__._,_.___

I Think

hit counter script

We all have to learn that it is foolish to try and manage nature, we should harness it.

All we need to change our world of food and farming is to connect those who want to eat and those who want to produce, customers and enterprise can change things.

Those who don't give a shit about where their food comes from and know the price of everything yet the value of nothing....

.....are ironically eating shit... literally in the case of chicken.... every day.

Has anyone else noticed that what is fat has changed, fat people used to look different, now a lot of them have fat in funny places..... is this due to what us fatties eat? In my case I think so...

Personally in last two years never felt fitter, and lost 2 stone. Only real change is a bit of mild excercise and stopping eating shit.
hit counter script

Sunday, 28 June 2009

hit counter script

Burka Debate

hit counter script

Farming in World War 2

Agriculture During World War II

Agriculture underwent considerable changes during the war years. Because of difficulties getting food from other parts of the world Britain had to rely on home production and food rationing was introduced. The government encouraged people to "dig for victory" by using every available area of land for growing crops including gardens and parks in towns. With many men away fighting in the war, women had to become a large part of the agriculture workforce.

Key Facts and Figures

Between 1939 and 1944 in England and Wales:

* Arable land increased in area by 63%
* Wheat, barley and potato crops almost doubled
* Oats production rose by two thirds
* Total agricultural workers increased by 22%
* Cattle numbers increased by 6%
* Pig numbers decreased by 58%
* Fowl numbers decreased by 46%
* Sheep numbers decreased by 30%
* Hay production fell by one third
* Tractor numbers increased by 50% between 1942 and 1944.

Acreage of Crops

In June 1939 the agricultural area of England and Wales was 30,251,000 acres. This comprised 15,709,000 acres of permanent grass, 8,934,000 acres of arable land and 5,608,000 acres of rough grazing (of which 1,428,000 was on commons). A certain amount of old grassland had been ploughed up before the outbreak of war under the encouragement of the ploughing grant of £2 per acre. With war imminent, the conversion of grassland into arable land was increased both voluntarily and under directions served by the County War Agricultural Executive Committees.

The arable land area increased by 63% from 8,934,000 acres in 1939 to 14,566,000 acres in 1944 due to conversion from grassland. This compares to the maximum arable area during World War 1 of 12,399,000 acres in 1918.

Saturday, 27 June 2009

A must visit

hit counter script
http://www.pigbusiness.co.uk/

From Treehugger.com

hit counter script

omborg Caught off Guard by Pawlyn's Robust Argument for Restorative Design (VIDEO 1 of 3)

by Leonora Oppenheim, London, UK on 06. 9.09
Design & Architecture
Buzz up!

Michael Pawlyn debates with Bjorn Lomborg photo.jpg

As you can imagine TreeHugger is always keen to hear of someone taking influential climate change skeptic Bjorn Lomborg down a peg or two, whether it's Stephen Colbert or Joe Romm or, as happened most recently, the British architect Michael Pawlyn of Exploration. Pawlyn, he of the incredible Sahara Forest Project, caught a visibly shaken Lomborg off guard at the British Council for Offices 2009 conference with an unequivocal dismantling of Lomborg's economic theories of cost of climate change by arguing for restorative architecture inspired by nature. Click through to check out Part 1 of Pawlyn's presentation...

Watch out for Part 2 of Pawlyn's presentation which goes on to explain how the Sahara Forest Project can create zero carbon food, renewable energy and abundant fresh water in some of the most water stressed areas on the planet.

Via: Exploration

More on Michael Pawlyn
Incredible Sahara Forest Project to Generate Fresh Water, Solar Power and Crops in African Desert
Lessons in Biomimicry - Part 1 Natural Forms
Lessons in Biomimicry - Part 2 Natural Systems
Lessons in Biomimicry - Part 3 Natural Processes

More on Bjorn Lomborg
Colbert does Bjorn Lomborg
Joe Romm on Bjorn Lomborg
Demolishing Lomborg's Cool It
Where Have All the Climate Deniers Gone?

Friday, 26 June 2009

The Great Land Grab - thanks Rob

hit counter script

Alexandra Spieldoch | June 18, 2009

Editor: John Feffer

Foreign Policy In Focus

Close to a billion people in the world are hungry, and there is growing poverty, unemployment, and displacement in the rural sector. The world community is in widespread agreement about the urgency of more investment in agriculture. The food crisis, partly characterized by unstable markets and low reserves, has led governments to seek measures to meet their food security needs more directly than through global trade. Even though this year's harvest was good and there was some replenishment of global stocks, there's no certainty of what markets will look like next year.

Governments and corporations looking to outsource food and energy more directly themselves are promoting a new wave of land acquisitions, also known as "land grabs." Persian Gulf states are working out land deals in Africa, Asia, and Eastern Europe. India has set up agricultural projects in Brazil. South Korea recently tried to buy up nearly half of the island of Madagascar.

"If food was ever a soft policy issue before," editorializes The Financial Times, "it now rivals oil as a basis of power and economic security." Control over the land that produces this power remains as critical today as it was in the past.

The Real Deal

Among the extraordinary number of new land deals, some have resulted in contracts while others have fallen through. Journalists have reported on the details of the deals, but so far there is little solid research from which to draw. Still, the deals are happening to such a degree that the World Bank and the UN are developing Codes of Conduct for Foreign Land Acquisition. The African Union will also publish investment guidelines in July, and Japan is pushing the G8 to get behind them. New websites tracking these land deals include the international land coalition and GRAIN.

Foreign investment deals in agriculture are nothing new. In colonial times, European countries established plantation economies in Africa, Asia, and Latin America to export food. Today there is large-scale investment in mining natural resources and contract farming as a means to source global supply chains. Yet these new land grabs are mammoth. The Economist reports that whereas land deals in Sudan used to be around 240,000 hectares, today's deals are three times as large. Before it fell apart, the proposed land deal between Madagascar and the South Korean company Daewoo would have included nearly half of the country's arable land. The lease would have lasted 99 years, with virtually no required taxes or other benefits flowing back to Madagascar or to the local community. Not surprisingly, the public in Madagascar rose up in protest, which contributed to the overthrow of the government.

During colonial times and in the recent past, developing countries exported cash crops such as cocoa and coffee. Now they are now exporting basic food staples. In many developing countries where land acquisition is taking place, the populations are already food insecure. So why are they exporting food crops instead of feeding their populations? For example, Ethiopia is the largest recipient of food aid from the World Food Program, but is also outsourcing food to Saudia Arabia. Cambodia, Niger, Tanzania, and Burma are other examples of countries receiving aid and also serving as host countries for foreign land acquisition.

Who's Behind the Grab?

Contrary to past trends, countries in the Global South are initiating much of the investment. The Persian Gulf States, including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, are investing in many parts of Africa, as well as Asia and Eastern and Central Europe. These countries are rich in energy but lack arable land and water. For example, Saudi Arabia has acquired land in Sudan to plant wheat, which is inefficient to grow at home. China is also buying up large tracks of land throughout Africa to produce biofuels and to produce food. India's companies have formed a consortium to invest in corporate farming of oilseeds in Latin America, most notably Uruguay and Paraguay.

Companies seeking more stable long-term profits are investing in agricultural land. In countries that already have shaky governments or civil war, foreign corporate investment may not end up being that stable or even profitable. Deals have already fallen through because of the risk. Others firms like UK Sunbiofuels are ignoring the risks and moving full-steam ahead with investment in crops such as sugarcane for ethanol in Tanzania.

From the land deals, developing countries hope to gain more investment in infrastructure such as roads, ports and other facilities. They hope to acquire more technology, research and science. Their farmers need jobs and a place in the global market. Over the past few decades, as part of structural adjustment requirements and other domestic measures to facilitate trade, many developing countries have disinvested from their agriculture. International investment flows into these countries have also declined.

The result is that today, many countries lack productive capacity to grow and provide food for their populations. For example, most Least Developed Countries are now dependent on food imports and lack capacity to be self-sufficient in food production. To countries starved of investment and with little except natural resources to offer the global market, land deals are deceptively attractive.

Struggle for Land

The operative word in all of this is "land." Countries are diverting high-quality land from production for local and national economies to create large-scale plantations focused on feeding other nations. What governments might deem as marginal or unused land to sell may very well be meeting an important share of rural people's household needs, especially in the poorest households. Uncultivated land has many uses such as for animal grazing, wild foods, medicinal plants, and even water.

Land disputes for control of natural resources and food are inevitable. Land struggles have been and still are violent and destabilizing. Identity, culture, justice, and governments' legitimacy are closely tied to these power struggles. To superimpose foreign investment on areas that are already fraught with violent land disputes requires a great deal of sensitivity. This isn't a situation that can be captured in a simple cost-benefit analysis. Many of these deals reinforce the existing imbalances between haves and have-nots. Few of the deals acknowledge the poverty and power discrepancies that mar the context in which the deals are made.

A Better Deal

Foreign direct investment could provide all kinds of new opportunities for developing countries in need of resources. Such investment can help them achieve food sufficiency and food security within their borders, to restore the land with sustainable practices, and to promote long-term development. If the end goal is really to resolve the food and climate crises, all investment flows should be assessed based on their ability to achieve this.

Governments should articulate a national vision based on these goals. All investment measures should be transparent, participatory and accountable to those who will be most impacted, such as smallholder producers. A mandatory review of land use and land rights would be essential to understanding potential impacts and how to promote investment that makes sense for communities and their culture and environment. All national investment plans should be assessed based on international human rights obligations.

The convergence of the energy, land, and climate crises serves as a reminder of the limits to growth. The majority of these land deals could worsen the food crisis and the struggles associated with land use, human rights, and environmental degradation. To bring us back from the edge of resource depletion, governments need to increase aid for investment in small-scale producers and also regulate all investment so that it meets food security goals and promotes the realization of people's rights. This means promoting democratic consultation and transparent contracts. And it means promoting climate-friendly production methods based on smaller-scale, diversified planting systems rather than large plantations growing one commodity for export.

This article is based on a longer piece written by Alexandra Spieldoch and Sophia Murphy, to be published by the Woodrow Wilson International Center in summer 2009.

Alexandra Spieldoch, a Foreign Policy In Focus contributor, is also the director of the Trade and Global Governance program at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), an organization which works locally and globally to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.

WATCH PIG BUSINESS!

hit counter script

On 30 June More 4 will broadcast PIG BUSINESS, a shocking exposé of the secretive world of corporate pig farming. We see who pays the true cost of ‘cheap’ pig meat – the appalling conditions of factory farms endured by animals, workers and neighbours, environmental pollution and the destruction of rural economies

You’ve probably heard that Swine Flu emerged just downwind of a swine plant owned by Smithfield, a giant multinational corporation and the world’s biggest pig meat processor - no great surprise as overcrowded pig factories are incubators of disease and superbugs.

Smithfield, the world’s biggest pig meat processor, does not want the truth to get out. They have already managed to stop the film being broadcast once, by threatening a ruinously expensive legal action. Even national newspapers trying to report on the film have been bullied into silence.
Though The Mail, The Sunday Mail and The Mirror, have all tried but failed to get an article about the film past their lawyers, See below for today's Irish Independent article
best wishes Tracy

Intensive farming practices might be breeding more than pigs

Rosita Sweetman believes swine flu may be a wake-up call alerting us to the dangers of animal 'factories'

By Rosita Sweetman

Sunday June 21 2009

HERE'S the beef: unless we stop big corporations "farming" animals in factories, we're all going to die.

Actually, we may be going to die sooner than we think if the swine flu virus, incubating for years now in the huge industrial hog farms of the USA and Europe, keeps spreading at its current rate: 30,000 cases (and rising) within three months, across 74 countries, leading to 145 deaths. The latest victim -- a 30-something mum in Scotland -- dying just after giving birth to her premature baby.

I know, I know, I thought it was media hype too, and that maybe the dreadful Michael O'Leary of Ryanair was right: swine flu kills poor people in Mexican slums. No one else need worry. Fly on!

Em, no. Swine flu has been around a long time; its granddaddy is the 1918 Spanish flu which killed between 50 million and 100 million people.

Eerily, it's also behaving in similar ways; starting out as a swine-cum-human virus, spreading quickly, first in a mild form, before mutating and returning in virulent form, hitting under-30s hardest (75 per cent of cases), and killing via a "cytokine storm" -- a massive over-stimulation of the immune system.

Experts have been warning for years of the time bomb that is factory farming. Don't get me wrong, I worship rashers and sausages. But the way pork is produced these days is so horrendous (for the animals) and so dangerous (for us), the swine flu scare may be a timely wake-up call.

Some facts: huge corporations, so big they have bank balances larger than those of most countries, control much of the food business. These guys don't believe in farming. A jolly Mr and Mrs Farmer with their rosy-cheeked children and happy animals on a little holding in deepest rural bliss? What a quaint notion!

Smithfield Foods, the corporation at whose plant in Mexico this outbreak of swine flu is believed to have originated, "processes" 27 million pigs in 15 countries, producing sales of $12bn every year. Smithfield has denied any link to the outbreak.

Serendipitously, environmental activist, the Marchioness of Worcester, Tracy Louise Ward, recently took on Smithfield Foods in her film Pig Business, showing just how brutal these vast "hog farms" are. Smithfield Foods was swift to act, blocking the screening of Pig Business on Channel 4, and trying to block a screening at the Barbican Arts Centre in London (the Marchioness put up her own indemnity and got it through).

Smithfield Foods is also after Robert Kennedy Jnr, who appears in the film, for addressing the Polish Senate: (Smithfield Foods) is trying to "get away with something in Poland, that people in the United States now recognise is a catastrophe".

What scientists and doctors are truly worried about is, what happens if swine flu mixes with avian flu? Then we really are in the caca.

And for those who believe pills are the answer, they are central to the problem.

As Dr Michael Greger of the US Humane Society said in a recent File on 4 documentary: "The sheer numbers of animals, the overcrowding, the lack of fresh air, the lack of sunlight -- put all these together and you have this perfect storm environment for the emergence and spread of new, so-called super strains of influenza."

In the Netherlands -- home to more "animal factories" per square kilometre than anywhere else, the long windowless huts horribly reminiscent of Nazi concentration camps-- 30 per cent to 50 per cent of all farmers now carry the superbug MRSA, largely, it is thought, due to the half a million kilos of antibiotics shot into the unfortunate porkers every year.

Tamiflu isn't the answer either. It reduces the time you have the flu by one day. One day! And, if a mutated virus does come back to bite us, brewing up a new anti-viral in time will be tricky.

But do not despair. Natural medicine and natural farming are making a comeback. And Ireland is at the forefront of the development of one of the finest, and oldest, medical systems in the world -- medical herbalism.

Anna Maria Keaveny, architect of Ireland's first degree course in medical herbalism at Cork Institute of Technology, says a Masters will soon be possible, with "clinically trained herbalists ready to take part in research at the highest levels". She is hopeful that the swine flu virus will remain at its current low virulence level.

US President Obama says swine flu is a "cause for concern; not a cause for alarm".

Actually, it seems it is a cause for both

Thursday, 25 June 2009

Wanton Destruction of Small Farmers

hit counter script

In the UK it happened in the 1960's, 200,000 farms of less than 20 acres were deliberately put out of business.... now the last ones in the WORLD are being attacked...

FOUND THIS

Polish farmers fear liquidiation by the European Union

All farmers under ten acres must disappear

français

As in every other country, the Financiers have decreed the death of small farms in Poland, for they are the “pet hate” of globalism. The Polish farmers did not let the Communists seize their land in the 1950. Now they won't let the Financiers do the same thing. The following information is taken from the Jan. 10, 2002 issue of the U.S. Catholic weekly “The Wanderer”:

WARSAW – As Poland moves toward “full membership” in the European Union, its strong peasantry may be headed for the dustbin of history. A casualty of Brussels' bureaucratic efficiency, reported the Christian Science Monitor January 2.

Reporting from Stryszow, Poland, Aric Farnam revealed that European Union agricultural policies call for the liquidation of all farms under ten acres – a death sentence that will affect 1.6 million of the country's two million farms.

“Smallholders are running up against the big-is-beautiful agricultural policies of the European Union, which Poland hopes to join by 2004,” wrote Farnam.

For years, Poland's farmers have suffered under EU agriculture policies, leading to strikes, road blockades and demonstrations, and anti-European Union sentiment resulted in a surprisingly strong showing at the polls last September, when an unexpected 10.2% of the vote was given to anti-EU parties.

One of the major fear factors leading to surprisingly strong showings by the League of Polish Families, a hard-line Catholic party, was suspicion that large chunks of Western Poland – the heart of Poland's peasantry – would fall into the hands of wealthy foreigners, looking for cheap land and well-maintained farms and estates.

Farnam reported that Brussels' bureaucrats claim the small Polish farms are “inefficient, unsanitary, and perpetuate poverty. EU agricultural policy requires that Poland modernize and restructure its farming sector over the next eight months. That means instituting regulations that would keep small farmers from selling their produce, and push more than a million farmers off their land.

“But most Polish farmers are saying no, fearful that they will end up as an even poorer class of urban unemployed.”

Farnam quoted one smallholder as saying: “The Communists tried to force us off of our land in the 1950s, and they failed. We are staying. This is the only life we know, and it suits us fine. Who are those politicians to say our farm is too poor.

“The average farmer here in Southern Poland owns just 10 acres, but most have snug homes, a car, amd even a few other luxuries,” Farnam wrote, even though their produce sells for next to nothing: Wheat is five cents a pound, and five gallons of milk goes for $4.00.

“In its annual report on candidate states issued last month, the EU ranked the great number of small inefficient farms in Poland among the country's most serious barriers to accession. Agriculture accounts for 25% of employment in Poland, as opposed to 4% in the EU.

