The rise of the… my number 8

There is something really scary happening in Britain. I do not think the British, mainly the working class, are racist, but I can see that awful racist party that is the STD after the sex of British politics getting a bit more electoral success over the coming years. I am not going to even mention their name on this blog post, but I think those British readers will know who I am on about.

There is a massive campaign to stop this party getting the votes it does not deserve, with groups like Fight Against Fascism and the TUC mobilising to try and neutralise the treat of that party. But I do not think this is going to work as their very focus seems to be missing the point.

The reason I think that party is going to get more electoral success is because of the lack of another radical (left) voting alternative. For years people have been saying that New Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems are all the same, that they are becoming disillusioned with voting because of this. During this time there had been no alternative force to vote for. Sure, you have the Greens, but they wrongly have the image amongst the British public that they are a one issue party, so do not count on them to pose the best alternative to that party. Then you have RESPECT, who, like every other left wing party have (and will do further in the future) become factious and are splitting. So do not expect them to pose an alternative.

The last time the far right ever really got as much support as they do now it was the 1930’s. The time of the Battle of Cable Street. At least this time we had an alternative on the left with the Communist Party. But now where are the alternatives?

People are going to vote for that party because they are different to New Labour, the Tories and Lib Dems. And that makes me sad.

Despite the work of Fight Against Fascism and the TUC (among many others) of which I support, and would gleefully help, I think the best way of countering the threat of that party is with a united left wing party who can give us an alternative vote to the main stream parties, and who can grow like that party have. But that is not going to happen, just look at the last attempt, RESPECT, funnily it was RESPECT’s MP that helped with the split. Ironic as getting an MP should had been the basis of expanding its support.

The best we can hope for is for the Tories to get into power, which could force New Labour to become Labour again and perhaps unite the left. But then they have a chance to get into power regardless, and I am too cynical to actually expect it to happen.

I’ll cheer myself up by listening to my number 8 favourite album of 2008:

8. Does It Offend You, Yeah? – You Have No Idea What You’re Getting Yourself Into

I came across this band as me and Johny 2 walked into the NME Awards tour last year down in Portsmouth. We walked in to what turned out to be the last song of their set, of which we heard about 40 seconds of it. But it only took 40 seconds of a heavy droning bass rift to make me explore this band further.

Before the album had come out with only a few songs released on their myspace, they had already become my going out band. We Are Rockstars, Let’s Make Out, Weird Science and Battle Royale were my essential tunes to listen to before going out for a night on the amber nectar. I cheesily call them rock’n’bass, they are the perfect get up and jump sort of band, get your heart beat racing with their bass and synth driven style of rock.

Then, wam bam, they released Dawn Of The Dead as a single. So different to what I had previously heard, primly cut specifically for the radio, I did not recognise who it was at first. It is essentially a pop song, but not one that you would be embarrassed to be seen listening to.

Apart from Dawn Of The Dead, the rest of the album is a fusion of rock’n’bass and pure punk attitude. Does It Offend You, Yeah want you to know where they are coming from, and they don’t care if that offends you. (Oh my cheese continues)

Oh and did I mention they are from my home town of Reading

Personal highlights on the album With a Heavy Heart (I Regret to Inform You) and Let’s Make Out.

Previous:

9. Vampire Weekend – Vampire Weekend

10. The Magnetic Fields – Distortion

Feeling dirty

I thought I was alone in this sentiment: things are getting so bad (environmentally) that I half hope the Tories do get into power. However there is someone else who at least considered it, George Monbiot. That made me feel in better company. Monbiot did go on to say “my first thought was ‘I hope the Tories get in’. My second thought was ‘What the hell am I saying?’”

It is not just New Labour’s environmental credentials that are non-existent by agreeing to a third runway at Heathrow (something Cameron has said he would scrap); it is their complete disregard for our privacy and rights that is really scary. Jacqui Smith is the female Stalin. She scares the hell out of me with her perusal of 42 days, ID cards, DNA, email and text message databases, CCTV systems and now secret gag orders. I painfully remember that it was the Tories who all (but one) voted against 42 days in the Commons.

