Category: Climate Crisis

  • Why LA is on fire (it’s not just climate change)

    Spread the love

    Jack Marley, The Conversation

    The fires that have engulfed Los Angeles cap the hottest decade in history.

    Each year in the last ten was record-warm, but 2024 was the warmest ever recorded. Last year, Earth was 1.6°C hotter than the temperature average of the late 19th century, which was before widespread fossil fuel burning had significantly altered the climate.

    Still, the conflagrations which have so far claimed 25 lives and razed thousands of homes are not inevitable – even on our overheating planet.

    “While climate change sets the stage for larger and more intense fires, humans are actively fanning the flames,” says Virginia Iglesias, a climate scientist at the University of Colorado Boulder.


    This roundup of The Conversation’s climate coverage comes from our award-winning weekly climate action newsletter. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed.


    Extreme heat dries out vegetation and the soil. Wildfires ignite more easily, spread faster and burn with greater intensity in these conditions, as parched land is more flammable. In the western US, aridity caused by climate change has helped double the amount of combustible forest since 1984.

    Nights are warming faster than days globally, and dusk has brought no reprieve from the fires menacing the residential areas of Pacific Palisades and Altadena. It’s been more than a week since the first spark but firefighters warn several more may pass before the flames are fully contained.

    High winds and whiplash

    Something is filling the fires with oxygen and spreading their embers to dry brush. The Santa Ana winds that blow down the San Gabriel Mountains between autumn and January lose moisture and gain heat as they rush downslope, and these gusts reached hurricane strength (exceeding 80 miles per hour) at the start of 2025.

    “When the wind is blowing like this, there is very little chance of stopping fires,” says Jon Keeley, a plant ecologist at the University of California, Los Angeles.

    Gusts have whipped the fire front onward and made containing the blazes difficult. EPA-EFE/Allison Dinner

    Santa Ana would cause much less havoc in a more typical wet season, which runs from October to April in California. Ming Pan, a hydrologist who tracks the state’s water supplies, estimates that soil moisture in southern California is in the bottom 2% of historical records for early January.

    In other words, the area around LA is about as dry as scientists have ever known it to be at this time of year. Why? Well, southern California has received less than 10% of the rain it would normally get from October onward. But it had the opposite problem last winter.

    “Unusually wet winters in both 2022-23 and 2023-24 led to increased vegetation growth, providing more fuel for the fires,” says Doug Specht, a geographer at the University of Westminster.

    “This cycle of wet and dry extremes, known as ‘hydroclimate whiplash’, is part of the increasingly intense climate cycles caused by climate change.”

    Affluent LA is the most recent arena of climate disaster to capture the world’s attention. Yet it is the poorest 20% of humanity who have felt the sting of whiplashes between drought and downpour most keenly according to Specht.

    When unusually heavy rain meets baked ground that cannot easily absorb it, as it did across much of east Africa in spring 2024, flash floods and landslides follow.

    ‘Perpetually on the brink of catastrophe’

    Now we come to the more immediately tractable causes of these fires.

    “Fire is a natural process that has shaped ecosystems for over 420 million years,” Iglesias says.

    “Indigenous people historically used controlled burns to manage landscapes and reduce fuel buildup. However, a century of fire suppression has allowed vast areas to accumulate dense fuels, priming them for larger and more intense wildfires.”

    European colonisation has transformed relationships with the land. Subsequent arrivals to southern California have included invasive plants capable of overrunning native flora and forming dense, uninterrupted fuel beds.

    The legacy of these fires may be more invasive plants, and more flammable landscapes. That’s because invasive species are typically better at exploiting extreme weather, their tendrils colonising land disturbed by fire before native species can recover.

    The overwhelming majority of wildfires that affect people are also ignited by them, intentionally or otherwise. Lightning has been ruled out for the LA fires so that leaves a wealth of human explanations: arson, unattended campfires, overheating engines or sparks from power lines that utilities have neglected to replace.

    “More people now live in and at the edges of wildland areas, and the power grid has expanded with them. That creates more opportunities for fires to start,” Keeley adds.

    The Eaton fire which erupted near Altadena on January 7 would have probably burned out in citrus orchards 50 years ago. Today, there is no buffer between homes and the wildland, Keeley says.

