Extinction Rebellion

Rishi Sunak Boasts That Oil Funded Think Tank ‘Helped Us Draft’ Crackdown on Climate Protests

Spread the love

Original article by Adam Barnett and Sam Bright republished from DeSmog according to their republishing guidelines

The prime minister praised Policy Exchange, which received $30,000 from oil and gas giant ExxonMobil in 2017, for shaping laws that target green activists.

Image of InBedWithBigOil by Not Here To Be Liked + Hex Prints from Just Stop Oil's You May Find Yourself... art auction.
Image of InBedWithBigOil by Not Here To Be Liked + Hex Prints from Just Stop Oil’s You May Find Yourself… art auction.

Rishi Sunak has confirmed that a fossil fuel-funded think tank helped to draft his government’s laws targeting climate protests. 

Speaking at Policy Exchange’s summer party on Wednesday (28 June), the prime minister boasted that the think tank’s work “helped us draft” the government’s crackdown on protests, according to Politico.

OpenDemocracy reported last year that Policy Exchange’s US wing, American Friends of Policy Exchange, which provides funds to the UK branch, received $30,000 (roughly £23,700) from oil and gas giant ExxonMobil in 2017.

Two years later, Policy Exchange published a report entitled “Extremism Rebellion”, in reference to the environmental protest group, calling for the police and the government to clamp down on eco protests. 

An Extinction Rebellion spokesperson told DeSmog that this story “exemplifies the stranglehold that private interests have on our democracy.”

Ministers have been clear that new police powers are designed to stop climate protests. The former Home Secretary Priti Patel cited tactics used by Extinction Rebellion and Insulate Britain when arguing for what became the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. 

Sunak’s statement yesterday appears to confirm Extremism Rebellion’s allegation that sections of the 2022 law were ‘directly inspired’ by Policy Exchange’s report.

The “Extremism Rebellion” report said that legislation relating to public protest needed to be “urgently reformed” in order to “strengthen the ability of the police to place restrictions on planned protest and deal more effectively with mass lawbreaking tactics”.

This was implemented in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act, which came into effect in April 2022 and awarded the police new powers to decide what constitutes a ‘disruptive’ protest and to more harshly punish those involved.

In the year to April 2023, more than 2,000 people were arrested and 138 spent time in prison for their involvement in campaigns by Just Stop Oil, the climate protest group.

Those encarcerated included two protesters who were each sentenced to more than two and a half years in prison – the longest sentences for peaceful climate protest in British history, according to the group – for causing a ‘public nuisance’ by scaling the Dartford Crossing.

This crackdown on protests has been continued by current Home Secretary Suella Braverman, a vocal critic of the UK’s net zero targets, who singled out Just Stop Oil when advocating further powers in the Public Order Act 2023, which received Royal Assent in May.

The legislation, which has been labelled as “draconian” by its opponents, allows the police to pre-emptively intervene to shut down protests and creates new offences for what it describes as “guerrilla tactics”, all of which have been used in recent climate protests.

The law criminalises protesters for attaching themselves (or coming equipped) to lock on to other protesters or buildings, threatening a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both.

For organising protests that block key infrastructure including “airports, railways, printing presses, and oil and gas infrastructure” protesters are threatened with up to 12 months in prison, while tunnelling is set at three years.

The law follows a November report by Policy Exchange that said it was “imperative” for protesters who repeatedly obstruct the highways to be “swiftly arrested, convicted and punished”. It further urged that “magistrates and judges should be imposing severe sentences on repeat offenders who aim deliberately to harm the public by breaching the criminal law”.

Sunak, who worked at Policy Exchange before his 2015 election to parliament, also used the summer party to make a jibe about the Labour Party’s links to Just Stop Oil, one of whose funders, Dale Vince, has donated £1.4 million to the party since 2014. 

Sunak’s comments echoed the claim made often by senior Conservatives, that Labour’s opposition to new North Sea oil and gas projects is linked to Dale’s donation. Grant Shapps, Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, has repeatedly attacked Labour over the connection, writing in the Daily Mail that Labour has become “the political wing of Just Stop Oil”. 

In fact, the International Energy Agency has said that new oil and gas projects are not compatible with keeping warming below 1.5C – an international climate goal that has been adopted by the UK government.

Meanwhile, DeSmog revealed in March that the Conservative Party received £3.5 million from fossil fuel interests, high-polluters and climate science deniers last year alone.

Policy Exchange and Climate Change

Policy Exchange was co-founded in 2002 by Michael Gove, who has been a mainstay in the cabinet since 2010. The think tank continues to retain significant influence in Westminster: Policy Exchange alumni make up a greater number of special advisers in Rishi Sunak’s government than any other think tank.