I know the consequences of me thinking this. I am a Green Party supporter. I consider myself wholly a hippy, liberal, wishwashy, self-hating, weed smoking, terrorist supporting, [add further nonsense claims about left wingers] leftie. I believe the Tories are essentially a party who only look after their own. But my regard of human rights and civil liberties coupled with my passion for the environment have caused me to internally conflict with my dream of economic equality and an increase in nationalisation of important services (banking, rail, reverse privatisation of NHS).

I could have said nothing. If I just voted Green in the next election as I will do, the Tories would have gotten into power anyway, and then people wouldn’t know I had been having this internal conflict. However it is out there now- I have a secret wish for them to get into power.

At least then it might make New Labour turn back to the Labour of old and kick out the business orientated, environment hating, self-demigod believers that inhabit the party at present, and then we would have a more recognisable party that represents truer social democracy, and who have a chance of getting into power. (See, I am trying to justify to myself all of what I said before).

I feel so dirty.

The Biggest Open Air Prison In The World

For those of you who have had the grace of hearing my baby/vegetarian analogy, you know that my reasoning arguments are often crude and simplistic. But that won’t stop me as here is another one:

If you and your family were under house arrest (could not communicate with anyone outside or even go outside) by a group of people who don’t have political power over you, and who only passed through to your family one meal per day, would you do something? If in your house you had a gun, would you or someone else in your family use this gun to try and end this situation?

Well this is one way of looking at the situation in Gaza.

I know this is a simplistic way of looking at things, and there are far more complex issues involved, but essentially the rocket attacks on Israel via Gaza are partly a reaction to Israeli control of Gaza and the severe economic and humanitarian sanctions imposed on the Palestinian people in Gaza by Israel- just because Israel does not like the democratically elected Hamas government (who admittedly can be more than a tad extreme).

Israel of course has a right to defend itself against these rocket attacks, but the scale to which they have reacted in recent weeks is sickening, but sadly not unexpected, Israel was born out of aggression, fear and genocide.

The blockade of Gaza by Israel has lead to the description of the biggest open air prison being suggested of Gaza. By road, air and sea Israel controls all imports into the country (apart from those that are smuggled), which include food, electricity and aid. There are numerous reports of Israel cutting off all food and energy imports into Gaza for days on end.

So if you were in Gaza would you sit back and say ‘fair play to Israel, they don’t like the government we’ve elected so they have every right to cause untold disruption and chaos in what should be my home country…’ Na, it does not work like that. When you’re put in intolerable positions where not just your own, but your family’s, your friend’s, your community’s and everyone around you’s life is in danger you react, you try and stop it, you try and make things better.

So in a way I empathise with the rocket attacks. NO, WAIT. I didn’t say I agree with the attacks, I just said I empathise- I can understand why they launch rockets into Israel. But then again I empathise with Israel’s right to defend its citizens, even though they bought it on themselves. Yet this is where the catch 22 situation comes into play. Without the hindsight of the complete withdrawal of the Israeli blockade, how do we know attacks against Israel will stop?

I believe the first step in resolving this situation is for America to pull its arse out of where ever it has been sticking it and actually stop supporting Israel in the way it does. America needs to say to Israel ‘now come on, now you’re just being stupid’. Then America and the UN need to send troops there, not to fight the Israeli forces but to create a bit of stability among the borders by controlling them and what goes in/out of Gaza. This force would of course need to be unbiased- something that would never happen with America’s current support of Israel. Then, we need three states. The old two state solution is far far away, not least because Gaza and the West Bank are not connected, but they are now so politically diverse considering the West Bank being under Fatah control and Gaza experiencing what it is currently experiencing (bombing, attacking and destroying Gaza will only radicalise those living in Gaza even more)

Yet this is not going to happen anytime soon. With all the hope of change Obama’s victory in America bought with it, he has only managed to say nothing but that there is no point in having two voices come out of America about the situation. Maybe this means he will differ from what Bush has recently said (Bush bumming Israel) and he doesn’t want to polarise American attitudes. Maybe it is because a huge majority of America is pro-Israel in this war and Obama doesn’t want to get off o the wrong foot. Or, he agrees with Bush and Israel…

***********

pro-Palestine, pro-Israel, pro-peace

Defeating the terrorists

I always thought the House of Lords was an undemocratic, elitist and the use-ridden side of British politics, but on 13 October 2008 the Lords single handedly defeated terrorism and exemplified humanity and Britishness in one sweep.

