Rupert's Read

Norwich Green Party Statement on the removal of City Councillors Samir Jeraj, acting Leader of the Norwich Green Party City Councillors, today issued a statement on Monday's High Court ruling to remove 13 City Councillors: "Monday's ruling to remove one third of Norwich City Councillors without setting a date for the election of new ones is the worst possible outcome for the people of Norwich and for democracy. This situation is testament to the completely inept way in which the plan for a unitary authority has been approached. "It is outrageous that so many voters will have to suffer the effects of a weakened Council as a result of legal ruling to remove a third of the Council; contrary to common sense. On the other hand, the fact that the Greens are now joint first place on the City Council shows how close Norwich Greens are to becoming the first Green controlled Council in the country. Norwich Green Party thanks outgoing Councillors for their dedica...

Some forms of growth are of course more damaging than others. And: It is of course in principle possible to have economic growth that does not do environmental damage. It is in principle possible to separate economic growth from negative impacts and from increased throughput of 'raw materials'. But (1) There is no evidence that economic growth is in general even now compatible with reducing emissions, impacts etc. - the 'lockstep' between CO2 emissions and growth has not been obliterated; (2) There is good reason to believe that it is in principle as well as in practice impossible to have endless economic growth without devastating environmental impacts - what Aubrey Meyer calls, with irony, the 'angelisation' of economic growth (evaporation of impacts of economic activity) is probably impossible, (3) One such good reason is that growth to infinity is simply absurd, on a finite planet, (4) If you have a real increase in economic activity without an...

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/rupert-read/why-greens-should-get-behind-av   So, it is indeed going to be May 5, as I wrote in breaking the news, last week: http://www.leftfootforward.org/2010/07/av-referendum-to-be-announced-next-week-held-in-may/ . The battle-lines are already being drawn – it is clear that there will be big money behind the campaign to stop change, and retain the status quo. Beside the predictable nonsense from these wreckers (cf. http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/guy-aitchison/how-opponents-of-av-plan-to-wreck-referendum ), some of 'the forces of conservatism' are also (rightly) pointing out some problems with the government's plans – such as the reduction in seat-numbers, which is liable to be anti-democratic, especially in a country whose population is continuing to rise. But it is important to be clear that, when it actually comes to the referendum, those problems will no longer be relevant. Parliament will decid...

Surely its doesn't take that long to define 'green'!: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2010-07-01a.4747.h&s=caroline+lucas#g4747.q0   [Hat-tip: Green Councillor Andrew Boswell]

I broke the story earlier today that Clegg plans for the AV referendum to take place next May: http://bit.ly/bMDDOz . See James MacIntrye taking up the story, here: http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/public-accounts/2010/07/160-forward-story-cameron UPDATE (Evening): No official announcement/confirmation - looks like the coalition are sticking to announcing the date officially next week (I think they would look bad if they didn't announce it through Parliament). BUT: After Ross Hawkins, (Beeb Political Correspondent) phoned me earlier to try to establish who my source was, I just saw James Landale (Beeb Political Correspondent) confirm that the BBC believes that the LFF story that I broke above is correct: That the government will announce next week that the referendum will be held on May 5 2011. UPDATE (Morning of 2nd): The story is now the lead on the BBC, and is spreading all over the media. My story was right, and the coalition may have been forced to bring forward its tacit...

I have been asked to give a few references that may help throw into clearer view how I understand the new ideology of ecologism, in contrast to the dominant ideology of liberalism (the ideology which motivates not only the LibDems, but most Conservatives and most Labour people too, now that socialism is supposedly dead). These links may help, plus of course the books etc referred to within them, for full detail. (Note, you may not be able to view some of the facebook ones, if you aren't my 'friend' on facebook (Advt..  ;-)   http://www.worldwidewords.org/turnsofphrase/tp-eco1.htm http://home.ca.inter.net/~greenweb/Ecologism.html  & http://home.ca.inter.net/~greenweb/Dobson-Comment.html http://rupertsread.blogspot.com/2010/03/eco-philosophy_12.html http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150180049030301 http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=328951325300 http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=300005325300 http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id...