    Fast-moving wildfires have engulfed residential neighbourhoods with stunning speed. EPA-EFE/Allison Dinner

    Whether it was wise to bring flammable homes and cars into this fire-adapted wildland is a debate that should have started nearly a century ago, after the catastrophic Malibu fire in 1930. It didn’t, and late urban historian Mike Davis had a lot to say about why.

    “Davis, who died in 2022, painted a vivid, if pessimistic picture of Los Angeles as both a real and imagined city perpetually on the brink of catastrophe,” says Alexander Howard, a senior lecturer in English and writing at the University of Sydney.

    “Davis’ Los Angeles is a place where – as he comprehensively details – commercial greed overrides common sense and the social good, where institutional racism marginalises vulnerable communities, and where wilful political inertia ensures history repeats itself with devastating consequences.”

    Davis criticised liberal California politicians who greeted each new fire with calls to cut greenhouse gas emissions, but continued to allow real estate developers to “profitably but insanely, [build] in high-fire-risk areas”.

    Although motivated by greed, these developers were not alone in their assessment of southern California as a tranquil paradise ripe for luxury housing. LA’s urbanisation occurred “during one of the most unusual episodes of climatic and seismic benignity” according to Davis, who traced natural disasters and climate change back several centuries.

    “These spans are too short to serve as reliable proxies for ecological time or to sample the possibilities of future environmental stress,” he writes. “In effect, we think ourselves gods upon the land but we are still really just tourists.”

    Jack Marley, Environment + Energy Editor, The Conversation

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Ecology of Fear: Mike Davis’ history of LA and natural disaster is re-read whenever fire rages in California

    LA fires: Why fast-moving wildfires and those started by human activities are more destructive and harder to contain

    How Santa Ana winds fueled the deadly fires in Southern California

    LA fires show the human cost of climate-driven ‘whiplash’ between wet and dry extremes

  • Right-Wing Sleuths Find the LA Fires Culprit: Once Again, It’s Wokeness

    Spread the love

    Original article by Ari Paul republished from FAIR under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

    CBS Evening News (1/13/25) cited Colorado’s 2021 Marshall Fire as another example of how climate disruption is making wildfires more destructive.

    The devastation of the ongoing Los Angeles fires is an alarm going off, but also the result of society having hit the snooze button long ago (Democracy Now!, 1/9/25; CBS, 1/13/25). Game-changing fires destroyed Paradise, California (NPR, 11/8/23), in 2023, and Lahaina, Hawaii, in 2024—clear warnings, if any were still needed, that the climate catastrophe had arrived.

    “The evidence connecting the climate crisis and extreme wildfires is clear,” the Nature Conservancy (7/9/24) said. “Increased global temperatures and reduced moisture lead to drier conditions and extended fire seasons.”

    The scientific journal Fire Ecology (7/24/23) reported that “climate change is expected to continue to exacerbate impacts to forested ecosystems by increasing the frequency, size and severity of wildfires across the western United States.”

    Now we are watching one of America’s largest cities burn. It’s a severe reminder that the kind of disruption we experienced in the beginning of the Covid pandemic in 2020 is the new normal under climate change.

    The right-wing media, however, have found a culprit—it’s not climate change, but Democratic Party–led wokeness. The coverage demonstrates once again that the W-word can be used to blame literally anything in the Murdoch fantasyland.

    ‘Preoccupation With DEI’

    Alyssia Finley (Wall Street Journal, 1/12/25): “A cynic might wonder if environmentalists interfered with fire prevention in hope of evicting humans.” Another cynic might wonder if the Journal publishes smears without evidence as part of its business model.

    “Megyn Kelly sounded off on Los Angeles Fire Department Chief Kristin Crowley and Mayor Karen Bass,” the New York Post (1/8/25) reported. Former Fox News host Kelly said “that the officials’ preoccupation with diversity, equity and inclusion [DEI] programs distracted them from the city’s fire-combating duties.”

    Wall Street Journal editorial board member Allysia Finley (1/12/25) echoed the charge: “Bloated union contracts and DEI may not have directly hampered the fire response, but they illustrate the government’s wrongheaded priorities.” In other words, the paper didn’t have evidence to blame the fires on firefighter salaries or department diversity, but decided to insinuate as much anyway.