Pushed through the House of Commons by bribing the DUP, the proposed 42-day terror detention extension was demolished in the Lords.

Not only was it argued that 42-days is unworkable, but most importantly that it was anti-British and a serious attack on civil liberties. When the day comes for civil liberties to be destroyed in the fight against terrorism, then the day will be the one where Britain loses what it means to be British, and everything fought for in the Second World War becomes meaningless. I wonder if those who support the 42-day limit also think Churchill was a great leader- if so, hypocrisy!

Why erode liberties when there is no need to?

The point is, it is not about whether you have anything to hide, it is about your right to privacy. It ties into the debate on CCTV and ID Cards. This may sound like an extreme example but how would you feel if you had to write down in detail everything you have done each day and send that to the government or the police. Alternatively, if everywhere you walk, a person follows you with a camcorder, filming your every move and the doing what they want with the film. If you have nothing to hide then surely it does not matter… Let us do away with curtains at the same time and promote dogging!

It’s so amusing so many people are scared by two terrorist attacks in the UK in 7 years- I wonder how these people would had coped during the blitz. Although, what is more amusing is that we needed the out-of-date aristocracy to protect us from the terrorists in ourselves and our ‘democratic representatives’ in the Commons. I would not go as far to say that the Lords have justified their existence, but today they went someway to doing so.

An idiot’s guide to the economy… the idiot being me

There are some people who it effects, some should be worried, some people’s lives destroyed, but in the most part, this financial ‘crisis’ is more of a financial circus.

We have witnessed history these last few weeks. Throughout human existence, we have strived for the perfect system to govern and to live by, and now we can cross free market capitalism off of the list. Perhaps the next system we will try will be the fair society, we will have to see.

Regardless, the whole mess, although started by free market loving elitist ‘fat cats’ through their creation of a debt ridden society they can milk for all it is worth, is now being pressed forward by the doomsday creating media (it makes a good story)- most notably BBC News.

Turn on BBC Breakfast in the morning and see on one of the screens in the background the words ‘financial’ and ‘crisis’ (crisis in huge bold red letters), even while talking about gardening or football. Nor does it help when guests come in trying to downplay, help and improve the situation and Sian Williams starts asking “But is it?” and “isn’t it true that the fall in shares is draining people of their blood?”- or words to that effect. What this is doing is scaring people into making decisions that is actually making the circus worse.

Take shares for example, if you have shares in a major company, despite the value falling it does not mean you have to sell, this makes them cheaper. By keeping your shares, you can wait a couple of years until the economy starts growing again and then sell them (or keep them) when they are worth more. There are some people who are effected, those whose pensions are tied up in shares and need to access those them very soon (next 2 years) for example, will have pensions worth less than a couple of years back. However, for the rest of us, even those who have shares or interests in companies that will not go bust, there is no need to worry about shares and the stockmarket at all, yet watch any news programme and the first topic is likely to be how the FSTE 100 has fallen 200 points.

Some of these principles also apply to the banks. In the UK all savings up to £50,000 are guaranteed by the government- so if you have less than this in the bank then leave it, you wont lose it. By taking your money out of the bank, then the bank will have less money, they are less likely to borrow, approve loans and mortgages and their confidence and shares will go down. This ties into the need for nationalisation.

In my most humble of opinions, every British based bank should be nationalised. This does not mean in terms of the government directly running the banks, but instead the government should own all the shares- become the majority (and only) shareholder. Not only will this guarantee 100% of savings, not only will it mean the Treasury could bank billions and billions in profit each year (a way to lower taxes), but it also means that loans, credit and more importantly mortgages can be controlled. The government can stop people getting into stupid debt, ensuring you only buy what you can afford. With mortgages, it means the government can repossess your house if you ca not pay for it, but actually, instead of them kicking you out, it allows them to start renting the place back to you at a cheaper rate. No government would want to be seen increasing the number of homeless on the streets, and to not have a house and hence a job it means less tax revenue. Besides, paying rent to the government once again adds coppers to the Treasury.