“The European Commission,” Farnam continued, “maintains that Polish farmers will not be eligible for the same EU subsidies as old members, yet must still comply with standards designed for larger and more modern farms, leaving many Poles wondering if joining the EU is worth the trouble. Since 1996, preliminary restructuring and the implementation of EU standards have contributed to a drop in farm incomes of more than 30% in Poland, a problem compounded by a massive influx of subsidized, factory-farm products from Western Europe to Polish markets...

“Prominent British activist and sometimes adviser to the British Government Sir Julian Rose spoke to the Polish Parliament last spring, begging the Polish Government not to abide by dated EU regulations.

“According to Rose, the same policies devastated his country, putting 1.2 million British farmers out of business and cutting remaining farm incomes by 70%. The results, he says, were pollution, loss of biodiversity, stock epidemics, unhealthy food, and shattered communities.

“`I am in Poland to urge you to fight for the future of your beautiful, diverse, small-scale farms', he said. `Say no to the intensive farming ethic that has destroyed my country'.” (End of The Wanderer's article.)

Comments of “Michael”

Unfortunately, this campaign to reduce the number of farms is global, and Canada is no exception. An article of the Canadian Press released on Feb. 23, 2002, reported that “the Canadian farming industry has been hit with the largest decline in employment in almost 35 years, according to a Statistics Canada report released Feb. 22. Numbers, complied from 1998 to 2001, showed a decrease of 26% in Canadian farming employment, leaving only 313,000 in the industry at the end of 2001.

“The report also states the number of farmers approaching retirement is also high, with 15% expected to retire within the next five years. Farming profits have remained almost stagnant since 1996 and have steadily declined over the past 25 years. In 1975, net profits for farming across the country stood at $2.6-billion, significantly more attractive than last year's rate of $1.1-billion.”

The Polish farmers, who have seen the example of farmers ruined in other nations, are absolutely right to defend their small farms. Pope John XXIII wrote in his encyclical letter Mater et Magistra (n. 115): “It is necessary to modify economic and social life so that the way is made easier for widespread private possession of such things as durable goods, homes, gardens, tools requisite for artisan enterprises and family-type farms.”

Let us call for the implementation of the Social Credit principles, to free farmers and everybody from the snatches of the International Financiers!

From the Guardian

hit counter script
Goldman to make record bonus payout

Surviving banks accused of undermining stability

* Buzz up!
* Digg it

* Phillip Inman
* The Observer, Sunday 21 June 2009
* Article history

Goldman Sachs London office

The London office of Goldman Sachs.

Staff at Goldman Sachs staff can look forward to the biggest bonus payouts in the firm's 140-year history after a spectacular first half of the year, sparking concern that the big investment banks which survived the credit crunch will derail financial regulation reforms.

A lack of competition and a surge in revenues from trading foreign currency, bonds and fixed-income products has sent profits at Goldman Sachs soaring, according to insiders at the firm.

Staff in London were briefed last week on the banking and securities company's prospects and told they could look forward to bumper bonuses if, as predicted, it completed its most profitable year ever. Figures next month detailing the firm's second-quarter earnings are expected to show a further jump in profits. Warren Buffett, who bought $5bn of the company's shares in January, has already made a $1bn gain on his investment.

Wednesday, 24 June 2009

Democracy Now

hit counter script

Our Proposed Logo for Our thing...




hit counter script
Posted by Picasa

Monday, 22 June 2009

From CIWF

hit counter script

Higher welfare alternatives

Higher welfare alternatives to intensive pig farming already exist and are commercially successful.

Free-range system in the UK

Free-range sow and piglets

In the UK, pregnant sows are kept in groups and are often provided with straw for bedding, rooting and chewing.

Around 40% of UK sows are kept free-range outdoors and farrow in huts on their range.

Higher welfare indoor systems

Pigs are kept in groups on solid floors with straw or other material for bedding and rooting.

Although there is no access to the outdoors, there is greater opportunity for natural behaviour, free movement within the pen orshed, less crowding, conflict, boredom and tail-biting. Deep bedded systems allow foraging and comfort.

Sows may still give birth in farrowing crates, but in the better systems they give birth in huts or pens.

Outdoor bred

Sows are kept free-range outdoors with huts for shelter and for having piglets. There are no sow stalls or farrowing crates. The huts are provided with straw. At weaning, the piglets are taken indoors and reared in extensive or intensive conditions.

In these systems, sows have a higher quality of life and are able to act naturally by building nests, rooting, wallowing and foraging. The piglets benefit from the free-range conditions until they are weaned.

Outdoor reared

Piglets spend part but not necessarily all of their lives outside. Outdoor reared pigs are usually, but not always, born outside, without crates or stalls.

Free-range

Whilst there is no legal definition of ‘free-range pork’ we believe this should mean pigs who are outdoor bred and reared: born outside (withoutstalls or crates) and then reared on outside for most of their lives.

Organic pig farming to high welfare standards

Free-ranging pigs

In the best free-range and organic pig farms, the sows and the growing pigs are kept outside for most of their lives.

The piglets stay with their mothers for longer (up to 6 to 8 weeks), mixing of unfamiliar pigs is reduced and tail-docking is not used.

Pigs spend their lives more like they would naturally.

Find out how you can help to end the suffering of intensively farmed pigs.

From the FT

hit counter script

Concerns mount over fresh rise in food costs

By Javier Blas in London

Published: June 10 2009 03:00 | Last updated: June 10 2009 03:00

After a year worrying about the piggy bank, the world economy is turning its attention to the cupboard.

Almost unnoticed, agricultural commodities prices have returned to levels last seen at the start of the 2007-2008 food crisis, prompting concerns about a fresh rise in food costs.

The increase in soyabean, corn and wheat prices - to their highest level in eight to nine months and up more than 50 per cent from their December lows - comes on the back of strong Chinese demand, a forecast of lower supply due to reduced planting, and the impact of a drought in Latin America.

Argentina's crops have been devastated.

"Agricultural markets are fairly nervous," says Sudakshina Unnikrishnan, an agricultural commodities analyst at Barclays Capital in London.

"We are not in the comfortable food surplus environment of the 1980s and 1990s."

The price of soyameal - critical for fattening livestock such as chickens and hogs - has moved above $405 a tonne, a level only seen for a brief period in 1973 and during four weeks at the peak of last year's crisis.

The rise has pushed the price of ready-to-cook chicken in the US to the highest in a decade.

Traders say hedge funds and other big institutional investors, including sovereign wealth funds from the Middle East, have poured money into the agricultural market, helping to drive commodities prices higher as the US dollar weakens.

A repetition of last year's food crisis, when sharply rising prices sparked rioting in some countries, seems unlikely, however.

Even after their surge, soya, wheat and corn prices are well below last year's peaks.

Rice is trading about $550 a tonne, well below its peak last year of more than $1,000 a tonne.

Beef, pork and milk prices remain depressed, further capping the potential for a rise in overall food costs,.

The United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organisation is relatively optimistic, saying that "barring major crop setbacks . . . the food economy looks less vulnerable" to a price spike.

"In spite of strong gains in recent weeks, international prices of most agricultural commodities have fallen in 2009 from their 2008 heights, an indication that many markets are slowly returning into balance," it says.

But private sector analysts and industry executives are less relaxed.

In rare public comments, Christopher Mahoney, a director at Glencore Grain, the secretive trading house based in Rotterdam, warned last week that supplies of some agricultural commodities such as corn and soya were "pretty tight".

Lewis Hagedorn, an agricultural commodities analysts at JPMorgan in New York, describes the situation as one of anxiety but not yet alarm.

"We are approaching a level of concern with respect to inventories in some areas, although we are not presently in a crisis mode. We are not well prepared from a supply and demand balance sheet perspective to absorb any weather-related surprise."

Food companies are taking precautionary measures, building positions in the commodities futures market to hedge against further price rises, says Luke Chandler, director of agricultural commodity markets research at Rabobank in London.

"There is a lot more attention among food companies, particularly after the pain experienced last season," Mr Chandler says.

The immediate concern is soya, both because of its use as food but even more as livestock feed.

Strong Chinese consumption, as the country's diet moves from vegetables to meat, and the crop failure in Argentina, the world's third largest exporter, have created extraordinary pressure on US supplies, sending inventories down to the lowest level in 40 years.

Soyabean prices yesterday hit $12.45½ a bushel, a fresh nine-month high. Soya is trading at the level of April 2008, after rising almost 60 per cent from its December's low.

Soya is, nonetheless, still below last year's record of $16.5 a bushel.

Looking at the 2009-10 season, analysts fear a drop in cereals production, in corn and, to a lesser extent, in wheat, as farmers cut their planted acreage in response to low prices last autumn, higher cost for inputs such as fertiliser and pesticides, and difficulties securing finance in some countries.

Production in countries such as Ukraine and Brazil is down because farmers did not have access to credit.

The International Grain Council, an inter-governmental organisation, forecast that global grains supplies would fall in the 2009-10 season, which starts at the end of the month, to 1,721m tonnes, down 3.4 per cent from 1,782m tonnes in 2008-09.

"World grains production is expected to fall short of use in 2009-10, eroding some of the gains in stocks achieved after the bumper 2008 harvests," the IGC said in its latest monthly report, forecasting a drop in stocks to 328m tonnes, down 4.3 per cent from 2008-09's level of 343m tonnes.

Global grains demand will rise to 1,736m tonnes in 2009-10, up 0.8 per cent from 2008-09 season, the IGC says.

With the US the world's largest corn exporter and wet weather disrupting planting in areas such as Illinois, Mr Mahoney of Glencore, says: "It is essential that we have a good US growing season this year."

The combination of worries is propelling cereal prices.

Corn is trading at the level of January 2008 at the start of the food crisis - about $4.5 a bushel, but still well below last year's record of $7.5 a bushel.

Wheat is lagging behind, trading at the level of October 2007 - at about $6.25 a bushel, still far below the 2008 peak of $13 a bushel.

Even if supply is set to drop this year, a large carry-over from last season will cap any price rally.

"The wheat supplydemand picture is considerably less tight," Mr Mahoney says.

The surge in prices is a reminder of how the world's food security has deteriorated, after years of comfortable surpluses, analysts and executives say.

Mike Mack, chief executive of Syngenta, one of the largest manufacturers of chemicals for agriculture, echoes a widely held view when he says that although the "headlines from the past year on the food crisis have been replaced by those on the economic crisis", the "long-term challenge to produce enough food" has not disappeared.

www.ft.com/foodprices

Sunday, 21 June 2009

Farming - the new cool?

hit counter script

Farming is Cool, Even Sexy

Signaled by Natalie Villalobos on 16 April 2009.
Affiliation: Media
Country: United States

From IFTF Ten Year Forecast: Trend: Are farmers are poised to become the next class of stars in American celebrity? Why not — a sexy farmer is the logical successor to the sexy chefs who currently dominate the cable channels. Farmers are being elevated to objects of lust – this means that American consciousness is undergoing a sea change. Less than a decade ago, farmers were relics from an agricultural past that seemed forgotten by everyone but real estate developers. But as urbanites began to seek out organic produce and decided to forge a closer connection to their food, they began to see its producers in a less — well, redneck — light.

Abstract:

Impact: According to the 2002 census, the average age of farmers was 55, the oldest average to date; just 6 percent of farmers were under 35, reports the National Agricultural Statistics Service. Unsurprisingly, the number of farms total continues to plummet too, as farmers retire and — unable to interest their kids in stepping into their hardworking boots, sell their land to developers. As young farmers are held up as celebrities - and farmings ‘cool’ factor grows in the general population, more young people will see it as a lifestyle/career choice. This will impact the aging demographic, and infuse the industry with values & mission driven entrepreneurs.

From the Guardian - police state?

hit counter script

Video shows surveillance protesters bundled to ground by police

• Women arrested for challenging officer with no badge number
• Footage shows arresting officers binding Fit Watch pair's feet
• IPCC to receive video as concerns grow over police tactics

Watch the video of the protesters' arrest Link to this video

Two female protesters who challenged police officers for not displaying their badge numbers were bundled to the ground, arrested and held in prison for four days, according to an official complaint lodged today.

The incident was caught on camera, and footage shows officers standing on the women's feet and applying pressure to their necks immediately after the women attempted to photograph a fellow officer who had refused to give his badge number.

From the Independent -

hit counter script

Swine flu 'could infect up to half the population'

Health authorities told to set up testing and drug distribution centres in case of autumn outbreak

By Jonathan Owen

Sunday, 21 June 2009


A medical researcher working to produce a DNA test for swine flu, which is spreading more quickly in the UK

afp

A medical researcher working to produce a DNA test for swine flu, which is spreading more quickly in the UK

Primary care trusts are to set up anti-viral drug distribution centres and swine flu testing clinics amid fears that the infection could spread out of control.

The Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, wrote to health authorities last week urging hospitals to test all patients who show signs of flu-like symptoms. He wrote: "Transmission from person to person in this country is increasingly common. There is evidence that sporadic cases are arising with no apparent link either to cases elsewhere in the UK or to travel abroad."

The letter followed an earlier warning from Sir Liam that millions of Britons could fall victim to swine flu in the coming months. Government officials admitted last night that illness rates from the virus could reach 50 per cent.

Primary care trusts are now being briefed to expect that the pandemic could affect as much as 40 per cent of the workforce before the end of the year, with many worried that there could be a surge of cases in the autumn, according to health industry sources.

hit counter script

More pork in the Telegraph -

hit counter script
MPs expenses: Margaret Beckett claimed three more times for hanging baskets
Margaret Beckett, the leading contender for the Commons Speakership, submitted three expenses claims for hanging baskets and garden plants totalling £1,380 despite having previously dismissed a similar claim as a "mistake".


By Alastair Jamieson
Published: 10:00PM BST 20 Jun 2009
Margaret Beckett - MPs expenses: Margaret Beckett claimed three more times for hanging baskets
Margaret Beckett

The former Cabinet minister, who resigned from the Government this month, claimed £543 in 2003, £512 in 2002 and £325 in 2001 for plants to go in hanging baskets, pots and flower beds at her constituency cottage in Derby.

Mrs Beckett, 66, last month told a jeering audience on BBC Question Time that an almost identical claim for £600 in 2005, which was rejected by House of Commons officials, had been a "mistake" that "should not have been made"

Saturday, 20 June 2009

Wanted - For War Crimes

hit counter script
Tony Blair pushed Gordon Brown to hold Iraq war inquiry in private

• Former PM feared facing 'show trial'
• Leak reveals plan to provoke invasion

* Buzz up!
* Digg it

* Toby Helm and Gaby Hinsliff
* guardian.co.uk, Saturday 20 June 2009 21.00 BST
* Article history

Prime Minister Tony Blair

Tony Blair announces on 20 March 2003 that British servicemen and women are engaged from air, land and sea in the war against Iraq. Photograph: PA

Tony Blair urged Gordon Brown to hold the independent inquiry into the Iraq war in secret because he feared that he would be subjected to a "show trial" if it were opened to the public, the Observer can reveal.

The revelation that the former prime minister, who led the country to war in March 2003, had intervened will fuel the anger of MPs, peers, military leaders and former civil servants, who were appalled by Brown's decision last week to order the investigation to be conducted behind closed doors.

Friday, 19 June 2009

RURAL AREAS HIT TWICE AS HARD

hit counter script

You are here: Publications and Records > Commons Publications > Commons Hansard > Daily Hansard - Westminster Hall

24 Mar 2009 : Column 1WH
Westminster Hall
Tuesday 24 March 2009
[Mr. Peter Atkinson in the Chair]
Rural Economy

Motion made, and Question proposed, That the sitting be now adjourned.—(Mr. Watts.)
9.30 am

Mr. James Gray (North Wiltshire) (Con): Although I am glad to have this important opportunity to discuss the rural economy as it faces the dreadful recession that our nation is collectively facing, the title of the debate is, to some limited degree, misleading in the sense that I am not sure that an absolutely clear, easily definable difference can be spotted between the rural economy and the urban economy, so, to some degree, it is a slightly false dichotomy and even risks being, in a way, patronising to our rural communities. It seems to indicate that the rural economy is all about farming, food production, tourism and rural crafts—that kind of thing—whereas by far the largest part of employment in the countryside today is manufacturing. Therefore, to a significant degree, the rural and urban economies are similar. I will come back to the stricter part of the rural economy in a moment.

I am glad to see that a large number of my hon. Friends have joined me. A second Liberal Democrat Member has arrived, so I am glad about that, too. There are one or two Labour Members present as well. This is a good turn-out to discuss these important matters.

Without being unduly constituency-minded, I thought I might use some examples from North Wiltshire, which is predominantly rural in terms of acreage—although most of the people tend to live in market towns and villages—to show how the national recession is affecting rural areas. North Wiltshire is not as rural as some parts of Cornwall or other parts of the west country, or other parts of England; none the less it counts as a rural or semi-rural constituency. Therefore our experience in North Wiltshire may be indicative of the kind of thing that is happening elsewhere.

Many people in my constituency who live in the depths of the countryside are deeply concerned about the announcement yesterday that Honda in Swindon is to cut its production and wages further and will be laying more people off. Who knows what the future of Honda is? It is astonishing to see the biggest employer in Swindon—Honda—shut down entirely. No cars are being produced at all until May. Many of the people in my constituency who work there are concerned about what will happen after May. Will we see an improvement?