At the 2022 Conservative Party conference, Jacob Rees-Mogg, at the time serving as Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary, said: “I believe that where Policy Exchange leads, governments have often followed.”

Lord Frost, is currently a senior fellow at the think tank. He was also recently appointed as a director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) – the UK’s principal climate science denial group. This week, Frost – who also attended the Policy Exchange summer party – gave a speech criticising Sunak’s government for offering voters “more net zero”. 

Since 2016, Policy Exchange has hosted events at the Conservative Party conference sponsored by energy companies and trade groups including: wood-burning bioenergy firm Drax, gas and electricity supplier E.on, British Gas parent company Centrica, the gas and electricity industry body Energy Networks Association, gas generation company Cadent Gas, trade association Hydrogen UK, and the Sizewell C nuclear plant. 

According to VICE News, while the think tank does not advertise the cost of sponsored meetings at party conferences, other similar organisations charge over £12,000 to host an event, which lasts about 30 minutes. 

Meanwhile, the chair of the Policy Exchange board is Alexander Downer, who served as Australia’s Foreign Minister from 1996 to 2007. Downer has expressed climate science scepticism in the past, claiming that we are “going through an era” of global warming, and saying that Australian climate leadership would be expensive “virtue signalling”. 

Downer was appointed as the High Commissioner to the UK in 2014 by Tony Abbott, who also recently joined the board of the GWPF. 

Policy Exchange and 10 Downing Street have been approached for comment.

Original article by Adam Barnett and Sam Bright republished from DeSmog according to their republishing guidelines

Continue ReadingRishi Sunak Boasts That Oil Funded Think Tank ‘Helped Us Draft’ Crackdown on Climate Protests

The likely outcomes of the current climate crisis :: Revision 2

Spread the love

The likely outcomes of the current climate crisis

Just Stop Oil protesting in London 6 December 2022.
Just Stop Oil protesting in London 6 December 2022.

I am webmaster of https://onaquietday.org. Here I am speculating on the likely outcomes of the current climate crisis. Please regard this post as draft and subject to change, revision or elaboration.

Writing in June 2023, the current situation is that the climate crisis is generally accepted as real, there are very few climate sceptics and instead there are mostly right-wing politicians but also others that campaign to stifle or delay meaningful climate action, the fossil fuel industry who are largely responsible for the climate crisis continuing to destroy the planet and profiteer in the process, scientists and others pleading for climate action. Extreme weather events are experienced worldwide which are expected to continue increasing, the 1.5 degree C goal of the Paris Agreement is likely to be passed within a few years.

There is currently some hostility to climate activists like Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil. I attribute this to the influence of the right-wing corporate press – GB News, Rupert Murdoch and Viscount Rothermere amoung others. As the climate is further damaged – and there’s only one way it’s going – the influence of these cnuts is likely to diminish as people recognise the shite they spew as exactly that.

People will come to realise that politicians and the tiny ruling elite that they serve have failed them as they experience more and harsher climate impacts actually over the next few years. Who will they turn to then? It’s obvious, isn’t it? We’re either going to end up co-operating to address the climate crisis or with authoritarianism protecting a tiny elite denying it.

While authoritarian actions are the current response and authoritarian parties are progressing in Europe, I regard this as temporary. Climate destruction affects everyone and people will come to realise that they must unite to defeat the climate destroyers. The only issue is that the longer it takes, the more damage our World suffers.

Notes: While global temperatures often pass the 1.5°C specified by the Paris Agreement, that 1.5°C increase specified in the Paris Agreement is an average increase over a longer term. It is likely that it will passed within a few years as I stated in the text above. The problem is that the fossil fuel industry is profiteering hugely with a disregard for the climate and governments are facilitating it.

Huge biodiversity loss accompanies climate destruction.

I find it difficult to understand the incessant drive for profit. Multiplying your wealth is meaningless if you’re already hugely rich. It’s a real shame that these people don’t understand that there is far greater wealth than monetary wealth.

Continue ReadingThe likely outcomes of the current climate crisis :: Revision 2

The likely outcomes of the current climate crisis :: Revision 1

Spread the love

The likely outcomes of the current climate crisis

Just Stop Oil protesting in London 6 December 2022.
Just Stop Oil protesting in London 6 December 2022.

I am webmaster of https://onaquietday.org. Here I am speculating on the likely outcomes of the current climate crisis. Please regard this post as draft and subject to change, revision or elaboration.

Writing in June 2023, the current situation is that the climate crisis is generally accepted as real, there are very few climate sceptics and instead there are mostly right-wing politicians but also others that campaign to stifle or delay meaningful climate action, the fossil fuel industry who are largely responsible for the climate crisis continuing to destroy the planet and profiteer in the process, scientists and others pleading for climate action. Extreme weather events are experienced worldwide which are expected to continue increasing, the 1.5 degree C goal of the Paris Agreement is likely to be passed within a few years.