Now we see the nationalisation of banks starting and new government laws mean councils can buy half of homes where families are struggling to afford their mortgages, so in my opinion, and I hate to admit it, this government is doing right (now). It’s funny though to see the ‘little state, de-regulate’ Tories not saying a thing, which is of course no surprise, their whole ideology is collapsing around them, if Cameron was in power then he would have to do the exact same thing as Brown is doing, and this would show the hypocrisy and lunacy of Tory politics. This is paralleled across the pond with Bush’s $700 billion bail out of the banks in America.

So now, the world has changed, but there is no need to be scared. Now we can find our new leaders, our new ideologies. We can re-build humanity and the world, raped by the greed of money, and change it into something that benefits and adds to the human experience.

I love this guy…

… Dennis Kucinich.

He is a Member of the US House of Presentatives from Ohio. He ran for the Democratic Presidential Nomination in 2004 and 2008, but was sadly brushed aside to the world’s loss.

I first became aware of Kucinich when i did a test to find out which Presidental Candidate i was most like- it turned out that every answer i gave fitted Kucinichs’ policies perfectly.

He is one of the only politicians in America with the guts to attempt bring about impeachment upon George W. Bush, yet it fails everytime as other Democrats are afraid of what would happen to them politically if they support the articles.

Anyway, while the spotlight at the Democratic Convention was being hogged by Hilary Clinton on tuesday, Kucinich came up with perhaps one of the most uplifting and hopefully one of the most important political speechs of recent times. It may not had been intellectually heavy, it may not had been groundbreaking, it may had not had contained revolutionary policies, but Kucinich shows, as he always has, how messed up America is under the Republicans, and he delivers it in a way Americans would recognise- as a preacherman!

Here’s the video:

Here is the transcript of his speech:

“It’s Election Day 2008. We Democrats are giving America a wake-up call. Wake up, America. In 2001, the oil companies, the war contractors and the neo-con artists seized the economy and have added 4 trillion dollars of unproductive spending to the national debt. We now pay four times more for defense, three times more for gasoline and home heating oil and twice what we paid for health care.

Millions of Americans have lost their jobs, their homes, their health care, their pensions. Trillions of dollars for an unnecessary war paid with borrowed money. Tens of billions of dollars in cash and weapons disappeared into thin air, at the cost of the lives of our troops and innocent Iraqis, while all the president’s oilmen are maneuvering to grab Iraq’s oil.

Borrowed money to bomb bridges in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. No money to rebuild bridges in America. Money to start a hot war with Iran. Now we have another cold war with Russia, while the American economy has become a game of Russian roulette.

If there was an Olympics for misleading, mismanaging and misappropriating, this administration would take the gold. World records for violations of national and international laws. They want another four-year term to continue to alienate our allies, spend our children’s inheritance and hollow out our economy.

We can’t afford another Republican administration. Wake up, America. The insurance companies took over health care. Wake up, America. The pharmaceutical companies took over drug pricing.

Wake up, America. The speculators took over Wall Street. Wake up, America. They want to take your Social Security. Wake up, America. Multinational corporations took over our trade policies, factories are closing, good paying jobs lost.

Wake up, America. We went into Iraq for oil. The oil companies want more. War against Iran will mean $10-a-gallon gasoline. The oil administration wants to drill more, into your wallet. Wake up, America. Weapons contractors want more. An Iran war will cost 5 to 10 trillion dollars.

This administration can tap our phones. They can’t tap our creative spirit. They can open our mail. They can’t open economic opportunities. They can track our every move. They lost track of the economy while the cost of food, gasoline and electricity skyrockets. They skillfully played our post-9/11 fears and allowed the few to profit at the expense of the many. Every day we get the color orange, while the oil companies, the insurance companies, the speculators, the war contractors get the color green.

Wake up, America. This is not a call for you to take a new direction from right to left. This is call for you to go from down to up. Up with the rights of workers. Up with wages. Up with fair trade. Up with creating millions of good paying jobs, rebuilding our bridges, ports and water systems. Up with creating millions of sustainable energy jobs to lower the cost of energy, lower carbon emissions and protect the environment.

Up with health care for all. Up with education for all. Up with home ownership. Up with guaranteed retirement benefits. Up with peace. Up with prosperity. Up with the Democratic Party. Up with Obama-Biden.

Wake up, America. Wake up, America. Wake up, America.”

Kucinich is a magical and perhaps a slightly unconventional speech maker. Here is another video i found of him:

He also has a British wife.