Dolby Systems, the computer people in Wootton Bassett, chopped 70 people recently; the Faccenda chicken factory in Sutton Benger closed and lost 200 people; Hygrade meats in Chippenham lost 750 jobs; and the St. Ivel dairy in Wootton Bassett closed, with 250 job losses. It is only some 10 years ago—it is history, in a way—that James Dyson moved his manufacturing capability offshore, leaving Malmesbury in my constituency
24 Mar 2009 : Column 2WH
and going to Indonesia, saying that it was impossible to manufacture vacuum cleaners in a rural area such as mine and preferring Indonesia instead. The net result of all that is that, between June last year and January the number of jobseeker’s allowance claimants in Wiltshire jumped from just under 3,000 to just over 5,000. In six months that figure has nearly, but not quite, doubled and is showing every sign of growing further in the months to come.

Business confidence, which is crucial to the whole thing, has collapsed. Some 66 per cent. of businesses in my area expect turnover and profits to be down in 2009, 50 per cent. are experiencing worsening cash flow and 33 per cent. expect to have reduced their staffing levels further by the end of the year. Whether rural or urban, those businesses are symptomatic of what is happening elsewhere in the economy, both in towns and in the countryside.

Angela Watkinson (Upminster) (Con): My hon. Friend will be aware that even London constituencies have rural parts. Upminster, for example, is 50 per cent. green belt and has farms on its border, where it has a boundary with rural Essex. The local economy depends on many very small businesses that are struggling in the current downturn.

Mr. Gray: My hon. Friend is right. The difference between rural and urban is often blurred, as it is in her constituency. I am glad that, as she inspired me to ask for this debate this morning, she has taken the trouble to come along and contribute to it. I hope that the decimation of the businesses in her constituency is less bad than she is predicting at the moment.

The figures being produced by the Office for National Statistics in respect of elsewhere in rural England are grave: they show that there is more economic inactivity in rural than urban areas and that unemployment is growing faster in rural than urban areas. Some 22 per cent. of firms surveyed in Cumbria have reduced staffing levels and 11 per cent. have made redundancies. The number of people applying for the JSA in Craven has increased by 66 per cent. In the constituency of my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond, Yorks (Mr. Hague), the shadow Foreign Secretary, which is probably one of the most prosperous, leafy areas in England and which has one of the largest Conservative majorities of any constituency, the number applying for the JSA has increased by 67 per cent.—just look at the increased unemployment in the most leafy part of England.

I am most grateful to the Country Land and Business Association, and particularly to John Mortimer of the south-west region who has done a good job in helping me to prepare for today’s debate. He says that there has been a 106 per cent. increase in redundancies in rural areas compared with 57 per cent. in urban areas. Of course, in rural areas the sparser employment patterns mean that job losses are felt even more keenly. In a village with a small number of jobs a relatively small number of redundancies feels like an enormous number compared with an urban area where even a large number might disappear into the background, as it were.

Stuart Burgess of the Commission for Rural Communities—the excellent rural tsar—has said it all in his latest report called “Rural Economies Recession Intelligence”:

24 Mar 2009 : Column 3WH

“Communities and businesses across rural England face increasing deterioration—business closures, job losses, reduced working, lower consumer demand, and difficulty in securing bank funds. Bad news far outweighs the good.”

If that is what the rural tsar appointed by the Prime Minister is saying, he cannot be accused of exaggerating the case.

Before the Minister leaps to her feet and says, “Never mind all that, farming is doing remarkably well,” I remind her that people are saying that it is doing well. The Minister is shaking her head, so I hope that she will not say that. However, there are people who would say that farming is doing remarkably well. By comparison with the last 10 desperate years, farming is slightly better than it was. Nevertheless, the Minister should remember that input prices mean that arable profitability is now looking shaky, that milk is some 8 per cent. down from its high last year and that the average hill farmer’s income is £15,000, which is less than the Government’s official threshold for poverty—so they are below the Government’s poverty level. Lowland farmers are at about £20,000 profitability, which is only just above the Government’s poverty level. So farming may be off its low point, but it is by no means profitable.

There is a worrying development in people’s purchasing habits, and I plead guilty in that regard. My income has not changed at all due to the credit crunch—as Members of Parliament we are paid precisely the same as we were before all this happened—but I have stopped going to Waitrose; I am going to Lidl and Aldi. It is all in the mind and there is no reason to do that, but I am doing it. Lidl and Aldi are reporting booming profits and are doing incredibly well, but they mainly buy their food from overseas. That is worrying for the future.

Dr. Andrew Murrison (Westbury) (Con): I expect that my hon. Friend will, like me, be distressed by the state of the British pork industry, which provides a good example of where imports have increased dramatically in recent years thanks to the Government’s maladroit handling of differential animal welfare standards. Does he agree that one way around that might be to improve labelling so that people at least have the choice to buy British pork, which is reared to extremely high welfare standards, because at the moment that are unable to do so as they do not know what they are buying?

Mr. Gray: My hon. Friend and parliamentary neighbour makes a good point. He could easily have quoted from the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs inquiry into the pig industry, which, among other things, concluded that it is simply absurd that pork sausages, for example, can be labelled “Made in Britain”, when in fact they come entirely from Danish pigs. He makes a good point. The situation that he mentions will make farming ever worse. We are merely exporting our high standards of animal welfare elsewhere. We buy our chickens from Thailand and our beef predominantly from South America.

The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Jane Kennedy): I want to bring the hon. Gentleman back to the subject of where he shops, because I wonder when he last shopped in Aldi. Far be it from me to champion a particular supermarket—I
24 Mar 2009 : Column 4WH
shop in many—but my experience is that one can buy British products, apart from bacon, in Aldi if one is prepared to look for them and be discerning.

Mr. Gray: The Minister is right. I last shopped at Aldi last Saturday. There is a good new Aldi, and also a Lidl, in Melksham, which is in the constituency of my parliamentary neighbour, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Devizes (Mr. Ancram), 2 miles from my house. My other half religiously sends me to Aldi and Lidl in Melksham, despite not having a reason to do so because we could happily afford to go to Waitrose, and should be going to the local farm shops. I shall tell her that when I next speak to her, because we have three or four local farm shops, and we should pay that little extra to support local farmers. Lidl in Melksham will not see me coming through its door as a result of this debate, so I am grateful for the Minister’s intervention on that front.

What about the other great urban myth that prosperous rural people live in quiet, prosperous, comfortable market towns? The Commission for Rural Communities—bless it—says that unemployment in market towns is higher than ever before and that the recession is taking a stronger grip there than elsewhere. The Daily Telegraph recently reported that one in six high street shops will be empty by the end of 2009, and that “retail deserts” are a real risk in most of our semi-urban, semi-rural constituencies. Ofcom recently announced that 15 per cent. of households in the country—the vast bulk of them being in rural areas—have no access to broadband. My constituency office cannot have broadband, which makes it difficult to operate, and small businesses, which are the backbone and the life blood of our rural areas, depend on broadband, and if they cannot have it, they cannot compete with bigger, urban-based businesses.

Compounding all that is the historic inequality of rural areas’ access to essential services of all sorts. In rural areas, 1.6 million people live below the poverty line. The image is of rich people living in the leafy countryside, but 1.6 million of them live in poverty, much of it grinding poverty. Many of them have no car, and they live in terrible conditions and are extremely poor, but because of the image of leafy, green and pleasant countryside the presumption is that areas such as mine are prosperous. That is simply not true. Stuart Burgess described rural poverty as

“a forgotten city of disadvantage”.

Rural poverty and our “retail deserts” are made much worse by the loss of local services such as surgeries, post offices, pubs, village shops, village halls, churches and public transport. All are progressively disappearing from our villages, which makes the poor who live there even more disadvantaged because they rely on those essential services, and the Government have done nothing to support them.

One in 13 rural primary schools has closed since Labour came to power. Only about half of rural households are within 2.5 miles of an NHS dentist or jobcentre, and this year the Government have closed down 20 per cent. more jobcentres, most of them in rural areas such as mine. There is a chronic shortage of affordable rural housing. Not only that, local government in rural areas is among the worst-funded in Britain. Wiltshire receives the lowest revenue support grant of any local authority in England, with the net result that it is difficult to break even on its budgets.

24 Mar 2009 : Column 5WH

What is the solution? I was somewhat encouraged when I glanced at a recent press release from the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on 5 February 2009 which said:

“England’s Rural Businesses will be vital in helping the country through tough economic times”.

I thought that that was good news and sounded interesting. He went on to pledge

“Government support for rural communities and businesses”

and to say that he is

“determined to ensure that rural businesses benefit fully from Government help during the economic downturn.”

It sounds pretty good if the Secretary of State is absolutely committed to helping rural businesses, treating the matter seriously and doing something to help our countryside. I looked forward to reading about radical solutions and real action, but this is what he plans to do:

“So today I am announcing that I will call together the Rural Advocate Stuart Burgess, the chairs of the RDAs and others to look at the impact of the recession on the rural economy and see what further assistance we can give through the National Economic Council.”

Hooray. Goodness, he is going to call together the rural advocate and see what can be done. Thank goodness we have the Secretary of State. Gosh, he really is concerned. But what is he going to do? He is going to report to the National Economic Council. Will that great champion of rural England, the Prime Minister, take great strides to help out my community in Wiltshire? Lord Mandelson of north London or wherever he is from is not exactly the biggest ever champion of rural areas.

Mr. Roger Williams (Brecon and Radnorshire) (LD): Herefordshire.

Mr. Gray: The hon. Gentleman corrects me and says that Lord Mandelson might have gone there once, perhaps on his bicycle, but he is from north London. I have no confidence that he and the Prime Minister have any commitment to doing anything to help our rural communities, and I do not believe that the much-lauded press release on the subject from the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs stands for much more than yet more talking, yet more websites and yet more focus groups, so there will be more discussions, but no action.

Mr. Williams: I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing this important debate. He drew attention to the parlous state of rural businesses, but one issue that he has not touched on and which the group that the Secretary of State is getting together might consider is business rates, which will rise by nearly 5 per cent. next year because the retail prices index was 5 per cent. in September. It is likely to be minus something today. Is it not ludicrous to put up business rates by 5 per cent. for this year and put an added burden on rural businesses?

Mr. Gray: That is an extremely good point. Business rates in areas such as mine are having a grave effect, and the increase when we are facing deflation rather than inflation in real terms is worrying. In addition, the rates on empty properties, although now reduced thanks to
24 Mar 2009 : Column 6WH
the Government’s late announcement, are still much more than they would have been had buildings simply stood empty.

Another good example is the increase in council tax. It is claimed everywhere to be only 3 or 4 per cent. and even that is quite a lot, but in areas such as mine villages are being brought into towns—Chippenham and Calne—and the increase in council tax resulting from that local government boundary change is 20 per cent. Such factors have a real effect on ordinary people, many of whom fear for their jobs.

I shall try to keep my contribution short, because I know that other hon. Members want to speak. Conservative Members have long called for real, practical, sensible and workmanlike actions that would have an effect on the sort of economic downturn that I have described. We have long called for a national loan guarantee fund to help businesses, particularly small businesses, and we have called for help by deferring VAT bills, cutting tax and national insurance, and cutting red tape for businesses and farms. Those actions would have immediate and real benefits for our wrecked rural economy.

The reality is that in towns and villages alike there is a terrible social price to be paid for the wreckage of the British economy. In Wiltshire, 77 per cent. of residents have reined in their spending in some way, 27 per cent. have seen an increase in their levels of debt, 24 per cent. are concerned about losing their jobs, 10 per cent. believe that they will struggle to pay their mortgage or rent, and 5 per cent. fear repossession of their homes. Rural areas and rural dwellers are facing just as much of an economic disaster, and perhaps a greater one, as urban ones, but our local economy and services are less well poised to survive it. These are grim and gloomy times for our market towns, our farmers, and our villages and country areas alike.
9.48 am

Mr. David Drew (Stroud) (Lab/Co-op): I am delighted to take part in this debate, not least because I have been trying for some weeks to obtain a debate on the rural economy, but I foolishly used the words “and the role of social enterprise”, which do not seem to fit the selection criteria, but I shall say something about that. I welcome my fellow member of the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the hon. Member for North Wiltshire (Mr. Gray), but I was a wee bit concerned that he did not mention our excellent report on the potential of England’s rural areas.

Mr. Gray: I left that to the hon. Gentleman.

Mr. Drew: The hon. Gentleman is leaving that to me. The report is a good starting point, and I do not deny many of the problems that rural Britain is facing, but I want to examine some other issues and where we should be going in dealing with current problems.
Next Section Index Home Page

* A-Z Index
* Accessibility
* Jobs
* Contact Us
* Freedom of Information
* Glossary
* Help
* Using this website

Wednesday, 17 June 2009

Amazing win:win

hit counter script
Eco-burials: burying our dead, uniting our families, preserving our open space
June 1, 2007 · 2 Comments

I met some months ago Nigel Lowthrop, a British social entrepreneur, who started Hill Holt Wood with his wife. It’s a fascinating story. Hill Holt Wood is basically a way to make sure that environmental land in England can sustain itself; They bought beautiful rural land in Lincolnshire, and then developed on the site a school that helps turn around kids at risk. It both keeps kids-at-risk from falling through the educational system, and also financed the 34 acre woods that they have now turned back over to the town. (There is much less undeveloped land in England than in the U.S.)

One of his latest ideas is to purchase a really large parkland and enable families to have eco-burials (the body wrapped in a shroud that decomposes); families would plant tree seedlings on the burial site instead of having tombstones. The idea is that the body relatively quickly decomposes, but the tree grows. People are buried with computer chips in them, so one can tell who is/was buried where by scanning the earth. Future family members can be buried around that *family tree*. They envision that the family trees might be places for future family gatherings honoring their ancestors. And each family only gets a space for 150 or 200 years, at which point the wood is harvested and turned into high quality furniture that family members can buy. And the park becomes a place that anyone can use for their enjoyment. It’s a really cool idea. It is really well thought out, long-term vision for how to sustain honoring the dead, not use up too much cemetery space, provide a center for future family get-togethers (i.e. social capital) and reunions and produce wonderful environmental space for others to enjoy.

Categories: Hill Holt Wood ·

Tuesday, 16 June 2009

From Fora TV - End of Food

hit counter script

Summary
More than 1.1 billion people worldwide are at risk of obesity-related illness, while roughly as many people are starving. Meanwhile, global food production faces dangers, including some chemicals, destructive farming techniques and contamination. Roberts takes a close look at food production, transport and consumption on a global scale, uncovering disturbing trends about the system we all entrust to handle our food. Will people take heed and work to improve the health of our food supply and distribution chain, before it is too late for millions of people around the world? - The Commonwealth Club of California


Bio
Paul Roberts - Paul Roberts is the author of The End of Oil, which was a 2005 New York Public Library Helen Bernstein Book Award finalist, and he is a regular contributor to Harper’s Magazine. A long-time observer of both business and environmental issues, he is an expert on the complex interplay of economics, technology, and the natural world. He lives in Washington State.

hit counter script

Compassionate Bake





Compassion in World Farming Logo

Compassion in World Farming Photos

P Please consider the environment before printing this email.


Compassion in World Farming’s Bake with Compassion fundraising week.

From the 6th -10th of July we are asking everyone to get their aprons on and bake with free-range or organic eggs.

By encouraging people to bake with higher welfare eggs (as well as organic milk, butter and chocolate) vital funds will be raised to campaign against battery cages. We are hoping you might be interested in spreading word of the event to readers of your blog, or may know someone who would like to blog about this fundraising event.

Any type of event can be organised around our Bake with Compassion fundraiser. Some may like to hold tea parties with family and friends; others may like to set up a cake stand at school or work.

There are nearly 6 billion hens used to produce eggs worldwide each year and by baking a few treats using free-range or organic ingredients will help raise awareness of farm animal welfare and Compassion in World Farming’s campaigns for food without cruelty.

A free Bake with Compassion Action Pack containing all the relevant information on the event is here: www.ciwf.org.uk/bakewithcompassion and there’s lots of other information about the welfare of hens and other farm animals.

Monday, 15 June 2009

Mr Cargill - terrifying words!

hit counter script
Summary
Greg Page, President and CEO of Cargill, discusses the state of global food and agriculture markets in a time of concern over increasing food prices as part of Chautauqua Institution's summer lecture series on What's for Dinner: Food and Politics in the 21st Century.

The Long Emergency

hit counter script
Summary
James Kunstler's The Long Emergency: Surviving the End of Oil, Climate Change, and Other Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-First Century made a huge impression on readers - and one hopes, on policy makers - when it was first published last year. Just now in paperback, it is even more compelling in the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which, in addition to causing massive destruction, slowed down oil and gas production out of the Gulf of Mexico. And with the growing demand India and China are putting on the world's oil supply, and the ongoing concerns of an influenza pandemic, we are witnessing many of Kunstler's predications come true at a startlingly fast rate. In The Long Emergency, he delivers a lucid and straightforward glimpse at the global changes that lie ahead of us. It is a controversial hit that sparked debate among businessmen, environmentalists, and bloggers, an eye-opening look at the unprecedented challenges we face in the years ahead, as oil runs out and the global systems built on it are forced to change radically.

Sunday, 14 June 2009

REWARDS FOR FAILING WORKING PEOPLE -

hit counter scriptFROM THE DAILY MAIL

Revealed: How the Kinnocks have enjoyed an astonishing £10m ride on the EU gravy train

By Simon Mcgee
Last updated at 1:49 PM on 14th June 2009

* Comments (27)
* Add to My Stories


Neil and Glenys Kinnock received more than £10million in pay, allowances and pension entitlements during their time working at the European Union in Brussels.

The astonishing figure can be revealed after a Mail on Sunday investigation into the couple’s lavish lifestyle funded from the public purse.