    Other conservative journalists were more direct, like CNN pundit Scott Jennings, who went on CNN NewsNight (1/8/25) to assert:

    As a matter of public policy in California, the main interest in the fire department lately has been in DEI programming and budget cuts, and now we have this massive fire, and people are upset.

    As the Daily Beast (1/9/25) noted, “His response was part of a Republican kneejerk reaction that included President-elect Donald Trump blaming ‘liberals’ and state Gov. Gavin Newsom.”

    The Washington Post (1/10/25) reported that Trump-supporting X owner Elon Musk

    has been inundating his 212 million followers with posts casting blame for the blazes on Democrats and diversity policies, amplifying narratives that have taken hold among far-right activists and Republican leaders.

    Liel Leibovitz, editor-at-large at the conservative Jewish magazine Tablet, blamed the LA devastation on the “woke religion” (New York Post, 1/9/25).

    “There are many things we’ve learned that the Los Angeles Fire Department needs—and more women firefighters isn’t one of them,” moaned National Review editor-in-chief Rich Lowry (New York Post, 1/15/25). “Los Angeles for years has been in the grips of a bizarre obsession with recruiting more women firefighters.”

    Blaming gay singers

    Mentioned by Fox News (1/10/25): $13,000 allocated to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Heritage Month programs. Not mentioned by Fox News: a $126 million boost to the LAPD budget.

    Fox & Friends (1/9/25, 1/9/25) blamed the city’s Democratic leaders and the fire chief for the destruction. Fox News Digital (1/10/25) said:

    While Los Angeles officials were stripping millions in funding from their fire department ahead of one of the most destructive wildfires in state history, hundreds of thousands of dollars were allocated to fund programs such as a “Gay Men’s Chorus” and housing for the transgender homeless.

    You may notice the shift from “millions” to “hundreds of thousands”—the latter, obviously, can’t explain what happened to the former. What can far better explain it is that the city focused much more on funding cops than firefighters (Intercept, 1/8/25). The mayor’s budget plan offered “an increase of more than $138 million for the Los Angeles Police Department; and a decrease of about $23 million for the LA Fire Department” (KTTV, 4/22/24). KABC (1/9/25) reported more recent numbers, saying the “fire department’s budget was cut by $17.6 million,” while the “city’s police department budget increased by $126 million,” according to the city’s controller.

    And in 2023, the LA City Council approved salary increases for cops over objections that these pay boosts “would pull money away from mental health clinicians, homeless outreach workers and many other city needs” (LA Times, 8/23/23). The cop-pay deal was reportedly worth $1 billion (KNBC, 8/23/23).

    LAFD cuts under Mayor Bass were, in fact, big news (KTTV, 1/15/25). Fox overlooked the comparison with the police, one regularly made by city beat reporters who cover public safety and city budgets, and went straight to blaming gay singers.

    Crusade against ‘woke’

    Contrary to the Daily Mail‘s headline (1/14/25), former California first lady Maria Shriver Maria Shriver did not “tear into LA’s woke leaders”; rather, she complained about LA’s insufficient funding of public needs.

    Or take the Daily Mail (1/14/25), a right-wing British tabloid with a huge US footprint, whose headline said former California first lady “Maria Shriver Is Latest Celebrity to Tear Into LA’s Woke Leaders.” But the story went on to say that Shriver had decried the cuts to the LAFD, citing no evidence that she was fighting some culture war against women firefighters.

    Shriver, the ex-wife of actor and former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, was pointing the finger at austerity and calling for more public spending. In other words, Shriver was siding with LAFD Chief Kristin Crowley, who had complained that city budget cuts had failed her department (CNN, 1/12/25). The Mail’s insistence on calling this a crusade against “woke” is just another example of how tediously the conservative media apply this word to almost anything.

    While these accusations highlight diversification in the LA firefighting force, the right never offers real evidence that these hiring practices lead to any kind of hindering of fire response, as University of Southern California education professor Shaun Harper (Time, 1/13/25) noted. If anything, the right admits that miserly budgeting, usually considered a virtue in the conservative philosophy, is the problem.