Kucinich is the kind of politician we need in the UK, instead of ‘dull old not a socialist’ Brown and ’seen it before, eh Tony?’ Cameron. America are lucky they have Kucinich, and with his recent performance at the Democratic Convention, there is no doubt that he would had been able to capture the hearts and minds of the American population if he had secured the Democratic nomination.

Let’s ship him over to Britain and let him run this country!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Kucinich

The UK Left should be smug, not wallowing in selfpity

This should be a booming time for the socialist and green movements. It is a time where we should be smug. Our smiles should be brimming from ear to ear at the prospect of the geminate sucker punch of ‘I told you so’ and the opportunity that is in front of us. Yet, we are instead waiting for other people to take the initiative. All this waiting is doing is to play into the hand of an Etonian, who is unmistakably buoyant that the only puissant opposition there is to New Labour is his band of affluent ninnies.

Five interdependent areas should be politically booming, where the red-greens should be taking the initiative by turning them into vote winners and realms of popular support. These are: the environment, terrorism, globalisation, socialist ideology and the factionary subject of nationalism.

___________________

Environmentalists have long stated their claim for the theory of peak oil, and the dangerous race for biofuels. We are now seeing the results of these issues. The basic premise of demand and supply is that as the supply of oil goes down and the demand of oil stays the same or increases, then the price of oil will go up. Peak oil fits into this under supply. As oil is a natural resource, it is going to run out, there is not an endless supply of it. [http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/102302_campbell.html] There has not been a discovery of a ‘giant’ oil field since 1976 with a capacity of over 10 billion barrels. [http://www.peakoil.net/AIMseminar/UU_AIM_Robelius.pdf] Originally, oil companies would refuse to acknowledge the idea of peak oil, however now speculation of peak oil works to the benefit of oil companies because it drives up the price of oil and therefore profits. This is not to say that peak oil is just a theory, but instead supports the idea of regulating oil companies, taxing them more and using this money to lower petrol prices. So where are the socialists arguing this case? Even better than using the money to lower fuel bills is to plough the money into renewable energy to make Britain self-sufficient, lower carbon emissions and lower fuel bills. So where are the environmentalists arguing this case?

By becoming energy self-sufficient, we can end the terrorist threat – face it, the only reason we are encamped in the Middle East is because of oil – fight globalisation, and for the more conservative of you, will support British (renewable)energy companies.

There is further nationalism within the environmentalist movement because of its promotion of local produce, and by supporting British farmers. By fighting with this nationalistic stance, the left can win support from the floaters deflecting towards the far-right while at the same time help Britain end its reliance on foreign countries and lower its carbon emissions.

Biofuels is another ‘I told you so’. Politicians have long pushed for biofuels, believing them to be the best way to combat climate change without investing heavily into renewable sources. Environmentalists, instead of being appeased, are livid at such ignorance. [http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11811-biofuel-production-may-raise-price-of-food--.html, http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/consumer_goods/article602228.ece] Although not all biofuels are bad biofuels, the demand for ethanol from crops such as corn has helped lead to an increase in the price of food. [http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/food-price-rises-force-biofuel-uturn-859979.html] As more crops are being used to feed our cars, there is less food to feed ourselves. Again, supply decreases so price goes up. It is simple economics! I have a letter from the office of the Transport Minister in 2007 (Stephan Ladyman) that claims they have found no correlation between high wheat prices and the pursuit of biofuels. (I will post it up here when I am next near a scanner). It is great to see our Government on top of things, I wonder what they would say now. [http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/200828/1423/UK-government-to-proceed-cautiously-on-biofuels]

As with oil prices, the left need to be seizing the opportunity of high food prices to win the support of those worse off; the Tories, while providing the only opposition to New Labour, are not going to help them. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/21/conservatives.labour, http://www.labourhome.org/story/2008/7/18/74035/5652]

It pains me not to see the left take greater advantage of the current financial crisis. As with regulating and taxing oil companies, the same should happen to energy companies who will soon be passing on their increased costs to their customers.