Lady Kinnock, who was appointed Europe Minister by Gordon Brown this month, was an MEP for 15 years. Her husband, who failed to win a General Election as Labour leader, was an EU Commissioner for ten years until 2004.
Neil Kinnock will enjoy a lavish retirement thanks to his EU payments

Drive to luxury: Neil Kinnock will enjoy a lavish retirement thanks to his EU payments

Their generous package of salary and perks included:

* A total of £775,000 in wages for Lady Kinnock and £1.85 million for her husband, adding up to £2,625,000.
* Allowances for Lady Kinnock’s staff and office costs of £2.9million.
* A £64,564 ‘entertainment allowance’ for Lord Kinnock.
* A total of five publicly-funded pensions, worth £4.4million, allowing them to retire on £183,000 a year.
* A housing allowance that allowed them both to claim accommodation costs although, as a married couple, they lived in the same house in the Belgian capital between 1995 and 2004.

Now back at the centre of British politics, Lady Kinnock has been elevated to the House of Lords while her husband played a key role in quelling last weekend’s rebellion against Mr Brown.

The Mail on Sunday questioned a spokeswoman for the Kinnocks in detail about the figures, calculated by the think-tank Open Europe. It campaigns for greater transparency in Brussels.

She disputed only one figure – a ‘transition allowance’ Lord Kinnock received on his departure from Brussels, worth £355,143 at today’s exchange rate. She said the true figure was lower, but refused to reveal it.

The European Parliament does not publish a breakdown of expenses that MEPs have to claim, rather than receive automatically, so Open Europe has estimated Lady Kinnock’s travel costs based on the average for MEPs.

These are in addition to her wages and the allowances she was eligible to receive automatically. The estimates are £1,179,482 for travel between Britain and the Continent over 15 years, and £45,777 for travel outside the EU.

Lady Kinnock is entitled to a transition allowance running into tens of thousands of pounds, designed to keep ex-MEPs going until they find new employment, but her ministerial appointment means she will forgo it.
Glenys Kinnock has been elevated to the House of Lords

Glenys Kinnock has been elevated to the House of Lords

However, questions were being asked last night about claims for the Kinnocks’ three-bedroom Brussels home, where they lived together between 1995 and 2004.

They bought it after Lady Kinnock’s election in 1994, and sold it after Lord Kinnock stood down from the Commission in 2004.

A Brussels estate agent said the house would probably have cost about £120,000 in 1994, and would have doubled in value by the time it was sold.

During his ten years in Brussels, Lord Kinnock automatically received residential allowances totalling £276,962.

And his wife has been claiming the controversial daily attendance allowance, designed to cover the cost of accommodation and subsistence when MEPs are in Brussels and Strasbourg for meetings. But she refused to say how many days she claimed for.

Asked if she claimed the attendance allowance while her husband received his residential allowance, a spokeswoman for the Kinnocks said: ‘Glenys Kinnock claimed the per diem attendance allowance to which she was entitled for each parliamentary day attended. European Commissioners’ residential allowance is paid at 15 per cent of a Commissioner’s salary.’

Really very interesting lectures

hit counter scriptMichael Sandel, Harvard Professor of Government, delivers four lectures about the prospects of a new politics of the common good. The series is presented and chaired by Sue Lawley.

Sandel considers the expansion of markets and how we determine their moral limits. Should immigrants, for example, pay for citizenship? Should we pay schoolchildren for good test results, or even to read a book? He calls for a more robust public debate about such questions, as part of a 'new citizenship'.

Broadcast on:
BBC Radio 4, 10:15pm Saturday 13th June 2009
Duration:
45 minutes
Available until:
12:00am Thursday 1st January 2099

Go to The Reith Lectures site

Saturday, 13 June 2009

hit counter script

Friday, 12 June 2009

Moment of Truth

hit counter script

is here...

wait till you can see the whites of their eye's...

keep calm... watch.. wait...

... then fire

Thursday, 11 June 2009

From the Guardian

hit counter script
Allotment demand leads to 40-year waiting lists

• For every UK allotment plot there are 30 applicants
• Allotment owners 'save £950 a year' growing their own

*
Comments (17)
* Buzz up!
* Digg it

* Rupert Jones
* guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 2 June 2009 10.07 BST
* Article history

Vegetables growing on The Dig for Victory: War on Waste organic allotment in St James's Park, London

Allotment accessibility is declining as consumer interest grows

Demand for allotments has reached such heights that in one London borough would-be gardeners will be waiting 40 years for a patch of land, it emerged today.

Latest research commissioned by home insurer LV= (formerly Liverpool Victoria) also revealed that for every UK allotment plot there are 30 people waiting to get their hands on one – providing evidence of our recession-fuelled enthusiasm for homegrown produce and the desire of many city dwellers to embrace "the good life" by getting back to the land.

Applicants are typically looking at an average wait of three years, although in some areas it will probably be decades before these green-fingered hopefuls are finally able to harvest the fruits (and vegetables) of their labour.

The research named the London boroughs of Camden and Islington as areas where plot availability is particularly problematic, with waiting times estimated at up to 40 and 25 years respectively, suggesting that a Camden resident who registers for a plot after finishing university might just get to access to it by the time they retire.

A spokeswoman for Camden council said: "We can confirm that Camden has a waiting list of about 40 years for a council allotment. This is because we have got 195 allotment plots in Camden but more than 800 people waiting."

She added: "Allotment gardening is a growing passion for many people in the borough. We are encouraging people on the waiting list to contact neighbouring authorities such as Barnet and Brent who have a greater number of plots."

The survey of more than 300 local authorities found demand for allotments had seen a "massive resurgence," with almost 6 million people wanting to rent one but only 206,000 plots across the UK.

The picture was brighter in the Midlands, with North Shropshire, Nottingham City and Bassetlaw District in Nottinghamshire all reporting available spaces within an average of five months.

LV= described its survey as the first comprehensive allotment survey in more than a decade. It also found that allotment owners claimed they save an average of £950 a year through home growing. More than half of those quizzed chose to rent a plot to save money, while a third did so to be in control of the pesticides used on their food.

Teaching children about food was also a factor for some, with almost one in three (30%) "growing their own" as a way to show their kids where fruit and vegetables come from.

Meanwhile, it seems the profile of the typical allotment owner is changing, with single parents the group most likely to want to rent or apply for a plot.

Geoff Stokes, secretary of the National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners, said: "We welcome this new insight into allotment accessibility in Britain, and it's encouraging that so many people are interested in getting out and getting in to some green space.

"Allotment gardening is a fantastic hobby and has so many benefits – it is cheap, it is good for you, and it can save you hundreds of pounds a year on food."

In February, the National Trust announced it was creating up to 1,000 plots to be used as allotments or community gardens to meet some of the demand from consumers.

From EPMAG.COM

hit counter scriptThe most controversial opinions you’ll ever hear

Oil at $700/bbl? A noted industry analyst predicts continued tough times.
Article By Kevin Parker- Senior Editor
Published Jun 1, 2009

print Print email E-mail

As he stepped to the podium, Matt Simmons, chairman of Simmons & Co., reminded his audience it was the 39th anniversary of Earth Day and the 40th of the Santa Barbara oil spill. Those two events, he said, caused war between the energy industry and green movement.

“The energy industry has been routed in battle by the greens,” Simmons said. “How has it happened that the world’s biggest, most important industry has failed so miserably?”

Simmons, a well known energy analyst, investment banker, and author of Twilight in the Desert, a 2005 close look at the Saudi Arabian oil industry. He was speaking at the symposium “Strategies for high performance in volatile times,” recently presented by Hart Energy Publishing and Oracle Corp.

Simmons went on to pose an even bigger question: if economies based on oil and gas as a primary energy source are not sustainable, how will civil society continue?

The oil industry’s aging work force and infrastructure — inadvertent byproducts of cyclical discontinuities between 1) costs and price, and 2) supply and demand, as well as the reality of “peak” oil, Simmons said, constitute grave threats to sustained reliance on hydrocarbons as the energy source that fuels globalization. And as yet, he further asserts, there is no viable near-term alternative.

The price of oil rose 15-fold in the last decade, Simmons said, “and at each point, a new culprit was blamed. With the price at (US) $150, speculation in oil futures was the supposed cause.”

“Nine months ago, there were shortages of everything,” he added, which caused costs to spiral out of control. For example, the Kashagan project in Kazakhstan, is now dubbed “cash-is-gone;” the price tag for Shell’s Pearl GTL project in Qatar to bring North field gas to shore has more than doubled to $20 billion and rising; and its the same for Kuwait’s oil refinery rebuild and expansion efforts.

The real reason the price rose is simple, Simmons said. Demand grew 13 million b/d while supply grew just 7 million b/d. “Yet even today, at $50 a barrel, people imagine the price is too high.”

Further, unless average retirement age is extended in an unprecedented manner, Simmons said, something like two-thirds of the industry’s workforce will be due to retire in the next five to seven years. “The skills shortage became painfully obvious last summer, but the problem could have been foreseen. Yet the industry hired only sporadically from 1982 forward while downsizing often and on the basis of seniority.”

More recently, with the ongoing credit freeze, oil prices fell 74% in three months, and natural gas prices fell even further. In the last 15 weeks, the industry let go more than 30,000 people, said Simmons. “This is the single biggest mistake we’ve ever made.”

With “98% of the infrastructure” for getting oil out of the ground and gasoline to the service station made of steel, saying “rust never sleeps” becomes something more than a non sequitur. Much of this infrastructure, Simmons said, though beyond its intended design life, remains in use. And despite incremental improvements, he maintained, corrosion control isn’t much better today than it was in the 1960s.

While the average age of offshore drilling rigs is 29 years, more than 6 million miles (9.6 million km) of pipeline is installed in the US, some of it 80 years old.

Rebuilding 70% of the hydrocarbon infrastructure, Simmons said, might cost anywhere from $50 to $120 trillion. Rebuilding the pipeline system alone might cost $16 trillion.

The reason only 70% of the infrastructure needs rebuilding, said Simmons, is that peak oil was reached in 2005. Productive capacity by 2015 may not exceed 60 million b/d.

Furthermore, no viable alternative fuel stands on the horizon. Simmons maintained the following: Hybrid vehicles aren’t going to be 15% of the vehicle fleet within a decade, as some have predicted. Corn ethanol is a scam. Battery technology will improve only incrementally. Wind is difficult but may be useful. Natural gas will continue to grow in importance, but unfortunately US producers have already throttled back on supply based on the market’s misunderstanding of the fundamentals.

So while many think $75 a barrel is too high a price, for Simmons, $150 is too low. At that price, “supply didn’t grow, rust didn’t end, and the people of Nigeria weren’t brought out of poverty.” It may be, he said, that the fair price is somewhere between $500 and $700.

Simmons predicts that within the next five to seven years, many people will work from home and be paid based on their productivity, bringing much long-distance commuting to an end. Moreover, goods will be produced near to their point of use, and almost any form of transportation will be favored over long-haul trucking.

From Luis - Peru needs help

Avaaz.org - The World in ActionDear friends,
Peru's government is clashing violently with indigenous groups protesting the rapid devastation of the Amazon rainforest by mining, oil and logging companies. The forest is a global treasure - let's stand with the protesters and sign the petition to President Garcia to stop the violence and save the Amazon:

Sign the petition

The Peruvian government has pushed through legislation that could allow extractive and large-scale farming companies to rapidly destroy their Amazon rainforest.

Indigenous peoples have peacefully protested for two months demanding their lawful say in decrees that will contribute to the devastation of the Amazon's ecology and peoples, and be disastrous for the global climate. But last weekend President Garcia responded: sending in special forces to suppress protests in violent clashes, and labelling the protesters as terrorists.

These indigenous groups are on the frontline of the struggle to protect our earth -- Let's stand with them and call on President Alan Garcia (who is widely known to be sensitive to his international reputation) to immediately stop the violence and open up dialogue. Click below to sign the urgent global petition and a prominent and well-respected Latin-American politician will deliver it to the government on our behalf.

http://www.avaaz.org/en/peru_stop_violence

More than 70 per cent of the Peruvian Amazon is now up for grabs. Giant oil and gas companies, like the Anglo-French Perenco and the North Americans ConocoPhillips and Talisman Energy, have already pledged multi-billionaire investments in the region. These extractive industries have a very poor record of bringing benefits to local people and preserving the environment in developing countries - which is why indigenous groups are asking for internationally-recognized rights to consultation on the new laws.

For decades the world and indigenous peoples have watched as extractive industries devastated the rainforest that is home to some and a vital treasure to us all (some climate scientists call the Amazon the "lungs of the planet" - breathing in the carbon emissions that cause global warming and producing oxygen).

The protests in Peru are the biggest yet and the most desperate, we can't afford to let them fail. Sign the petition, and encourage your friends and family to join us, so we can help bring justice to the indigenous peoples of Peru and prevent further acts of violence from all parties.

http://www.avaaz.org/en/peru_stop_violence

In solidarity,

Luis, Paula, Alice, Ricken, Graziela, Ben, Brett, Iain, Pascal, Raj, Taren and the entire Avaaz team.

Sources:

  • Civilians and police killed: Human rights lawyers accuse the government of a cover-up, BBC, 10 June:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8092453.stm
  • Civil Society Condemns Massacre of Indigenous People in Peru, 8 June:
    http://www.globalwitness.org/media_library_detail.php/765/en/global_witness_condems_violence_in_peru
  • On Peru's rift over economic policy and the controversial free trade agreement with the US , Reuters, 9 June:
    http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN09374943
  • Research Article: Oil and Gas Projects in the Western Amazon: Threats to Wilderness, Biodiversity, and Indigenous Peoples, M. Finer et al:
    http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi/10.1371/journal.pone.0002932
  • Oil companies ‘should withdraw’ as Peru ‘faces its Tiananmen’, Survival International, 8 June:
    http://www.survival-international.org/news/4640
  • Peru's Amazon oil deals denounced, BBC News, 3 February:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6326741.stm


    Want to support Avaaz? We're entirely funded by member donations and receive no money from governments or corporations. Our dedicated online team ensures even the smallest contributions go a long way -- donate here.



    ABOUT AVAAZ Avaaz.org is an independent, not-for-profit global campaigning organization that works to ensure that the views and values of the world's people inform global decision-making. (Avaaz means "voice" in many languages.) Avaaz receives no money from governments or corporations, and is staffed by a global team based in Ottawa, London, Rio de Janeiro, New York, Buenos Aires, and Geneva. Call us at: +1 888 922 8229 or +55 21 2509 0368

    Click here to learn more about our largest campaigns.

    Don't forget to check out our Facebook and Myspace and Bebo pages!


    You are getting this message because you signed "Swine flu: investigate and regulate" on 2009-05-07 using the email address timwaygood@btconnect.com. To ensure that Avaaz messages reach your inbox, please add avaaz@avaaz.org to your address book. To change your email address, language settings, or other personal information, https://secure.avaaz.org/act/index.php?r=profile&user=e4abe4ff31784f7f55e4db4fe1cb313e&lang=en, or simply go here to unsubscribe.

    To contact Avaaz, please do not reply to this email. Instead, write to info@avaaz.org. You can also call us at +1-888-922-8229 (US) or +55 21 2509 0368 (Brazil) If you have technical problems, please go to http://www.avaaz.org
  • Wednesday, 10 June 2009

    Economics... interesting ... behavioural...

    hit counter script

    From the Guardian - Smoke or FIRE?

    hit counter script

    Met police: six officers accused of torturing drug suspects

    Six Metropolitan police officers have been suspended from duty following ­allegations they used a form of water-based torture on suspected drugs ­smugglers, it emerged last night.

    The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said it was investigating the conduct of officers based in Enfield, north London, during drugs raids in the borough last November.

    Neither the IPCC nor Scotland Yard would comment on the nature of the ­allegations but sources said the officers were accused of pushing suspects' heads into buckets of water.

    One IPCC document is said to use the word "waterboarding" – the CIA technique condemned as torture by Barack Obama – in connection with the allegations.

    The torture claims are part of an ­investigation which also includes accusations that evidence was fabricated and suspects' property was stolen. It has already led to the abandonment of a drug trial, it was reported last night.

    The IPCC is examining the conduct of six officers connected to drug raids in ­November in which four men and a woman were arrested in Enfield and Tottenham, north London.

    Police said they found a large amount of cannabis and the suspects were charged with importation of a class C drug. The case was abandoned four months later when the Crown Prosecution Service said "it would not have been in the public interest to proceed".

    Last night the Times reported that any trial, by revealing the torture claims, would have compromised the criminal investigation into the six officers.

    None of the officers under suspicion has been arrested, but the IPCC said last night: "This is an ongoing criminal investigation and as such all six officers will be criminally interviewed under caution."

    A Scotland Yard spokesman said a police employee had raised concerns about the conduct of officers during an internal investigation into allegations of mishandling of property.

    He described the allegations as serious and raising real concern, saying they would be treated seriously."The Met does not tolerate conduct which falls below the standards that the public and the many outstanding Met officers and staff expect. Any allegations of such behaviour are treated very seriously, as this case illustrates, and if found true the strongest possible action will be taken."

    Tuesday, 9 June 2009

    SWINE FLU - ON RADIO 4 -

    hit counter scripthttp://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00ktc9y/File_on_4_09_06_2009

    Nonsense Agri-food Quote in Article Below

    hit counter script"Too many British producers are inefficient. The herds are too small," he adds...

    Well, these farmers were producing fresh milk at 22p per litre.

    This is then bottled and put on the supermarket shelf for at least 3x that amount.

    Can anyone else see that there is something amiss?

    And the problem for these farmers is they are price takers and do not have any power in the deal with the buyers.

    And .... herds are too small!! How big do these people want them?

    Lets just have one farm in wales then, that would make all the differnence.

    I think these agri-food - businesses are profiting from the demise of farmers. That's the game.