    Equal opportunity disasters

    These talking points among right-wing politicians and their sycophants in the media serve several purposes. They bury the idea that climate change, driven by fossil fuels and out-of-control growth, has anything to do with the rise in extreme weather. They pin the blame on Democrats: LA is a blue city in a blue state. And they continue the racist and sexist drumbeat that all of society’s ills can be pinned on the advancement of women and minorities.

    There is, of course, an opportunity to look at political mismanagement, including the cutbacks in the fire department. But natural disasters—intensified by climate change and exacerbated by poor political leadership—have ravaged unwoke, Republican-dominated states, as well, meaning Democrats don’t have a monopoly on blame.

    Hurricane Ian practically destroyed Sanibel Island in Florida, a state that has been living with Trumpism for some time under Gov. Ron DeSantis. Hurricane Helene also ravaged that state, as well as western North Carolina, a state that went to Trump in the last three elections. Hurricane Harvey drowned Texas’ largest city, Houston, and the rest of Texas has suffered power outages and shortages, due to both extreme cold and summer spikes in energy demand.

    Climate change, and the catastrophes it brings to the earth, does not discriminate against localities based on their populations’ political leanings. But conservative media do.

    Metastasizing mythology

    Ari Paul (In These Times, 8/31/15): “The more progress made in racial and gender diversity, the more white male firefighters will denounce the changes and say that increased diversity is only the result of lowering standards.”

    Meanwhile, real firefighters know what the real problem is. The Western Fire Chiefs Association (3/5/24) said:

    Global warming pertains to the increased rise in Earth’s average surface temperature, largely caused by human activity, such as burning fossil fuels and deforestation. These practices emit greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) into the atmosphere. These gases trap heat, resulting in a gradual increase in global temperatures over time. Recent data on fire and trends suggests that global extreme fire incidents could rise by up to 14% by the year 2030, 30% by 2050, and 50% by the end of the century. The impact of global warming is seen particularly in the western United States, where record-setting wildfires have occurred in recent years. Fourteen of the 20 largest wildfires on record have been in California over the past 15 years.

    Conservative media can ignore all this, because the notion that cultural liberalism has tainted firefighting isn’t new. I covered efforts to diversify the New York City Fire Department as a reporter for the city’s labor-focused weekly Chief-Leader, and I saw firsthand that the resistance to the efforts were based on the idea that minority men weren’t smart enough and women (white and otherwise) weren’t strong enough (PBS, 3/28/06; New York Times, 3/18/14; In These Times, 8/31/15).

    What I found interesting in that case was that other major fire departments had achieved higher levels of integration, and no one was accusing those departments of falling behind in their duties. At the same time, while the FDNY resisted diversification, the New York Police Department, almost worshipped by right-wing media, embraced it (New York Post, 9/8/14, 6/10/16).

    This racist and sexist mythology has metastasized in the Republican Party and its propaganda apparatus for years. With Trump coming back into power, these media outlets will feel more empowered to regurgitate this line of thinking, both during this disaster in LA and in the disasters ahead of us.

    FAIR’s work is sustained by our generous contributors, who allow us to remain independent. Donate today to be a part of this important mission.

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License

  • The Burning Questions: LA Fire Cuts vs. Billions for Israel and Ukraine

    Spread the love

    https://www.mintpressnews.com/the-burning-questions-la-fire-cuts-vs-billions-for-israel-and-ukraine/288934/

    As Los Angeles battles historic wildfires, residents are demanding accountability for why the city’s fire department faced budget cuts while greater disaster preparedness measures were overlooked. These frustrations have fueled questions about the prioritization of aid to Israel and Ukraine.

    Just months before the wildfires ravaged the city, LA Mayor Karen Bass approved the budget for the next fiscal year, which included a $17.5 million reduction to the fire department’s funding. The department’s budget slashed to $819.64 million, prompted warnings from Fire Chief Kristin Crowley, who cautioned that the cuts were already impeding emergency response capabilities.

    All of this comes amid a revelation that the State of California has sent approximately $610 million in taxpayer funds to Israel, making it the most significant state contributor to Israeli aid in the U.S. This disparity gained attention online after Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson suggested imposing conditions on federal disaster relief for Los Angeles.

