Skip to main content

Upcoming Seminar...Sustainability and social democracy



Sustainability and social democracy

A seminar to debate how the centre-left and the environmental movement can share goals, policies and approaches.

Progressives have been torn by how to respond in principle, in practice and politically to increased global temperatures and the rise of environmental politics. Compass has produced an e-book looking at whether and how the traditions of social democracy and sustainability might be squared. A range of authors examine exactly how social democracy should respond to the imperative of sustainability.

Compass with the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung is holding a morning seminar of key Labour, union and environmental politicians, thinkers and activists to discuss the e-book and begin a more fundamental debate about whether and how the social and democratic can be reconciled with the sustainable. This UK focused seminar is a precursor to a bigger European seminar being planned for the Autumn 2012 in London as part of the Compass/FES ongoing Building the Good Society debate.

The Sustainability and Social Democracy Debate

Thursday 14th July 2011
At the London Office of the FES
66 Great Russell Street London WC1B 3BN



Agenda

Speakers will introduce the topics briefly which will allow for maximum discussion time.

9.00 Welcome and Introduction
Neal Lawson (Compass)

9.05 General Principles of Red/Green politics. Where do we agree, where do we differ?
Neal Lawson (Compass) Jean Lambert (tbc) (Green MEP for London)

10.05 Coffee Break

10.15 Is Economic Growth Desirable?
Introduction by Victor Anderson (Convener of the Compass Sustainability Panel) Responses from Cllr Rupert Read (Green Party) and Howard Reed (Landman Economics)

11.30 Red/Green Politics in Practice – How to build red/green coalitions
John Hare (Green Party) and Caroline Lucas MP (Green Party)

12.30 Concluding Comments and Next Steps
Victor Anderson and Neal Lawson

12.45 End




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reasonable manners, in the blogosphere

Dear readers of Rupert's Read; One thing I am pleased about about this blog is that when we have had debates or disagreements here, they have virtually always been good-tempered. Because the norm out there in the blogosphere is often not like that. Take 'Comment is Free', for example, on the Guardian Unlimited site: the level of debate on CIF is pretty awful, frankly, in terms of civility. It is a very unpleasant place to take part in any debate, generally, unless perhaps (as most commenters do) one hides behind the veil of anonymity (which 'ain't allowed' here). And the truth is, in case any fellow commenters reading this don't realise it, that there are many many people who get put off even reading (let alone posting to) CIF because of the volume of plain nasty comments that they risk getting, when they do. I am slightly singling out CIF here, because I believe that this is actually one of the worst places on the blogosphere in terms of this kind of ...

Medialens under the lens, over Syria and Libya: Becoming the new Dave Sparts?

I have long been an active supporter of Medialens ( http://www.medialens.org/ ). Like many others, I have supported them with money, time, tips, and I have been proud to have done so. For they have done very important groundbreaking work over the years challenging the inanities and distortions of the 'mainstream' media. They have for example written important critiques of mainstream media coverage of dangerous climate change, of Iraq Body Count, of the corporate nature of most of our media, and much more besides. They have held the corporate media to account time and again. They ought to be saluted for all of that. It is therefore with a sense of deep regret (as well as of some foreboding) that I have finally to write to address the ways in which, lately, some of the wheels seem to be coming off their wagon. An early warning sign perhaps was their long-running spat with George Monbiot, over the Rwandan genocide and the terrible atr...