    FRom the FT - Dairy Farmers of Britain

    hit counter script

    Small dairy producers face skimmed payments

    By Andrew Bounds

    Published: June 8 2009 03:00 | Last updated: June 8 2009 03:00

    Almost 2,000 farmers are set to lose tens of thousands of pounds each with the collapse of one of Britain's largest dairy co-operatives, according to the National Farmers' Union.

    Dairy Farmers of Britain, which supplies 10 per cent of the UK market and has 1,800 members, was put into receivership by management last Wednesday after it failed to find buyers for loss-making parts of the business.

    Commenting on the collapse, Hayley CampbellGibbons, chief dairy adviser to the NFU, says the average farmer with 200 cows will lose at least £14,000 on milk and about £50,000 in investment. "It is a nightmare," she says.

    Andy Guy, a co-op member from Nottinghamshire, has been searching desperately for alternative customers for his milk.

    "I have lost £7,000 from my milk cheque and thousands more in investments," he adds.

    Stephen Oldfield, receiver and manager from PwC, says DFB could not pay for milk delivered in May and did not know how much it could pay members in June.

    "One month's milk cheque is in many cases a whole year's profit," he admits. Mr Oldfield says there could be a 1bn litre shortfall this summer, hence the need to "keep the milk flowing".

    However, food industry observers say milk will still arrive on supermarket shelves.

    "Supply has not changed and demand has not changed," says Will Sanderson, for Milk Link, another co-operative.

    The longer-term legacy will be a further step on the road to consolidation, begun after deregulation in 1994.

    Many believe Dairy Farmers of Britain could be sold within "days or weeks", with bigger rivals such as Dairy Crest, Arla and Robert Wiseman mentioned as possible buyers.

    The group, which has already shut two dairies, is shedding 640 of its 2,200 employees and has cut milk payments by 2p a litre to 22p.

    About half of its members had already said they would quit - but they are still serving a one-year notice.

    Simon Chantler, executive chairman of Meadow Foods, which supplies dairy products to the food industry, says milk price volatility will continue as European Union quotas were gradually abolished, opening the sector to global market prices.

    "We had highs last year and now with the credit crunch the price has fallen because demand even in places like China has fallen sharply," he said.

    Stefan Barden, chief executive of Northern Foods, which uses dairy ingredients in many of its ranges, says New Zealand, with its vast lush pasture, set the production standard. "Too many British producers are inefficient. The herds are too small," he adds.

    From Ruth

    hit counter scriptSlop buckets in every home as councils consider a ban on food waste in landfill
    Every home could be forced to use "slop buckets" under Government plans to cut waste by banning councils from dumping food scraps in landfill.
    Hilary Benn, the Environment Secretary, said it was ridiculous to continue dumping food waste or other materials such as aluminium or glass that can be recycled or used to generate energy. He announced a £10 million investment in new technology that turns food waste into biofuels and launched an informal consultation on banning food waste being sent to landfill.
    Daily Telegraph (9 June, p.12)
    Misleading food labelling on sell-by-dates to be scrapped to stop food waste
    The sell-by and best-before dates on almost all fresh produce and thousands of other food items are to be scrapped to prevent waste. Thousands of tons of perfectly good food is binned annually because critics claim the labelling system is misleading. Ministers say products should only have a 'use-before' date because it is the only way of giving consumers a safety cut-off point. Hilary Benn is expected to tell the Chartered Institute of Waste Management's Futuresource conference today: "Too many of us are putting things in the bin simply because we're not sure, we're confused by the label, or we're just playing safe. This means we're throwing away thousands of tonnes of food every year completely unnecessarily."
    Daily Mail (9 June, p.9)

    Shame he doesn't mention the real culprits: the supermarkets chuck away masses of food simply because they've got new stocks in for the shelves
    cheers
    Ruth

    Jackals in the Countryside

    hit counter scriptMilk companies taking advantage of DFB producers

    News | 9 June, 2009
    By Howard Walsh

    MILK companies that are known to be taking advantage of vulnerable Dairy Farmers of Britain producers’ plight, will be exposed, NFU dairy board chairman Gwyn Jones has pledged.

    “I am receiving a growing number of reports that some buyers are taking advantage of farmers in vulnerable positions and offering shamefully low milk prices.

    "I will be investigating this matter further and any buyer that is proved to be profiteering and exploiting farmers will be exposed,” said Mr Jones who’s team met with DFB representatives and receiver PricewaterhouseCoopers on Monday,

    The meeting was set up to see what could be done to help the union’s dairy members affected by the collapse of the co-operative.

    It is believed well over 1,000 NFU dairy farming members will be affected after DFB went into receivership last week.

    “It was crucial that we met with PWC and DFB at the earliest opportunity. We had a long list of questions, some of which will have to wait to be answered – including how did we get here? Where has the money gone? And why did things go so wrong?

    "However, today’s meeting was about ensuring the smoothest transition through this situation and clarifying specific technical and legal points that have been raised by our members.

    “I remain extremely concerned that some farmers with small volumes or in remote locations could end up with no buyer for their milk. The NFU is working very hard to ensure that as many farmers as possible are able to find suitable homes for their milk.”

    NFU deputy president Meurig Raymond who has written to the largest agricultural banks to assist in helping producers overcome any immediate financial difficulties said: “I am convinced that the majority of the farming businesses that are affected by the collapse of DFB have a bright long-term future.

    "However, the immediate situation is characterised by uncertainty, instability and, for many, significant short term cash flow implications. I am keen to learn what arrangements the banks are likely to put in place to assist those affected.”

    One of the first to pledge support was Barclays.The bank says it is proactively contacting affected customers to offer reassurance and a financial support package, including repayment holidays on existing and new loans and appropriate extension of overdraft facilities.

    Tim Seeley, the bank’s head of agriculture, said: “We appreciate that this will be a worrying time for those supplying Dairy Farmers of Britain. We are currently speaking to all affected customers to reassure them that we will do our utmost to provide them with the tangible support they need to help to keep them in business.”

    From the Institute of Science in Society

    hit counter scriptExposed: Europe’s GM-Hype in Times of Food and Fuel Crisis

    Claire Robinson

    A fully referenced version of this article is posted on ISIS members’ website. Details here

    An electronic version of this report with full references, can be downloaded for a donation of £3.50.
    Download Now
    digg Add to My Yahoo!
    Food Futures Now , *Organic *Sustainable *Fossil Fuel Free, How organic agriculture and localised food, and energy systems can potentially compensate for all greenhouse gas emissions due to human activities and free us from fossil fuels Pro-GM brigade at large in the food and fuel crisis

    The pro-GM brigade has been losing no time in exploiting the current global food and fuel crisis and the high price of animal feed to promote GM as the solution in the mainstream media. An offensive was launched on the European Union (EU) to relax its policy on GM imports and cultivation. At present only one GM crop, a GM maize, is approved for cultivation in Europe. The European Commission department of agriculture has joined forces with the biotech industry and the animal feed industry in claiming that it is the EU’s GM policy that is harming Europe’s livestock industry.

    Leading the charge of the pro-GM brigade in Europe is Britain, in its role as chief ally of the largest GM exporter the United States. The UK Independent reported that [1], “Ministers are preparing to open the way for genetically modified crops to be grown in Britain on the grounds that they could help combat the global food crisis.” The main source quoted in the article is environment minister Phil Woolas. The night before promoting the GM agenda, the article said, Woolas held talks with the Agricultural Biotechnology Council, a biotech industry PR group representing Monsanto, Bayer, BASF, Dow, Pioneer (DuPont), and Syngenta. This industry lobby group is run by Lexington Communications, a PR agency intimately connected to the New Labour government [2]. The British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has fallen in line, calling on the EU to relax its rules on importing GM animal feed in order to cut spiralling food prices [3]. In addition, a new report by the UK Cabinet Office on the food and feed crises focuses almost exclusively on the role of the EU's GMO regulations in creating delays for GM feed crop approvals [4].

    Critics say that such scaremongering is a cynical attempt to force the EU to drop its “zero tolerance” approach to GM and GM-contaminated imports. Bob Stallman, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, said at UK's National Farmers Union (NFU) conference [5], "I think the debate about higher prices and being able to meet the demand of people in the world for food is a perfect opportunity to make the case [for GMO crops]... We may have a window of opportunity here and I would encourage you to exploit that."
    President of European Commission at the heart of EU’s pro-GM lobby

    Industry lobbyists hoping to convince Europe to go down the GM route face an uphill battle, at least, as far as democracy prevails. Most EU member states and their elected representatives in the EU Parliament remain sceptical of GM crops. Votes by ministers from the member states on applications for their import or cultivation regularly oppose GM applications, but not with a sufficient majority to finally block the approval. The technical name for this type of majority decision in Eurospeak is an ‘unqualified majority’. In such cases, the decision reverts to the unelected European Commission.

    The Commission president, Jose Manuel Barroso, is at the heart of the EU's pro-GM lobby. Reports have emerged that Barroso is trying to get member states to agree on GMOs behind closed doors, so that there are no more unqualified majorities [6]. Barroso is also trying to find a way to lift Europe’s “zero tolerance” policy and smooth the way for the entry of GMOs into Europe [7, 8]. The Commission has already announced that a decision on animal feed imports and EU GM approvals and laws will be reached this summer. A group of MEPs on the agriculture and environment, public health and food safety committees has written a letter to Barroso expressing concern at [9] “reports that the Commission is deliberately trying to find ways to avoid a co-decision process, thus excluding MEPs, the elected representatives of European citizens, from any decisions on this issue.”

    The pro-GM lobby, including influential people within the European Commission, claims that Europe must open the doors to GMOs in order to solve the food and feed crisis; but there is little basis to the claim.
    No evidence that GM crops will solve the food and fuel crisis
    Most of the EU’s animal feed comes from Brazil and Argentina, which are careful to grow only those varieties of feed, both GM and non-GM, that are approved in the EU, so as not to harm their export markets [10]. An article in the Financial Times quotes a Brazilian diplomatic source saying, “We produce to satisfy our clients. We are not going to produce something they are not going to buy.” The article goes on to say that neither Argentina nor Brazil share the “apocalyptic” scenario currently being put forward by the biotech and livestock industries and intensive farmers [11].

    Such scaremongering ignores the well-known fact that GM crops have at best, variable impacts on yields and are therefore not a solution to the food crisis, as was confirmed by the recent IAASTD (International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development) report on the future of agriculture [12].

    More importantly, it ignores the fact that the major cause of the food and feed crisis is not European GM policy, but the rush to biofuels. Even the World Bank has now confirmed what NGOs have been saying ever since the notion of a food crisis was first mooted, that the Bush-subsidised ethanol boom (with the EU's agrofuel boom following in its wake) is by far the single most important factor in creating the food crisis that is driving 100m people worldwide below the poverty line. The report, which has not been published but was leaked to the UK’s Guardian newspaper, says biofuels have forced global food prices up by 75 percent. The figure emphatically contradicts the US government's claims that plant-derived fuels contribute less than 3 percent to food-price rises. Senior development sources believe the report, completed in April, has not been published to avoid embarrassing President George W. Bush [13].

    The irony is that exactly the same people who created this disaster by promoting the rush into agrofuels are now promoting a rush for GMOs as the solution. It is this hype that the European Commission and British politicians appear to be swallowing, without being honest about the vested interests at stake.
    Monsanto does a complete about-turn on GMOs being needed to feed the world

    And here’s another irony. The truth about GMOs as the solution to the global food crisis is not coming from politicians but from industry itself. Previously, in the face of growing global opposition, Monsanto has long proclaimed that GM crops are vital for feeding a hungry world, while critics countered that the food is there and that distribution is the key to tackling hunger. But as opposition to biofuels is rising in Europe and even in the US on the grounds that they are not a solution to climate change and are contributing to the food crisis, Monsanto is now keen to defend the biofuels gravy-train that sent food prices sky-rocketing, and the company's spin has suddenly gone into complete reverse.

    The ethanol boom may be pushing millions towards starvation and hundreds of millions deeper into poverty, but, says Monsanto's chief technology officer Rob Fraley [14], "From a production perspective, we have abundance [of food]". Fraley now says the "challenges" are in distribution and access to food because of wealth distribution, in other words, poverty.

    Fraley made his pitch at the launch of a new multi-million dollar lobby group for ethanol, the Alliance for Abundant Food and Energy, that Monsanto has helped set up. There could be no clearer demonstration that Monsanto's concern has never been feeding the hungry; its leading role in the ethanol lobby shows that the hungry can happily starve, just so long as it's good for the company's bottom line.

    Given that industry has revealed the truth behind its biofuels agenda, is it too much to ask of Europe’s politicians that they should be equally honest about the vested interests behind the hyping of GM crops?
    Claire Robinson is an editor of GMWatch www.GMWatch.org

    From the Guardian -

    hit counter script
    Shell pays out $15.5m over Saro-Wiwa killing

    * Buzz up!
    * Digg it

    * Ed Pilkington in New York
    * guardian.co.uk, Monday 8 June 2009 22.22 BST
    * Article history

    The oil giant Shell has agreed to pay $15.5m (£9.7m) in settlement of a legal action in which it was accused of having collaborated in the execution of the writer Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other leaders of the Ogoni tribe of southern Nigeria.

    The settlement is one of the largest payouts agreed by a multinational corporation charged with human rights violations. Shell and its Nigerian subsidiary SPDC have not conceded to or admitted any of the allegations, pleading innocent to all the civil charges.

    But the scale of the payment is being seen by experts in human rights law as a step towards international businesses being made accountable for their environmental and social actions.

    In the past, it has been notoriously difficult to bring and sustain legal actions involving powerful corporations.

    The settlement follows three weeks of intensive negotiation between the plaintiffs, who largely consisted of relatives of the executed Ogoni nine, and Shell. "We spent a lot of time trying to put together something that would be acceptable to both sides, and our people are very pleased with the result," said Anthony DiCaprio, the lead lawyer for the Ogoni side working with the New York-based Centre for Constitutional Rights.

    The deal marks the end of a 14-year personal journey for Ken Saro-Wiwa Jr, son of the executed leader. Among the other plaintiffs was Karalolo Kogbara who lost an arm after she was shot by Nigerian troops when she protested against the bulldozing of her village in 1993 to make way for a Shell oil pipeline.

    Though the settlement cannot compensate for individual losses of loved ones or livelihoods, the plaintiffs will now be able to pay all legal fees and costs. A sum of $5m will be used to set up a trust called Kiisi - meaning "progress" in the Ogoni Gokana language - to support educational, community and other initiatives in the Niger delta.

    Shell has consistently denied any involvement in the decision of the Nigerian regime to execute the Ogoni nine. It argues it tried to plead with the government to grant clemency to the prisoners but to its great sadness the appeal went unheard.

    Supporters of the legal action said the fact that Shell had walked away from the trial suggested the company had been anxious about the evidence that would have been presented to the jury had it gone ahead.

    Stephen Kretzmann, director of Oil Change International, said Shell "knew the case was overwhelming against them, so they bought their way out of a trial".

    Among the documents that were lodged with the New York court was a 1994 letter from Shell in which it agreed to pay a unit of the Nigerian army for services rendered. The unit had retrieved one of the company's fire trucks from the village of Korokoro - an action that according to reports at the time left one Ogoni man dead and two wounded. Shell wrote that it was making the payment "as a show of gratitude and motivation for a sustained favourable disposition in future assignments".

    Shell's involvement in the oil-rich Niger delta extends back to 1958. It remains the largest oil business in Nigeria, owning some 90 oil fields across the country.

    The Ogoni people began non-violent agitation against Shell from the early 1990s, under the leadership of Ken Saro-Wiwa and his organisation Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People. Mosop has long complained that the oil giant was responsible for devastating the ecosystem of the delta upon which Ogoni farmers and fishermen depend, through a combination of oil spills, forest clearance for pipelines and the burning of gas from oil-wells known as gas flares.

    Human rights experts believe the settlement will have a substantial impact on other multinational corporations. DiCaprio predicted it would "encourage companies to seriously consider the social and environmental impact their operations may have on a community or face the possibility of a suit".

    Monday, 8 June 2009

    A walk round the farm

    hit counter script

    Found this....

    hit counter script

    One of the first definitions of sustainable agriculture adopted in the US was published by the American Society of Agronomy [1989, pg. 15]:

    "A sustainable agriculture is one that, over the long term, enhances environmental quality and the resource base on which agriculture depends; provides for basic human food and fiber needs; is economically viable; and enhances the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole."

    In 1990 the US Congress passed a farm bill that defined the term sustainable agriculture as an integrated system of plant and animal production practices having a site-specific application that over the long term will:

    1. Satisfy human food and fiber needs.
    2. Enhance environmental quality and the natural resource base upon which the agricultural economy depends.
    3. Make the most efficient use of nonrenewable resources and on-farm resources and integrate, where appropriate, natural biological cycles and controls.
    4. Sustain the economic viability of farm operations.
    5. Enhance the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole.

    Sunday, 7 June 2009

    PRINCE OF DARKNESS

    hit counter script

    Mandelson wants to fast-track GM

    By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor

    Sunday, 5 June 2005

    Peter Mandelson is pressing for new GM foods and crops to be eaten and planted across Europe, even though governments cannot agree on whether to introduce them, top officials from the European Commission have told The Independent on Sunday.

    Peter Mandelson is pressing for new GM foods and crops to be eaten and planted across Europe, even though governments cannot agree on whether to introduce them, top officials from the European Commission have told The Independent on Sunday.

    They say that the controversial trade commissioner's department wants to speed up their use, despite widespread public opposition, and is insisting on their being imposed by the Commission on unwilling governments.

    The Commission lifted a six-year moratorium on approving new modified foods and crops last year, and biotech firms have been queuing up to have their products officially cleared for use across the Continent.