Despite the unions becoming more active in support of pay rises for its workers, we see the demands being denied while business men in the city give themselves higher than inflation pay rises and bonuses. [http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/02/uk-chancellor-attacks-city-bonuses.html, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2022636/City-bonuses-defy-credit-crunch-and-hit-new-record-of-andpound13bn.html]

The current climate is perfect to preach higher taxes for the rich to decrease the wealth gap between the rich and the poor. Moreover, perhaps socialists should abandon their interest in the free trade market to preach protectionism in the case of the fear of businesses moving aboard when faced with higher taxes. ‘If you leave Britain when it needs you, you will never be able to come back and exploit its public.’ We are currently a consumerist market; no business will want to lose us. The change in attitude of the left to free trade markets and protectionism would be the perfect example of how the left can adapt and modernise, without falling into the hands of the affluent as Labour did in the early 90’s. (I do realise that Marx did state that free trade can be described as exploitation, yet it appears that free trade has appeared to have been accepted by many modern day socialists).

___________________

So come on you socialists, you environmentalists, you angry liberal Brits, let us unite and fight this wave of bitterness.

Applauding a Tory

I never thought I would say this, but I respect and applaud Tory MP David Davis on his resignation from the House of Commons. His reasoning (obviously one of many) for this was to force a by-election in the constituency of Haltemprice and Howden in order to debate the issue of the 42-day terror detention limit.

Maybe Davis is just trying to impose more election woe upon New Labour, but nonetheless, Davis, along with all but one Tory MP opposed the 42-day terror detention expansion. Sadly for the British public, the limit was passed in the Commons, and will now come under attack within the House of Lords.

There is not one reason for the terror detention limit to have to be increased. If the police cannot find enough evidence to charge somebody of a suspected terror incident or conspiracy to commit terror within 28 days then the chances are they never did or never were.

But let us not forget why we should oppose the increase in the detention limit; our civil liberties. British people have been fighting for generations for our rights, and now we are in a age where we are willing to throw them all away without an ounce of fight.

There was a time when the sacrifice of our rights and liberties would be the last straw. However, with large public support for this extension, and the fact that ID Cards are being debated, it seems that any terrorist threat has succeeded. The whole concept of terrorism is to scare people and to therefore control them, and so be it, it has.

I wonder whether these people supporting the extension (and on a larger scale ID Cards), are the same people who feel that it means nothing to be British any more, and that there is a lack of a British identity. Where has the patriotism of the British gone; we will never give up, we keep fighting, and fight for our principles, we will never give in- Churchill will be turning in his grave.

Craig Murray commented at People & Planet’s Shared Planet event in 2007 that MI5 have suggested there are around 2000 terrorist suspects in the UK, however, Murray notes that considering the number of terrorist attacks in the UK, they are perhaps the most inefficient terrorists of all time.

I would also like to point out that there have not been any terror arrests that have required more than the current 28-days. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for the need to extend the limit.

Yet we are now at a stage where the limit has been passed – in the Commons at least – and where there is large public support for it. People say this country is going down the pan, they create scapegoats out of ‘foreigners’. I say if it is going down the pan, it is because British people have lost British principles. We no longer have the fight within us to secure our own and others liberties. We would rather throw them all away and let any actual and fictional terrorists win.

The Social Environmentalist

This is a key period for the environmental movement. If it were seen to be supporting the high price of fuel, then it will lose a large majority of its support. However, the higher cost of oil will lead to a fall in demand, essential in the fight against climate change.

Along with the rise in the cost of fuel, there has been a visible public outburst of rage – fuelled by the media – at the proposed increase in car tax for gas guzzling cars in October.

From the viewpoint of an environmentalist in a low income household, there is an obvious conflict; the climate verses being able to support oneself. This conflict is not helped with the possibility of being labelled a hypocrite by fellow environmentalists.

To fully engage the argument, it is important to note that the world oil price will now forever be high. This is down to peak oil supplies. Added to this, no country has been able to locate a viable ‘giant’ oil field for 30 years. We also have to take into account that although the Government are raking it in from high taxes placed upon fuel, it is not the Government who control the overall oil price. High prices are not limited to just this country. Recently, there have been other protests around Europe, including a rather violent riot in Belgium.

The most important issue that needs to be taken into account to help out the poorer members in society, while at the same time fight climate change, is the supply and demand of oil.