    U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson has been a staunch advocate of unconditional aid for Israel, notably championing a $74 billion aid package in April 2024 that included $60 billion for Ukraine and $14 billion for Israel, despite mounting public and congressional pressure to curtail such transfers. Specifically, the Leahy Law, named after its author, former Senator Patrick Leahy, prohibits the transfer of military aid to nations credibly accused of committing human rights abuses. In a recent Washington Post op-ed, Leahy urged that the law be applied to Israel, arguing that ongoing rights violations demand accountability and adherence to U.S. legal standards.

    In October 2024, U.S. President Joe Biden drafted a $100 billion aid package for Ukraine and Israel—a striking coincidence, as this is the same amount now proposed to confront the devastating wildfires in Los Angeles. The announcement of a one-time payment of $770 to each wildfire victim by the administration has drawn mixed reactions, with some calling it a necessary gesture while others see it as woefully inadequate. This announcement came mere days after the White House informed Congress of its intention to send an additional $8 billion in military aid to Israel.

    Although the aid package isn’t a cash handout to Israelis, the cost of the military aid package would be the equivalent of handing each Israeli over $820. Israel is the largest recipient of U.S. aid in history, amounting to a total of over $250 billion in American taxpayers’ dollars, at least $25 billion of which has been publicly disclosed to have been sent since the beginning of the war in Gaza. At a time when U.S. domestic crises demand urgent attention, the government’s unwavering commitment to foreign aid for Israel continues unabated.

    The concern extends beyond monetary figures. Cities across the U.S. struggle to provide safe drinking water, veterans face mounting suicides due to inadequate access to healthcare, and Los Angeles grapples with a homelessness crisis. Experts estimate that $22 billion—roughly equivalent to the aid Israel received in a year—could eliminate homelessness in LA over the course of a decade. Meanwhile, Israelis enjoy clean drinking water year-round and are even expanding their control to include six key water sources in southern Syria, in contravention of international law.

    Feature photo | Locals help a firefighter stretch a hose as an apartment building burns, Jan. 8, 2025, in the Altadena section of Pasadena, Calif. Chris Pizzello | AP

    Robert Inlakesh is a political analyst, journalist and documentary filmmaker currently based in London, UK. He has reported from and lived in the occupied Palestinian territories and hosts the show ‘Palestine Files’. Director of ‘Steal of the Century: Trump’s Palestine-Israel Catastrophe’. Follow him on Twitter @falasteen47

    This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.

    Genocide Joe Biden
    Genocide Joe Biden
  • How the UK’s plans for AI could derail net zero – the numbers explained

    Spread the love
    Data centres use an enormous amount of electricity for cooling and to power servers. Andia/Alamy Stock Photo

    Tom Jackson, Loughborough University and Ian R. Hodgkinson, Loughborough University

    The UK government’s goal to increase public-controlled artificial intelligence computing power twentyfold by 2030 would significantly raise electricity demand. Can renewable energy supply meet it – and still have enough left over to electrify sectors like heating and transport, which must be fully decarbonised by 2050?

    First, let’s discuss why AI is so energy intensive. AI systems demand a huge amount of computing power. The creation and use of AI involves training the programmes on models and algorithms that must be invented and calibrated, all of which demands computing power. Then, that AI model must draw conclusions from the new data it is fed, which is another energy-intensive process in itself.

    The need for more and more computing power has risen sharply as AI has become more sophisticated. Computing power is becoming scarce as a result and is a major bottleneck for the further development and use of AI. Indeed, the UK’s national AI strategy published in 2021, recognised that computing power capacity must be increased if the potential of AI is to be realised.

    The more sophisticated the AI, typically, the more energy intensive it is. This has significant implications for the UK.

    How much energy does the AI rollout need?

    Data centres (facilities that store, process and distribute data) are a significant and growing consumer of electricity. From training complex AI models, which requires immense computational power and data storage, to running data through trained AI models to make predictions or solve tasks, data centres are central to every stage of AI’s use and development.

    According to estimates by the International Energy Agency, data centres globally account for approximately 1%-1.3% of total electricity consumption. One recent observation suggests that developing the most sophisticated AI systems currently requires a fourfold increase in the amount of computing power annually. The total amount of data required for AI training has also risen by 2.5 times a year, increasing reliance on data centres.