    Two types of GM maize have already been passed for human and livestock consumption over the past year, and more than 30 GM versions of maize, rice, potatoes, sugar beet, soya beans and other foods and crops are awaiting approval.

    They are being nodded through by the Commission, over the heads of governments, because ministers cannot agree on whether to approve them. European countries are almost equally split into pro-GM and anti-GM camps, and every time a new product comes before ministers for clearance they are deadlocked. It then passes to the Commission itself for approval, in a procedure denounced by campaigners as "profoundly undemocratic".

    Now the Commission's Health and Environment directorates are pressing for the system to be changed to give governments greater control.

    Markos Kyprianou, the health and consumer protection commissioner, has also come out against it, and Hervé Martin, head of the biotechnology and pesticides unit in the EU Environment Directorate, says that it is "not sustainable to continue the system". He believes commissioners and governments should meet "before the summer" to work out a better one.

    But, Mr Martin adds, the Trade Directorate wants to speed up the approval of more modified crops and products. He says it is insisting on sticking with the present arrangements, even if this means overriding the wishes of some governments.

    Michael Meacher, the former UK environment minister, said yesterday: "Having a group of unelected bureaucrats deciding what food should be eaten is fundamentally undemocratic. It is intolerable that they can ride it through roughshod over the objections of member states.

    "This is the very kind of thing that the peoples of France and the Netherlands were objecting to in their referendums last week."

    Mr Mandelson's office failed to take up the opportunity to comment.

    Thoughts of an Agrarian Renaissance from Washington State University

    hit counter script

    The Farm of the Future:
    A Mosaic of Diversity

    By Brian Clark, Marketing and News Services

    Will the farm of the future be larger than today’s farm or smaller? Single crop or diversified? Organic or conventional? Family-owned or corporately owned?

    The answer to all those questions could be “yes” but, as physicist Niels Bohr once said, “Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.” The future of farming is a hot topic, one of serious concern to farmers as well as everyone who eats.

    Connections asked a group of experts to speculate about where the American farm is headed. And as Dan Bernardo, dean of WSU’s College of Agricultural, Human, and Natural Resource Sciences, recently told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, “It may be easier to predict where we’ll be in 20 years than in one.”

    One of the greatest concerns in recent years is the decline of the family farm. The U.S. is historically an agrarian society, but the number of farms has dwindled while farm size has swelled in the past century. As agribusinesses has driven a “green revolution” that fed millions who might otherwise have gone hungry, the American psyche has suffered as mom and pop have sold their land and their kids have moved to the city.

    An Agrarian Renaissance?

    But the times are changing, and many observers of the global food system—the network of farmers, fields, and related industries that puts food on our tables—see an agrarian renaissance in the making.

    “It’s not about big versus small anymore,” said John Gardner, WSU’s vice president of economic development and Extension. “Individual agricultural operations will be differentiated according to place, market niche, and individual interests. From an era of Wonder Bread to, well—look at the bread aisle now!”

    Like the markets for bread, apples, potatoes, and other commodities—which consumers have changed with demands for variety, nutrition, and sustainability—so too the farms of the future are likely to look less like they are cut from the same cloth and more like a mosaic.

    Gardner said the farm of the future will be “site specific.” Small or large, growing a single crop or a diversified array, farmers will tailor operations to grow in concert with local resources. Part of the reason for this is growing consumer concern about the social and environmental costs of their choices, which is driving change across entire industries.

    “What we’re seeing,” said David Granatstein, a WSU Extension educator and Climate Friendly Farming project leader, “are behaviors changing. People are talking about energy; they’re changing their habits, taking fewer trips, changing cars.”

    And change is happening quickly in Granatstein’s view. With rising food and energy prices, the miles we travel to work or play and the miles our food travels are of great concern. “The food and fuel thing happened in one year—people weren’t expecting that, and it’s changing the way we do things.”

    Locavores

    The sudden uptick in concern about the intertwined system of food and energy is captured by the Oxford American Dictionary’s choice of “locavore” as its 2007 word of the year.

    A “locavore” is someone who consumes food produced locally, on the assumption that the fewer miles food travels the more sustainable it is in terms of carbon footprint. Not so, said Granatstein, who argues that we need to conduct “life-cycle assessments” for agricultural products, as mileage alone does not capture the full impact of food’s footprint. To the “food miles” calculus must be added all the other costs of production.

    “Some of this calls for getting people to change their diets and expectations—not having tomatoes available year-round is something we need to be alert to,” said Mike Kahn, associate director of WSU’s Agricultural Research Center.

    While this is likely true, Granatstein is quick to point out that “our long-distance shipping is generally quite efficient relative to a bunch of people driving pickup trucks to sell at a farmers market.”

    The Triple Bottom Line

    triple bottom line

    The global food and energy system needs to “reconcile the books,” according to Gardner. He sketches the concept of a “triple bottom line.” Old-school economics, he explained, just followed the money, leaving aside the social and environmental costs of doing business as intangible. In order to balance the books, Gardner insists that tomorrow’s economist will have to include those intangible costs when calculating profit. “Otherwise,” he said, “it’s not fair to the farmer or the consumer.

    “If we can successfully reinvent ourselves, the American rural landscape needs to have a longer-term vision. This will require ongoing adjustment. We’ll have a covenant, and then the power of the entrepreneur can kick in. We need to free up the entrepreneurs from regulation but we have to have the triple bottom line in place.

    “One of the big issues happening now is that we’re in the midst of coming to terms with food and natural resource products that we have not been paying the whole price for,” Gardner continued. “We’re seeing food riots in Haiti, but also rice and flour rationing at Wal-Mart, Costco, and so on. Some of this is knee-jerk reaction, simply because we don’t know where the reconciliation will end up.” Some will resist the process of reconciliation, but it must happen in order to provide a hungry world with a safe and abundant food supply, he added.

    “A while ago,” said Ralph Cavalieri, associate dean and director of the Agricultural Research Center, “we were pretty smug that we’d solved the problem of world hunger with the green revolution, but the more critters you have to feed, the more food you need. And, the land mass on which to grow that food is not increasing.”

    “In fact,” added Kahn, “the land devoted to agriculture is decreasing around the globe.” And, he said, “Nobody would argue that current agricultural practices are sustainable right now. There are going to be shifts in production systems.”

    Eyes Per Acre

    triple bottom lineGardner sees opportunity in the evolution of the American farm. “We’ve shaken people out of ag in the past era. If you look at the whole supply chain of food, ag probably employs 30 percent of Americans. But we’ve run people out of the starting point; only about 1 percent of Americans work in production agriculture. The supply chain will probably reshuffle and, to use a term from Wes Jackson at the Land Institute, the ‘eyes-to-acres’ ratio will probably go up. We need more people on the land. We’re entering an era where there are going to be lots of opportunities for people to get in early in the supply chain.”

    WSU alum Travis Allan, general manager of Allan Brothers Fruit in Naches, Wash., agrees. “I see a huge demand for competent, intelligent people to come into the industry,” he said. “One of the most important things we’ll do over the next decade is recruit talented, energetic young people to farming.”

    Granatstein said more and more people are interested in learning to garden or farm on a small scale. He sees people educating themselves through Cultivating Success, WSU Extension’s sustainable small farm course. “The sense among people is that if they know how to grow their own food, they’ll be protected against rising prices and safety concerns about safety,” he said. In other words, they’ll have a buffer against change and a sense of security knowing where their food comes from.

    Pedro Calderon Hernandez, ’05, witnesses these concerns from his vantage point as animal health manager at Viega Dairy in Sunnyside. “It’s important to keep our animals healthy because that keeps the product healthy and that benefits the people who drink the milk,” he said. “Everything starts here, and when it goes to the city, people don’t know where their milk comes from, but they’re very concerned about safe food.”

    For Allan, being close to the source is the reason he followed his family into the orchard industry. “I produce an eating experience, something people enjoy and get pleasure from,” he said. “And that’s the best.”

    Even as the mosaic of agrarian diversity increases the eyes-per-acre ratio, the billions of hungry people on the planet require systems of highly efficient mass production in order to stay fed.

    “Larger scale ag will continue to provide most of our food,” Granatstein observed, “but energy is the wild card here. Agribusinesses will be challenged with producing energy locally, on-farm, so part of a farm may be dedicated to growing fuel stock. They’ll have to internalize that cost in some way. We simply won’t be able to tolerate waste, and anyway, most waste has some potential value. So we either reuse or simply don’t produce waste.”

    Wasting not so we want not requires applied problem-solving, a key skill students acquire with a WSU education. Applied problem solving is also one of the core missions of Extension, the nation-wide system that focuses on applying the power of science to current problems as well as issues still on the horizon.

    “The notion of an educated populace dealing with knowledge that has a rapidly contracting half-life speaks to the land-grant mission as first devised,” said Gardner. “We need to expand our educational mission to embrace the entire society and that speaks to the founding mission of Extension.”

    About our Geese

    hit counter script

    embden geese sometimes spelt Emden



    History;
    Of great age and history

    Appearance: This is the tallest goose with a massive and long body, long swan neck, with the double lobes not touching the ground. The colour of the plumage is completely white (some grey feathers are admitted in young ones / first year often under the wing ); Bright orange bill with flesh coloured bean ; and legs; clear blue eyes, ( if crossed for the Toulouse/Embden meat birds eye colour will alter so check).The normally reach over a metre in height.

    Meat Production: The true Embden Goose suffers like the Aylesbury in that most of the public think all white geese are Embden's whereas few of them are actually pure bred stock. The height of this breed will normally be the giveaway as they are considerably taller than their cross bred cousins.



    Names.The Embden Goose breed is also known as the Bremen and although a German name most historical sources place this as a northern Dutch breed that also migrated throughout Europe to Italy where it was imported from to cross with our native white breeds. Also known as L'oie d'Emden in France/Belgium

    Country Of Origin;........ Although a German name most historical sources place this as a northern Dutch breed that also migrated throughout Europe to Italy from where it was imported from to cross with our native white breeds.
    Carriage;


    Purpose;.........Eggs.....Meat...Broody

    Egg Colour ..................... eggs white / egg weight 170g

    Egg Numbers............10 / 20

    Breed Defects. . . . .plumage other than white; Uneven lobes; Keel;

    Incubation: . . . . . .28 -34 days.

    Breed Hints....****.The tallest breed if the bird is short and dumpy it is NOT an Embden

    Weights;Gander, 26 pound mature Goose, 20 pounds mature
    gander 11 to 12 kg / goose of 10 to 11 kg;

    Breed Tip Kept as pair or flock.... can be over protective of their 'wives & young' in spring so not a beginners breed. Can also be short fused with small dogs ie not advisable for dog keepers unless you have a problem. . . .

    Info**Used historically as a meat cross either with the utility Toulouse ( darker drier meat) or another large framed breed..... can run to fat so used to be killed off at Michlemas.

    http://www.feathersite.com/Poultry/Geese/BRKEmbden.html



    From the Guardian

    hit counter script

    Apprentice or government, Tories tell Sugar

    Sir Alan Sugar's appointment as enterprise tsar 'totally incompatible' with BBC rules on impartiality, says Jeremy Hunt


    The Apprentice 2009: Sir Alan Sugar

    Sir Alan Sugar on The Apprentice. Photograph: BBC/PA

    Sir Alan Sugar must choose between working as the government's enterprise tsar and presenting The Apprentice, the Conservatives said today.

    The shadow culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, said the two roles were "totally incompatible" and he had written to the BBC Trust chairman, Sir Michael Lyons. Sugar was appointed as enterprise tsar by Gordon Brown during Friday's reshuffle.

    The millionaire Amstrad founder told BBC1's Andrew Marr Show today that the position was "politically neutral", although he believed he would be given a seat in the House of Lords.

    Sugar said he had spoken to the BBC in advance for guidelines on the issue. "It's very simple – all I am is an adviser, I'm not a policy­maker. I wouldn't join the government. I don't see this as a political thing... As far as I'm concerned I've just got a passion to help out young people, to help out businesses and act as a kind of giant Dragon's Den if you like – although not with my money."

    Hunt said presenting a programme and working for the government on the same issue was "totally incompatible with the BBC's rules on political independence and impartiality".

    He added: "I have written to Sir Michael Lyons and asked him as a matter of urgency to explain who at the BBC gave guidance to Sir Alan and whether he had informed them that he would be a Labour peer."

    From the Guardian

    hit counter scriptKitchen bin war: tackling the food waste mountain

    A Government campaign will see the end of confusing 'best before' labels, reduced packaging, and five new plants to convert waste into energy

    By Rachel Shields

    Sunday, 7 June 2009

    An ambitious "War on Waste" campaign to tackle Britain's mountains of food-based rubbish with a range of radical new measures is to be launched tomorrow.

    The programme will scrap "best before" labels on food, create new food packaging sizes, build more "on-the-go" recycling points and unveil five flagship anaerobic digestion plants, to harness the power of leftover food and pump energy back into the national grid. The government hopes that its plans will reduce the 100 million tons of waste the country produced last year, which included 20 million tons of food waste and 10.7 million tons of packaging waste.

    On Tuesday, Hilary Benn, Secretary of State for the Environment, will announce plans to dispense with "best before" labels, in an attempt to reduce the estimated 370,000 tons of food that is thrown away despite being perfectly edible. The latest government research into food labelling showed that the British are very cautious when it comes to eating anything that has passed its "best before" date: 53 per cent of consumers never eat fruit or vegetables that has exceeded the date; 56 per cent would not eat bread or cake; and 21 per cent never even "take a risk" with food close to its date.
    Related articles

    * More Environment News

    "One of the things we found in our research is that confusion over date labelling is one of the major reasons for throwing food away. Often people don't realise the difference between 'best before' and 'use by'," said Richard Swannell, director of retail and organics at Wrap, the Government waste watchdog. It is working with the Food Standards Agency (FSA) and leading retailers to get rid of the "sell until", "display until" and "best before" tags, which confuse customers, causing them to throw away edible food.

    "It is an issue that we want to address, but there has to be a balance, as we have to protect consumer safety," said an FSA spokesman. "Not eating out-of-date food is one of the simplest ways of preventing food poisoning."

    Ahead of the launch, Mr Benn said: "It's time for a new war on waste. It's not just about recycling more – and we are making progress there – it's about rethinking the way we use resources in the first place.

    "We need to make better use of everything we produce, from food to packaging, and the plans I'm setting out over the next few days will help us to achieve that. We all have a part to play, from businesses and retailers to consumers."

    The minister added: "Too many of us are putting things in the bin simply because we're not sure, we're confused by the label, or we're just playing safe. This means we're throwing away thousands of tons of food every year completely unnecessarily. I want to improve labels so that when we buy a loaf of bread or a packet of cold meat, we know exactly how long it's safe to eat."

    On Tuesday, the Government will also unveil plans for dealing with packaging, including increased glass collection from pubs, clubs and restaurants, a huge expansion of "on-the-go" recycling points for aluminium cans, and new packaging sizes for supermarkets.

    In addition to tackling food waste and packaging, the Government will reveal plans to use the waste we do produce as fuel. Tomorrow Mr Benn will announce the location of five new anaerobic digestion plants, built with the help of £10m in state funding. The facilities compost waste in the absence of oxygen, producing a biogas that can be used to generate electricity and heat.

    Mr Benn said: "We need to rethink the way we deal with waste – to see it as a resource, not a problem."

    The UK produces 100 tons of organic waste a year. If processed anaerobically this would produce enough energy to power two million homes, or Birmingham five times over. Anaerobic digestion plants are widely used across Europe, and are already being used by high street retailers such as Sainsbury's and Marks & Spencer to tackle their food waste.

    Michael Warhurst, senior waste and resources campaigner for Friends of the Earth, said: "This should be happening across the country, instead of councils still putting money into building incinerators. They are the technology of the past – this is the future."

    Don't read the label: 'If it looks old, cook it for longer'

    Edmund Luxmoore, 39, from London, hates waste and never pays any attention to "best before" dates:

    "I get most of my vegetables from the supermarket near my house, picking up bits and pieces throughout the week. I get the heavy stuff delivered. We plan meals, making lots of lists. I like to cook and we make curries and lots of other dishes.

    "I'm a vegetarian, and I suppose if I was eating meat I would be more wary about eating off food, but a dodgy potato probably isn't going to do much, is it? The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Just look at it and see if it's OK: if it looks a little bit old, cook it for longer.

    "I totally understand the difference between the 'best before' and the 'use by' dates. I've certainly got friends who will bin just about anything. Money used to be a factor in not wasting stuff in the days when I had a lower income but now it's just a personal choice. I intensely dislike waste – I think that is a family tradition. My dad used to make us stop the car by the side of the road to pick up plastic bags and clean up the countryside!"

    Cautious eater: 'I don't want to poison my mother'

    Julie Andrew, 48, from Wakefield, is nervous about eating food that is even approaching its "best before" date:

    "I must admit that I'm a bit wasteful. I throw things away when they are near the date. If it's in the fridge and it passes the best-before date I throw it out, even if it's just one day over. I always check both the 'best before' and 'use by' dates in the supermarket and know the difference, but when I get home I just throw things in the bin if they pass any date on the packaging. I do end up throwing out a lot – day-old yoghurts or the end of Flora pots. If I have meat and it looks at all suspicious, I put it straight in the bin.

    "With ready meals I worry about the date too and if I've had them in the freezer too long I chuck them out. I had food poisoning once and since then I've been more careful. I try to not be as wasteful because I know there are starving people out there, but I just like to know the food we eat is OK. I live with my mother, who's in her 70s, and I don't want to poison her."

    Saturday, 6 June 2009

    hit counter script

    When I was just a little boy...

    hit counter script
    I asked my .... what will I be,
    Will I be happy, will I be sad,
    Here's what ... said to me...