Gordon Brown’s recent reaction to the ‘oil crisis’ reaffirms his defunct commitment to the environment. By not offering viable alternatives to the car, and instead attempting to increase the supply of oil – by pleading with North Sea oil suppliers to increase supply – Brown has shown that any serious attempt to reduce our carbon emissions is not on the present Government’s agenda.

Let us not focus entirely on the Government during this period though. Let us also look at the oil suppliers themselves. At the start of this year, Shell announced a record breaking annual profit of £13.9 billion. The shareholders of these companies – that also include BP and ExxonMobil– must be sweating with excitement at the prospect of an even higher payback and increased yearly bonus at the expense of ordinary people who are struggling to put food on their families’ tables.

Now, we can never expect any oil company to show any form of corporate responsibility, especially when it is not possible to boycott their drug – however, consider the possible implications for the company of a 60 million strong petition being delivered to their next shareholders meeting.

Moving back to the issue of Government policy; protesters have commanded that the Government ease the impact of high oil prices by reducing the tax on fuel. The environmentalist in me is outraged at such an idea; we need to be lowing the demand for oil. However on the other side of my shoulder – the low income stricken angel, dependent upon the main income earner being able to drive, is whispering in my ear that the poorer members of society are being severely hit, including myself.

There are measures I believe can ease this situation. As noted, the world oil price shall conceivably never fall again. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the fuel tax should go down to ease pressure. Instead there should be a commitment from the Government that this money will be used for one of two things.

Firstly, there needs to be a huge rise in the investment into all areas of public transport. This includes: increasing the capacity of trains, making buses, coaches and trains more luxurious to make them more appealing, finally, and most importantly, to subside and lower the cost of using buses and trains. It is ludicrous that it is cheaper to go by car than by train in some circumstances.

It is essential that to reduce the number of cars on the road, and reduce the demand for petrol, there needs to be viable and suitable public alternatives.

Secondly, the money made from the rise in the price of fuel should be used to help subsidise essential travellers. These include manual labourers, such as plumbers and electricians, who need either their van or car for transport and to carry tools and materials. In many cases, these manual workers do not get fuel paid for them by their companies, and the fall in wages in these areas mean that it is increasingly difficult to run their transport and to feed their families.

The recent lorry protest demanded the introduction of an essential duty to lower the cost of fuel for truck drivers. Although I do agree with this duty, I do not agree that it should be given to long distance truck drivers. The reason for this is because I believe it is environmentally more effective to move haulage back onto the rail. However, it is naïve to suggest that this would not have dire consequences, as there will be high unemployment among former truck drivers. If significant investment in retraining programmes were implemented however, then it could be possible to manoeuvre these recently unemployed into the rail haulage network, working on transporting huge amounts of resources around the country on late night trains.

These two measures are not going to lower the cost of oil, however, it could ease and assist members of the public who financially need the most help.

This moves me onto the prospect of increased car taxes for those cars that emit higher emissions. As an environmentalist, I fully endorse a rise in car tax for higher polluting cars. However, coming from a working class background, the current proposals are economically destructive for British families.

Groups including Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace have commented how these would give green taxes a bad name. This is true. Although it is clear that radical action needs to be taken to halt the rate of climate change, it is also counter-productive for the poorer members of society – those whose apathy needs smashing – to be negatively impacted by these taxes.

Many economic, political and social commentators have suggested that the proposition of the tax being implemented on cars going back to 2001 is going to hit the poorest hardest. For example, it is highly unlikely that an average family would had considered how much carbon a new car would emit back in 2002 when they bought it. However, 6 years later, they will be taxed upwards of a hundred pounds a year extra for a condition that would not even be on the specification of a new car in 2002.

Once again, it would be the poorest who are the most vulnerable, and who will be hit hardest.

At the same time, the taxes should be implemented. We cannot give up on our commitment on the environment. These taxes however should only be placed upon cars that are bought from October 2008 onwards.

The risk is that families looking for new cars will purchase used inefficient cars, but at least at the same time it will put added pressure on car manufacturers to improve efficiency on new cars while not hitting those with low incomes who need their car in order to live the most.

There are therefore steps that can be taken by the Government to help those worse off from the rise in oil prices, while at the same time reaffirm their commitment to fighting climate change. However, whether the current or any future Government would dare be radical enough to implement such changes to move us away from this doomed addiction to oil that we have seems highly unlikely.