    Pylons at sunset.
    Britain’s electricity grid will strain to meet rising demand even without AI. SuxxesPhoto/Shutterstock

    In the UK, AI and related infrastructure consumed around 3.6 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity in 2020. If this consumption increases twentyfold, as per the government’s target, it could reach 72 TWh by 2030. This would represent over one-quarter of the UK’s total electricity consumption in 2021, which was approximately 261 TWh.

    The rapid growth in AI computing requires careful planning. However, data centres are only part of the equation. The devices that use AI, such as sensors in smart homes, gas and electricity meters, routers, wifi hubs, streaming devices and social media platforms, could add significant energy demand that is difficult to estimate.

    These additional components of AI’s total energy consumption are often overlooked.

    Renewable energy growth is insufficient

    The UK has made significant strides in renewable energy production, with wind and solar power contributing over 40% of electricity in recent years.

    However, our projections, reported in the journal Energy Policy, indicate that global renewable electricity supply will not meet surging demand from global digital data growth.

    Our research considered different scenarios for AI’s energy use. The UK’s target of a twentyfold increase in AI computing power by 2030 is certainly a high-consumption scenario, in which energy demand from digital infrastructure alone could outpace the growth of renewable energy capacity.

    At the same time, the UK’s decarbonisation hinges on electrifying transport and heating, sectors traditionally reliant on fossil fuels: replacing natural gas boilers with electric heat pumps and combustion engine cars with electric vehicles. These will require substantial increases in electricity supply.

    A row of electric cars plugged into public chargers.
    Britain’s electric vehicle charging network will need to expand to decarbonise transport. Shutterstock

    However, solving this problem will not just require expanding renewable energy production. The energy efficiency of AI systems and related technologies must improve too. Ensuring that the energy needed for AI and other digital advancements is sustainably sourced, without compromising broader net zero goals, will require a combination of government policy, technological innovation and public awareness.

    AI’s growing electricity needs could exacerbate competition for limited renewable energy resources. This competition risks increasing reliance on fossil fuels, especially during periods of peak energy demand. If additional renewable capacity cannot be deployed quickly enough, the UK might face a scenario where AI-driven electricity demand increases overall emissions rather than reducing them.

    The UK’s commitment to a twentyfold increase in public AI computing power by 2030 presents an immense challenge for the country’s electricity system. Meeting this goal sustainably will require balancing AI’s energy needs with broader electrification goals and renewable energy limitations.

    Without immediate and concerted efforts to expand renewable energy and improve efficiency, AI’s electricity demands could hinder the transition to a net zero future.


    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.


    Tom Jackson, Professor of Information and Knowledge Management, Loughborough University and Ian R. Hodgkinson, Professor of Strategy, Loughborough University

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

  • UK accused of undermining democratic rights with climate protest crackdown

    Spread the love

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jan/16/uk-accused-of-undermining-democratic-rights-with-climate-protest-crackdown

    Just Stop Oil protesters at Heathrow airport. New powers granted to police have undermined free speech and peaceful assembly, the NGO says. Photograph: Guy Smallman/Getty Images

    British director of Human Rights Watch attacks ‘dangerous hypocrisy’ of government

    Britain’s crackdown on climate protest is setting “a dangerous precedent” around the world and undermining democratic rights, the UK director of Human Rights Watch has said.

    Yasmine Ahmed accused the Labour government of hypocrisy over its claims to be committed to human rights and international law.

    Ahmed said: “We’re at a stage where we’re talking about the … dangerous hypocrisy of what the UK government is saying and doing, and also the fact that the international community and the UN have [raised] and continue to raise the alarm about how this UK government responds to protest, and in particular climate protest.”

    In the UK “laws criminalising protests undermine democratic rights”, the NGO says in its latest annual world report, published on Thursday, adding that in the past year “the UK continued to crack down on and criminalise climate protests”.

    New powers granted to police by the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 and the Public Order Act 2023 have had the effect of undermining “free speech, peaceful assembly, and democratic rights in the UK”, the report says.

    …

    Article continues at https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jan/16/uk-accused-of-undermining-democratic-rights-with-climate-protest-crackdown

    Keir Starmer confirms that his government is cnutier than Suella Braverman on killing the right to protest.
    Keir Starmer confirms that his government is cnutier than Suella Braverman on killing the right to protest.