    Listen, hard, really hard,
    Understand there is, sense and
    Non sense, scienc and non-science, and trade

    Hey and William and Grace,
    Find the "happy coincidences, filter the noise"
    Create you own RULES, yet change,
    Adapt, Rules, known facts, all is open to question,

    Another voice in the debate on free speech / speach?

    hit counter script

    BNP win Herts County Council seat

    The British Nationalist Party has won their first county council seats. Unfortunately, one of them was Hertfordshire, my county, in South Oxhey ward (which isn’t mine, luckily - in Abbots district they came fouth). I then called this in to Iain Dale’s Huge Election programme and disclosed it live.

    They must not be able to get away with this. The other parties must not allow this to continue. The BNP should not be voted in anywhere, and no-one should ever feel the need to vote for them. We need to make sure that this becomes the case.

    Friday, 5 June 2009

    There was a Mr Gill of the Gill sans - our Font.. ... rob see the ... can't remember but elesi orgasms is it ish..

    hit counter script

    Gill Sans

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Jump to: navigation, search
    Gill Sans
    Category Sans-serif
    Classifications Humanist
    Designer(s) Eric Gill
    Foundry Monotype
    Date created 1926
    Date released 1928 (Monotype)
    Re-issuing foundries Monotype, Adobe Systems, ITC
    Design based on Johnston

    Gill Sans is a humanist sans-serif typeface designed by Eric Gill.

    The original design appeared in 1926 when Douglas Cleverdon opened his own bookshop in his home town of Bristol, where Eric Gill painted the fascia over the window in sans-serif capitals that would be later be known as Gill Sans.[1] In addition, Gill had sketched a design for the publisher and bookseller Douglas Cleverdon[2], intended as a guide for Cleverdon to make future notices and announcements.

    Gill further developed it into a complete font family after Stanley Morison commissioned the development Gill Sans to combat the families of Erbar, Futura and Kabel which were being launched in Germany during the latter 1920s. Gill Sans was later released in 1928 by Monotype Corporation.

    Gill Sans became popular when in 1929 Cecil Dandridge commissioned Eric Gill to produce Gill Sans to be used on the London and North Eastern Railway for a unique typeface for all the LNER's posters and publicity material.[3]

    Gill was a well established sculptor, graphic artist and type designer, and the Gill Sans typeface takes inspiration from Edward Johnston’s Johnston typeface for London Underground, which Gill had worked on while apprenticed to Johnston. Eric Gill attempted to make the ultimate legible sans-serif text face. Gill Sans was designed to function equally well as a text face and for display. It is distributed as a system font in Mac OS X and is bundled with certain versions of Microsoft products as Gill Sans MT.[4]

    Contents

    [hide]

    [edit] Characteristics

    The uppercase of Gill Sans is modelled on the monumental Roman capitals like those found on the Column of Trajan, and the Caslon and Baskerville typefaces.

    The capital M from Gill Sans is based on the proportions of a square with the middle strokes meeting at the centre of that square. The Gill Sans typeface family contains fourteen styles and has less of a mechanical feel than geometric sans-serifs like Futura, because its proportions stemmed from Roman tradition. Unlike realist sans-serif typefaces including Akzidenz Grotesk and Univers the lower case is modelled on the lowercase Carolingian script. The Carolingian influence is noticeable in the two-story lowercase a, and g. The lowercase t is similar to old-style serifs in its proportion and oblique terminus of the vertical stroke. Following the humanist model the lowercase italic a becomes single story. The italic e is highly calligraphic, and the lowercase p has a vestigial calligraphic tail reminiscent of the italics of Caslon and Baskerville. Gill Sans serves as a model for several later humanist sans-serif typefaces including Syntax and FF Scala Sans. An Infant variety of the typeface with single-story versions of the letters a and g also exists.

    The basic glyph shapes do not look consistently across font weights and widths, especially in Extra Bold and Ultra Bold weights, and Extra Condensed width. However, even in lighter weights, some letters do not look consistent. For example, in letters p and q, the top strokes of counters do not touch the top of the stems in Light, Bold, Heavy fonts, but touch the top of the stems in Book, Medium fonts.

    [edit] History

    The letter 'a' was originally developed with straight tail, followed by diagonal tail (which can be seen on early specimen sheets), then the hooked tail. The diagonal tail eventually was found in Extra Bold, Bold Extra Condensed; a modified straight tail was later found in Ultra Bold.

    The original Gill Sans lacked distinctions between numeral 1, uppercase I, and lowercase l, so alternate version of Gill Sans was made that included an alternate 1 that could be used for numerical setting, such as shop window prices and timetables.[5] In the Adobe version, such alternate figure is not included, even in the OpenType version of the font.

    Eric Gill removed terminus endings of the vertical stroke in b, d, p and q, but Monotype drawing office revised the forms so that they were preserved in the medium weight, which can be seen on early samples of the series 262. In Gill Sans Pro, the restored endings can be found in Gill Sans Light (in d, p, q only), Bold, Heavy, Extra Bold (p only), Ultra Bold (p only), Condensed, Bold Condensed, Ultra Bold Condensed (p only), Display Bold, Display Extra Bold (p only), Display Bold Condensed, Bold Extra Condensed (d, p only), Shadowed Light (d, q only).

    [edit] Variants and other versions

    [edit] Arabic

    Gill Arabic started as a project while Pascal Zoghbi was working with Gill Sans in the Letter Press workshop at The Royal Academy of Arts (KABK). It is designed as Arabic type companion for Gill Sans. The finalized font is expected to have an Arabic name rather than 'Gill Sans Arabic'.

    The type is based on the Arabic Naskh style with a modern look that echoes the proportions and feel of Gill Sans.

    [edit] Others

    Versions of Gill Sans exist in display, condensed, outlined (Monotype ser. 290[6]), ultra bold (ser. 442), among others, and also Greek and Cyrillic letters. A schoolbook/infant edition also exists.

    Monotype released in August 2005 a collection of 21 fonts including Book, Book Italic, Heavy, Heavy Italic, Display Bold, Display Bold Condensed fonts of Gill Sans. It adds support of Eastern European characters but not Greek and Cyrillic.[7]

    [edit] Similar fonts

    Granby from Stephenson, Blake was a contemporary variant based on Gill Sans.[8]

    [edit] Usage

    Gill Sans as used by the LNER on a station running in board.

    First unveiled in a single uppercase weight in 1928, Gill Sans achieved national prominence almost immediately, when it was chosen the following year to become the standard typeface for the LNER railway system, soon appearing on every facet of the company's identity, from locomotive nameplates and station signage to restaurant car menus, printed timetables and advertising posters — roles it took on nationwide for British Railways after nationalisation in 1948, until the comprehensive British Rail corporate rebranding in 1965 which used the specially designed Rail Alphabet. Other users were quick to follow, including Penguin Books' iconic paperback jacket designs from 1935, and Gill Sans became Monotype's fifth best selling typeface of the twentieth century.

    The typeface continues to thrive to this day, often being held to bring an artistic or cultural sensibility to an organisation's corporate style. Prominent users include the BBC, which adopted the typeface as its corporate typeface in 1997. Until 2006, the corporation used the font in all of its media output; however, the unveiling of its new idents for BBC One and BBC Two has signalled a shift away from its universal use, as other fonts were used for their respective on-screen identities.

    Monotype themselves use it in their corporate style. English Welsh and Scottish Railway (who together with Network Rail have continued the Gill Sans railway pedigree) continue to use the face.

    [edit] Bibliography

    • Carter, Sebastian. Twentieth Century Type Designers, W.W. Norton 1995. ISBN 0-393-70199-9.
    • Johnson, Jaspert & Berry. Encyclopedia of Type Faces. Cassell & Co 2001, ISBN 1-84188-139-2.
    • Ott, Nicolaus, Friedl Fredrich, and Stein Bernard. Typography and Encyclopedic Survey of Type Design and Techniques Throughout History. Black Dog & Leventhal Publishers. 1998, ISBN 1-57912-023-7.

    [edit] References

    [edit] External links

    Cosa Nostra

    hit counter script

    Peasant's revolt: casting off the yoke of bondage

    Free born Englishman

    Before 1066 land in England was owned not by wealthy landlords, nor by the state, nor even by the monarchy, but rather by free peasant proprietors, or ‘coerls’. Each family cultivated its own smallholding and undertook communal activities within their own village. The ceorl was an independent ‘free born Englishman’, subject only to the king, to whom he had to provide military service when required, and the only tax was an annual ‘food rent’, a quantity of provision sufficient to maintain the king and his retinue for a day.

    This system was beginning to break down even before the Norman conquest. The Saxon kings rewarded supporters by making them ‘thegns’ or territorial lords, and bestowed charters transferring to the thegns the rights of claiming military service and food rent from the peasants. In some places, when harvests failed, thegns would take over land in return for providing relief from hardship, and were paid in labour instead of food rent.But extensive common lands remained, and all the people of a district or village shared the right to these lands.

    The Norman yoke

    The Norman occupation changed all this. William the Conqueror handed out the land of England as spoils of war to his victorious mercenaries, and as a result, ownership of land was no longer absolute, but rested on permission of the king, the ultimate owner. Parts of the kingdom were kept by William for himself ‘in demesne’, and the rest was divided among about 180 barons, on the understanding they would provide knights for battle when the need arose. In turn the barons retained a portion of the land allotted to them as their own demesne and divided the rest among knights, each of whom was under a military obligation to the barons (and thus to the king). The churches and monasteries also retained demesne lands and sub-let the rest of their holdings.

    As for the conquered Saxons, they became serfsall that was left to them was survival in exchange for servitude.Where the population resisted they were annihilated, and their villages burnt, and for decades after 1066 great swathes of England especially in the North remained depopulated.

    The feudal system

    The nobility, naturally, kept the best land for themselves.Villagers were required to give up a set number of days to work the lord’s demesne land, and to serve as foot soldiers if there was war. There were many other rights and obligations, varying from place to place, more often preserved by custom than written into formal statute. The village peasants were obliged to grind their corn at the lord’s mill, and if they wanted to marry, they would first have to beg the lord’s permission, and pay a tribute.

    But though in relation to the lord of the manor they were serfs, in relation to each other the peasants were a self-governing community. In most places, the landscape they worked was very unlike that of modern rural England. There were no hedges or fences; the cultivated land was a single large open field, and every year a communal gathering of villagers at the manor-court or court-leet would allot to each man several narrow strips, taking care to share out the good and bad land equally, and on these narrow strips each villager tried to grow enough food to feed himself and his family.

    The nobility were expected to provide basic assistance, in cases where the deserving poor became ill, or a man died and left a widow and children.As for the undeserving poor, they did not last long. Anyone who did not work or who committed a transgression was brutally punished or executed, or outlawed and left to starve to death in the woods or wastelands.

    A rudimentary legal system did provide some limited safeguards for the common people, and above all ‘habeas corpus’ ensured that no man could be held in prison without being charged and put on trial by a jury of his peers. But the lord held power in his manor, and in many a case was, in practice, judge, jury and executioner.

    And always and forever there was the church, which claimed its tithes from the poor, made its own laws and held its own courts, made certain that the common people remained illiterate, controlled public and private morality, and built splendid cathedrals.

    The commons

    Beyond the open field was unenclosed common land, where the villagers had rights, granted not by statute but by immemorial custom, to cut the long grass to make hay, to gather fuel from the woodland, or to graze their cattle if they had any.There were also vast forests, but these belonged to the king and only the king and his nobility were allowed to hunt the deer, wild boar, rabbits, and other game. Poaching was a national sport, but punishable by death.

    This system was, to a degree, sustainable. The villagers were allowed to gather wood for fuel, but only the twigs and branches they could reach with a shepherd’s crook or a haymaker’s hook, and this meant that the woodlands were not destroyed and would continue, winter after winter, providing fuel for the poor.

    It was nevertheless a subsistence economy. The villagers on their narrow strips, with rudimentary implements and limited farming methods, could barely grow enough to feed themselves.There was little travel or trade between communities, let alone nations. What wealth the king and barons gathered to themselves was more often the pillage of war (the main purpose of the later crusades) than the produce of local economies. Only the monasteries grew rich, and were hated for it.

    The Black Death

    The Black Death changed everything. It reached Europe in 1347 when contaminated bodies were hurled by catapult over the city walls in the siege of Caffa in the Crimea. The plague arrived in England in 1348, landing at Melcombe in Weymouth bay and spreading rapidly across the country. When the plague reached one village, people fled in panic to the next village, and then the next, and so death struck down one community after another. A third or more of the population perished, causing distress and social upheaval on an unimaginable scale.

    Because of severe labour shortages, the working people who survived found themselves everywhere in a stronger economic position than before. A class of free yeoman farmers emerged, who paid rent on land and cattle, and in turn offered employment to farm labourers. There was rapid transition towards a wage economy, and bonds which for centuries had tied peasant workers to the villages in which they were born were loosened.Itinerant workers and their families moved from village to village, selling their labour, without either the restraints or protections of the feudal system.

    Wages were driven ever higher. Inevitably there were attempts to restore control, and laws were passed to limit wage levels.Suddenly the economy was booming. There was a huge expansion in sheep farming and wool production, initially exported as a raw commodity to the continent. Soon thousands of small village enterprises were producing the finest woollen cloth in Europe, and the wool merchants became the greatest power in the land.

    Other forms of trade flourished, above all local markets, where travelling entrepreneurs would sell household goods and the latest luxuries. These also offered amusements, regarded as cruel by modern tastes, and wanton by the contemporary church, but adding liveliness to a society still living in the shadow of death – the plague was to return to afflict each generation for another three hundred years.

    In this new world, there was vastly more opportunity and wealth, but also growing divisions between the wealthy and the poor. Those who were left behind had no safety net at all.

    With large profits to be made from wool, the old nobility and the rising merchant classes started to replace arable farmland with pasture, and worse, to encroach on common land, starting the long process of fencing and hedging that was to destroy the subsistence economy, depopulate villages, and drive the poor off the land and into the towns.Often they did this without legal sanction, in outright defiance of the laws.And yet it happened all the same, and the poor seemed powerless to prevent it.

    The Peasants’ Revolt

    In the year 1381, thirty three years after the first outbreak of the Black Death, the king decided to impose a new tax. He needed cash to finance foreign adventures, and the taxation systemwas no longer providing sufficient income to satisfy the lifestyle of the king and his court.

    So, for the first time, the central government decided to impose a poll tax directly on all its citizens. Worse, this tax meant that everyone, rich or poor, would pay exactly the same amount. The injustice of this added fuel to the fire in an already volatile society. At the villages of Fobbing and Brentwood in Essexvillagers decided not to pay, and forced the tax collectors to flee for their lives. Resistance spread rapidly, and the Peasants’ Revolt was underway.

    Casting off the yoke of bondage

    Radical clergymen and craftsmen took the side of the common people. Pre-eminent among them was John Ball, a renegade priest, and when the rebels gathered at Blackheath on the outskirts of London, John Ball addressed them:

    When Adam delved and Eve span, Who was then the gentleman? From the beginning all men by nature were created alike, and our bondage or servitude came in by the unjust oppression of naughty men. For if God would have had any bondmen from the beginning, he would have appointed who should be bond, and who free. And therefore I exhort you to consider that now the time is come, appointed to us by God, in which ye may (if ye will) cast off the yoke of bondage, and recover liberty.

    Land and tenements to be divided among the commons

    In June 1381 the rebels marched into London, occupied the city, and struck off the heads of the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Treasurer, and the Archbishop of Canterbury. The rebels expected that the boy king Richard II would listen to their grievances, and treat them with justice. (Such tragic optimism would characterise popular rebellions for the next six hundred years).

    The king, accompanied by the Mayor of London and a group of armed retainers, rode out to meet the peasant army which was camped at Smithfield under the leadership of Wat Tyler. There are different versions of what happened next, but the Anonimalle Chronicle tells us something of the hopes of the peasants. Like John Ball, Wat Tyler called for all people to be treated by the State as equal under the law, demanding that ‘there should be no outlawry in any process of law, and that no lord should have lordship save civilly, and that there should be equality among all people save only the king.’

    Wat Tyler went further, attacking the abuses of the church and calling for church land and buildings to be returned to the people: ‘all the lands and tenements now led by them [the bishops] should be confiscated, and divided among the commons, only reserving for them a reasonable sustenance. ’And finally he called for an end to the feudal system of peasant bondage, insisting that ‘there should be no more villeins in England, and no serfdom or villeinage, but that all men should be free and of one condition.’ [1]

    Wat Tyler did not have to wait long to receive his answer. He was stabbed to death by the Lord Mayor’s retinue. The furious peasants drew back their bowstrings, but the boy king had the presence of mind to save his own life by a desperate promise that he would agree to all the demands. The mayor rushed off for reinforcements, and the leaderless rebellion, mollified by the king’s promises, dispersed.

    Now that the immediate threat had passed, the king and the nobility turned quickly to vengeance. Walsingham, in Historia Anglicana, records the king as announcing: ‘Serfs you were and serfs you are; you shall remain in bondage, not such as you have hitherto been subject to, but incomparably viler. ’This time, he kept his word.

    The seeds of defiance

    Even in defeat some remained defiant. In St Albans, where Wat Tyler’s men had stormed the Abbey, William Gryndecobbe, a rebel leader, said ‘Fellow-citizens, whom now a scant liberty has relieved from long oppression, stand firm while you may, and fear nothing for my punishment since I would die for the cause of the liberty we have won, if it is now my fate to die.’

    These words and those of John Ball and Wat Tyler reverberate down the centuries. Again and again the social reform movements of the poor (Robert Kett’s rebels in the 1540s, the Levellers and Ranters and Diggers in the 1640s, the followers of Thomas Spence and Tom Paine in the 1790s, the Owenites and Chartists in the 1830s and 1840s, the followers of Henry George in the 1870s) returned to these core ideas: that once there was a golden age of social equality, of justice and prosperity, when land was held in common. This common ownership was the birthright of every free-born Englishman, but the birthright had been stolen by the rich and powerful, and injustice and poverty was the result.

    Sources

    Marion Shoard, This Land is Our Land: The Struggle for Britain’s Countryside, 1987.

    Norman Cohn, The Pursuit of the Millennium: Revolutionary millenarians and mystical anarchists of the Middle Ages, 1957.

    Local History

    hit counter script

    Ebenezer Howard and the Garden City

    In 1898 Ebenezer Howard, an obscure court stenographer, published Tomorrow: A Peaceful Plan to Real Reform.This book set out an inspired vision of a garden city of 30,000 people on a 6,000 acre estate, intended to combine the very best of town and country life.Howard was consciously attempting to put into practice, on a large scale, ideas he found in Herbert Spencer’s land scheme[1] (itself deriving in part from Thomas Spence’s Land Plan), the model city of James Silk Buckingham, Edward Bellamy’s utopian vision of state communism,[2] and Henry George’s land value taxation theories.

    Letchworth

    The Garden City Association was formed in 1899, and its members visited and admired experiments at Port Sunlight and Bourneville.In September 1903 the ‘First Garden City Ltd’ was incorporated and construction began at Letchworth, on 3,800 acres costing £160,000.

    Letchworth attracted a stream of people keen to discover new ways of living: Tolstoyans, anarchists, vegetarians, trade unionists, socialists, followers of Ruskin - even Lenin, who found refuge there for a short time in 1907.George Orwell was to say that in the garden city you could find ‘every fruit juice drinker, sandal wearer, sex maniac, Quaker, nature cure quack, pacifist and feminist in England.’[3]

    Schools were established on advanced principles: the school diet was based on butter, milk, eggs, fresh fruit, and vegetables, and morning assemblies were deliberative rather than devotional.George Bernard Shaw’s John Bull’s Other Island, a comedy which apparently caused the Prince of Wales much merriment, contains the following exchange:

    Have you heard of Garden City?
    D’ye mean Heav’n?
    No: it’s near Hitchin.

    Land in common ownership

    Howard’s approach was distinguished by its treatment of land values and tenure arrangements.Land for the settlement would be purchased by a Trust at agricultural land values (then about £40 per acre), with a rate of return for investors of not more than 4%.All occupants would pay a rent (referred to as the rent-rate as there was to be no separate general rate levied by the local authority) and the income received in this way would be used for three purposes: to pay interest on the initial capital sum; to pay back the capital; to pay for the general running costs, and welfare of the garden city.

    Over a period of time the first two items of expenditure would fall away, and the Trust would be left with a greater choice of what it could do to improve amenities for the community.This was a radically different model from that which applied elsewhere, where rising land values were enjoyed primarily as a source of profit for private landlords.The secret, claimed Howard, was to retain the land in common ownership and to build this into the plan from the outset.

    New garden cities

    The influence of Letchworth spread rapidly.Joseph Rowntree appointed Raymond Unwin, the gifted architect of Letchworth, to design New Earswick outside York.Hampstead Garden Suburb was begun in 1907.Plans were drawn up for garden cities across the country: at Fallings Park near Wolverhampton, Warrington, Hull, Newport, and Bristol.One was Woodlands, a community planned for the employees of the Brodsworth Colliery near Doncaster.

    In 1920, Ebenezer Howard, together with a group of followers (including several Quakers) established the New Town Trust and then the Welwyn Garden City Limited, with a capital of a quarter of a million pounds.

    An agricultural guild was set up to supply the inhabitants of Welwyn with milk and vegetables, using land leased from the Garden City Company.The business was kept separate from the Trust, and without ownership of the land it had nothing to fall back on in time of financial difficulty.As a result it failed during the agricultural depression in the 1920s, and the land was re-let to tenant farmers.

    Town planning

    A town planning profession began to emerge.The Garden Cities Association grew into the Town and Country Planning Association.The first Town Planning Act came into force in 1909 to regulate development, and in the same year a department of civic design was established at the Liverpool School of Architecture, funded by William Hesketh Lever (the founder of Port Sunlight).

    From garden cities to dull suburbs

    In the 1930s industrialists and their friends in government came to realise that garden cities provided for employers the housing and other amenities which their Victorian predecessors such as Titus Salt had to provide themselves.

    In Manchester the local authority purchased land and built Wythenshawe, on principles much diluted from those of Howard; there was for example no town centre.With large scale government investment, trading estates were established at Treforest in Glamorgan, Team Valley at Durham and Tyneside, and Hillington near Glasgow.These were often functional and uninspired places, and had little in common with Howard’s original vision.

    Sources

    W H G Armytage, Heavens Below: Utopian Experiments in England 1560-1960, 1961, pp 370-384.

    Dennis Hardy, Community Experiments 1900-1945, 2000.

    Robert Beevers, The Garden City Utopia: A critical biography of Ebenezer Howard, 1988.

    Heronsgate - Feargus O'Connor

    hit counter script

    Heronsgate

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Jump to: navigation, search
    Feargus O'Connor commemorated at Heronsgate

    Heronsgate (or formerly Herringsgate) is a settlement on the outskirts of Chorleywood, Hertfordshire founded by Feargus O'Connor and the Chartist Cooperative Land Company (later the National Land Company) as O'Connorsville or O'Connorville in 1846. The land was bought on 14 March 1846, the plots allocated by ballot on 20 April 1846 (Easter Monday) and settled on 1 May 1847.

    In addition to the 35 plots of land covering 103 acres, a beer house was also provided, now the Land of Liberty, Peace, and Plenty public house.

    The National Land Company was wound up by Act of Parliament in 1851. The estate was administered by the Court of Chancery until the freeholds were sold off by auction on 27 May 1857.

    Heronsgate lies by junction 17 of the M25.

    (FROM WIKIPEDIA)

    ---------

    |

    Feargus O’Connor and the Chartist Land Plan

    Heronsgate

    Just off junction 17 on the M25 on the outskirts of London, a quiet country lane leads to the village of Heronsgate.Behind tall hedges, spacious gardens are well stocked with trees, fruit trees in particular.This is stockbroker territory, as the imposing houses, immaculate lawns, expensive cars, and tasteful security all testify.But here and there within the grounds lie small cottages, and the narrow lanes, designed for carts rather than cars, are named not after poets or war heroes or local councillors, but commemorate rather a series of industrial towns: Halifax, Nottingham, Bradford, and Stockport.

    For this was once O’Connorville, a community designed and built by working people for themselves, and an almost forgotten memorial to the aspirations of mid nineteenth-century Chartism.

    How the voice of the people fell on deaf ears

    In 1838, and again in 1842, the Chartists had drawn up petitions calling for universal suffrage and annual elections, as a means of securing political power for all people rather than merely the privileged minority.They had travelled to town and village, collecting signatures, fired by great hopes.In Yorkshire when town meetings were banned they met by torchlight at night on the moors, and at last the petitions, bearing millions of signatures, were carried with ceremony to Parliament.Twice the petitions were presented, and twice they were dismissed.

    The Land Plan of Feargus O’Connor

    Feargus O’Connor, leader of the radical wing of the Chartist movement, was not to be beaten.He came up with a plan to settle large numbers of working people on the land, each man holding property with an annual rental value of at least forty shillings, sufficient to qualify for a county vote.The idea was simple: when enough working people had obtained property qualifications, the people would be able to vote themselves the reforms which those in power had denied them.

    O’Connor was editor of the Northern Star and in April and May 1843 his newspaper ran a series of letters (written by himself) addressed to the ‘producers of wealth’, and suggesting that 20,000 acres could support 5,000 families, with four acres per family, in forty estates, each with its community centre, school, library and hospital.Subsequently he published a booklet, ‘A Practical Work on the Management of Small Farms.’

    Investment, he believed, would have to come from working people themselves.In 1845 O’Connor proposed that a company be formed and capital of £5,000 be raised from two thousand shares bought by working people for £2.10s each.This would allow 120 acres of good land to be brought at the current price of £18.15s an acre, providing sixty cultivators, selected by lot, with two acres each and £2,250 to buy cottages and stock.The allotments would be let by the company to the members in perpetuity at £5 a year (providing total rental income to the company of £300 a year).By selling twenty years of the rental income the company could raise a further £6,000, which would buy land for 72 families.Their rent would be capitalised in the same way and would buy land for 86 families, and so on.

    O’Connor travelled to France and Belgium and met socialist and communist leaders, including Marx and Engels.They were vehemently opposed, regarding private land ownership as a stronghold of opposition to change in society.O’Connor refused to be discouraged.He remained firm in his belief that by owning a cottage and a piece of land, people would achieve fulfilment, independence and liberty.

    The Land Company would give everyone a chance to work for himself, would solve the problems of criminal law, dispense with many of the burdens of government and a standing army, and provide sanitary improvements and educational aid.In the Northern Star on 12th August 1848 he also claimed that the plan would reduce the suppression of wages of the industrial poor:‘With my operations I will thin the artificial labour market by employing thousands who are now destitute, and constituting an idle reserve to enable capitalists to live and make fortunes upon reductions of wages.’

    O’Connor insisted that he intended no socialism (on the Owenite model) or partnership with the state.Ownership and control were always to reside with the individual, and O’Connor described himself as an ‘elevator’ not a ‘leveller’.

    Company registration

    The Land Plan office was set up at 83 Dean Street in Soho.The legal form of the new company was the first obstacle.Charitable registration was out of the question because of the Plan’s commercial aspects.The Registrar of Friendly Societies ruled that the company was not a type of savings scheme and was therefore ineligible.The remaining options were to establish a Joint Stock Company (which required prescribed forms of governance and account keeping), or by Act of Parliament apply for a royal charter, available for non-profit-making benevolent activities or for single purposes such as building a railway.All were expensive (the cost of a private Act of Parliament if uncontested was about £2,500) and none were entirely suitable.

    Initially O’Connor opted for the joint stock route, and approached the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, achieving provisional registration as a joint stock company.The company was originally called the Chartist Land Company, then the Chartist Co-operative Land Company, and finally the National Land Company.

    The Land and Labour Bank

    Working people asked why they could not save to buy the freehold on their allotment.So in August 1846 O’Connor proposed to found a land bank where members could deposit money at 4% interest, and save towards the £250 purchase cost of their allotment.Deposits would progressively reduce an allottee’s rent. A levy of 3d per share per annum was made to cover expenses of the bank, arrangements of the company, directors wages etc, and in January 1847 the Land and Labour Bank went into operation.

    The first settlement

    The Land Plan was widely promoted and Chartist branches across the country collected 3d or 6d a head towards shares.By April 1846, 1,487 people had paid in full, enough to establish the first settlement, so O’Connor and his colleagues started to travel in search of land.In September 1846 he visited Devon but was not impressed, calling it the ‘land of Parsons, sour cider, and low wages.’He settled on a piece of farmland outside Rickmansworth, and named it O’Connorville.

    The model cottages at O’Connorville had three rooms: a sitting room, kitchen, bedroom, and next to them outhouses for a cow, pony, cart, wash-house, diary, wood, fowls, and pigsties.The company provided equipment, farm stock, manure, and fruit trees.O’Connor was determined that quality should be high and the cottages were roomy, well lit, with oak plank floors and good cast iron grates.As the town was being built, working people holding shares would turn up from all over England, finger the seasoned oak, and exclaim ‘Eh! But that’s rare stuff!’

    A ballot was held to select the first thirty five settlers, and they arrived on 1st May 1847.It was, according to O’Connor, ‘England’s “May Day”’, and a band struck up the tune ‘See the conquering heroes come’.At the official opening on 17th August 1847 O’Connor stood on a platform jubilantly waving a giant cabbage.

    Victory in Nottingham

    In 1847 O’Connor stood for election to Parliament in a Nottingham by-election.In a campaign speech O’Connor described the case of Charlie Tawes, an allottee who had come from Radford to O’Connorville.Charlie had been shut up in a ‘Whig bastille’ (a workhouse), separated from his wife and children.

    Now he had been reunited with them and raised to independence.Now he had four pigs in his sty (tremendous cheering).Would he have ever got them by sticking in Radford workhouse?If the government would put half the money spent on building workhouses into buying land for poor men, it would destroy the new Poor Law system.

    O’Connor won a surprise victory.Across the country working people rejoiced.In Barnsley candles were lit in every working class window and the Chartist flag of green and pink hung over the streets.

    The model replicated

    Over the next two years, working people continued to buy shares and money poured in.By the end of 1847 O’Connor was able to claim that over 60,000 members were holding 180,000 shares, and £90,000 of capital had been accumulated.Further settlements were built at Lowbands, Minster Lovell, Snigs End, and Great Dodford.

    Education was always a core objective: ‘The mind has not been forgotten, as each house is fitted up with a neat and elegant library.’Schools were built and schoolmasters appointed, employed by the Land Company.

    The allottees represented a cross-section of the mid nineteenth century working classes.Former occupations included:

    Coalminer, weaver, labourer, calico printer, shoemaker, limeburner, block printer, stockinger, baker, woolcomber, innkeeper, smith, tailor, stonecutter, cabinetmaker, joiner, potter, cordwainer, mason, grocer, piecer, moulder, nailer, victualler, postman, skinner, butcher, embroiderer, farmer, hatter, spinner, milkman, servant, gardener, lacemaker, overlooker, warehousemen, tinman, clerk, thatcher, plumber, painter, plasterer, mechanic, clothier, fustian cutter, grinder, bricklayer, trunkmaker, seamstress, warper, turner, carpenter, slater, schoolmistress, cotton band maker.

    Life in the new settlements was difficult: the urban settlers were unskilled in rural trades, and often arrived malnourished and in poor health.Nevertheless, initial enthusiasm was high and by 1848 some of the allotments were, literally, bearing fruit.One claimed to have 700 fruit-bearing trees: apples, pears, gooseberries and currants.

    Attempts were made to find customers for produce.At Great Dodford the settlers cultivated strawberries and made jam for sale in markets in Bromsgrove and Birmingham.At Lowbands and Snigs End market gardens were developed to supply Gloucester.At O’Connorville some residents became cobblers and carpenters, providing services to the agricultural community.Outbuildings were sometimes converted into small workshops, and at Great Dodford wives and daughters started making bonnets.Some allottees demonstrated a sound business sense, co-operating to buy coal and groceries at wholesale prices.

    Under pressure

    But O’Connor was falling under personal strain.Like many a modern community activist he found himself doing too much of everything, describing himself as ‘bailiff, contractor, architect, engineer, surveyor, farmer, dungmaker, cow and pig jobber, milkman, horse jobber and Member of Parliament.’He started drinking heavily.

    The uncertainty of the company’s legal status was a great burden.In an attempt to meet the regulations for the deed of registration, the company directors were advised (wrongly it seems) that they needed to collect 40,000 signatures. The company’s representatives travelled from town to town in a weary and expensive attempt to achieve this.

    National and regional newspapers began to attack the company’s business methods, pointing out with sanctimonious glee that while incorporation remained unresolved, the legal rights of working people in the settlements were uncertain.This created a crisis of confidence.Receipts dropped quickly towards the end of 1847 and some of the lucky winners in the ballots promptly sold their allotments, for amounts between £70 and £120.O’Connor found it hard to hold his tongue and addressed the editor of one national paper as .You unmitigated ass!You sainted fowl! You canonised ape!’

    The Parliamentary enquiry

    In February 1848 O’Connor, desperate to achieve legal status, presented a petition to Parliament to legalise the company through Act of Parliament, and the Bill received a first reading. It was not immediately rejected, probably because the government did not want to be held responsible for dashing the hopes of so many working people.A date for a second reading was appointed and a Parliamentary investigation began.

    Complaints started to surface from within the company.Meetings of Directors and dissident representatives were called, to which O’Connor was not invited, and he used the columns of the Northern Star to vent his frustration and anger.

    The enquiry took evidence from a Poor Law specialist, who pointed out that tenants would be eligible for poor relief by virtue of length of residence and level of rent they paid, and this meant that if the allotments failed and the tenants threw themselves on the parish for relief, rural parishes be forced to levy a massive increase in poor rates and this would suddenly reduce to nothing the value of every property in the parish.

    His conclusion was that the settlements were not sustainable, and therefore that they were likely to lead to ‘serious and sudden burthens upon the poor’s rates of those parishes in which they acquire land.’He noted that the allottees were not yet paying rent, that manure provided in the first year had been used up and not replaced, that some of the settlers had already fled the land.

    O’Connor replied that the settlements were viable, and that he had provided ‘a market, better than the gin-palace or the beer-shop, for those who had small savings to carry to the labour field.’One of the committee members travelled to Snigs End and Lowbands to see for himself. He was surprised at the high standard of building and cultivation on Lowbands.Wheat and potatoes, he reported, were as good as those of any farmers.

    There were accusations of financial mismanagement, even suggestions that O’Connor had been lining his own pockets by tricking the poor.Clutching bundles of paper, O’Connor pulled out records and accounts.A government accountant claimed they were unintelligible, so O’Conner took him to Great Dodford and showed him more piles of papers.Patiently the accountant examined them all.His conclusion was a vindication of O’Connor: ‘I am thoroughly satisfied, not only that the whole of the money has been honourably appropriated and is fully accounted for, but also that several thousand pounds more of Mr O’Connor’s own funds have been applied in furtherance of the views of the National Land Company.’

    An illegal lottery

    So far, O’Connor was standing his ground, but there was worse to come.A government barrister, Edward Lawes, asserted that the company was established