There is currently some hostility to climate activists like Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil. I attribute this to the influence of the right-wing corporate press – GB News, Rupert Murdoch and Viscount Rothermere amoung others. As the climate is further damaged – and there’s only one way it’s going – the influence of these cnuts is likely to diminish as people recognise the shite they spew as exactly that.

People will come to realise that politicians and the tiny ruling elite that they serve have failed them as they experience more and harsher climate impacts actually over the next few years. Who will they turn to then? It’s obvious, isn’t it? We’re either going to end up co-operating to address the climate crisis or with authoritarianism protecting a tiny elite denying it.

While authoritarian actions are the current response and authoritarian parties are progressing in Europe, I regard this as temporary. Climate destruction affects everyone and people will come to realise that they must unite to defeat the climate destroyers. The only issue is that the longer it takes, the more damage our World suffers.

Continue ReadingThe likely outcomes of the current climate crisis :: Revision 1

The likely outcomes of the current climate crisis

Spread the love
Just Stop Oil protesting in London 6 December 2022.
Just Stop Oil protesting in London 6 December 2022.

I am dizzy deep (not my real name and I seem to have many names ;), webmaster of https://onaquietday.org. Here I am speculating on the likely outcomes of the current climate crisis. Please regard this post as draft and subject to change.

Writing in June 2023, the current situation is that the climate crisis is generally accepted as real, there are very few climate sceptics and instead there are mostly right-wing politicians but also others that campaign to stifle or delay meaningful climate action, the fossil fuel industry who are largely responsible for the climate crisis continuing to destroy the planet and profiteer in the process, scientists and others pleading for climate action. Extreme weather events are experienced worldwide which are expected to continue increasing, the 1.5 degree C goal of the Paris Agreement is likely to be passed within a few years.

There is currently some hostility to climate activists like Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil. I attribute this to the influence of the right-wing corporate press – GB News, Rupert Murdoch and Viscount Rothermere amoung others. As the climate is further damaged – and there’s only one way it’s going – the influence of these cnuts is likely to diminish as people recognise the shite they spew as exactly that.

People will come to realise that politicians and the ruling elite that they serve have failed them as they experience more and harsher climate impacts actually over the next few years. Who will they turn to then? It’s obvious, isn’t it? We’re either going to end up co-operating to address the climate crisis or authoritarianism denying it. Authoritarianism is unlikely since it affects so many people and there is not a scapegoat other than the rich. I regard this as inevitable, the only issue is that the longer it takes, the more damage is done to our World.

Continue ReadingThe likely outcomes of the current climate crisis

How police in England can now stop basically any protest

Spread the love

Original article republished from openDemocracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

New anti-protest legislation forced through by Suella Braverman has been labelled “unlawful”

Adam Ramsay

15 June 2023, 3.55pm

A Just Stop Oil protest in central London
Suella Braverman forced through new anti-protest laws after slow-marching demonstrations from Just Stop Oil activists in London

At midnight last night, the right to protest in England and Wales became a matter of police discretion.

Yesterday, the police could restrict or stop a protest to prevent it causing either “serious public disorder, serious damage to property, or significant and prolonged disruption to the life of the community”.

Those powers already allowed plenty of room for interpretation, but from today the threshold is even lower. This week, home secretary Suella Braverman forced through new laws in a way never seen before in the UK. Here’s what you need to know.

What are the new police powers targeting protests?

Changes to the Public Order Act mean police can now restrict or stop a protest if they believe it could cause “more than minor disruption to the life of the community”. They have the power to arrest anyone taking part in a protest, or even anyone encouraging others to take part.

Officers are also now required to consider “cumulative disruption” from protest, even if the protests in question are organised by different people and about different issues. And the definition of “community” has been changed to include anyone affected by a protest, not just people who live or work in the area it’s happening in.

“The regulations also say the police will be required to take into account all relevant disruption. For example, if there are regular traffic jams in the area, that would have to be taken into account [when the police decide whether to ban a protest], even if it had nothing to do with the protest”, Jodie Beck, policy and campaigns officer at Liberty told openDemocracy.

Braverman argued the new laws were needed to target slow-marching protests from climate activists Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion.

What do they mean?

In reality, the police could find a way to argue that any protest meets the threshold for imposing restrictions, if they wanted to. The new law, says Beck, is a “huge expansion of police powers” that could also lead to police allowing some protests to go ahead while imposing restrictions on others, simply based on how the officers felt about the message behind them.

While the government has focused on one particular type of protest – slow-marching – all protests are potentially impacted.

Beck gives the example of striking railway workers and their supporters holding a rally outside a train station. The police “could decide that means a more than minor disruption to people’s travel,” and so ban the gathering, and arrest anyone taking part.

It could even be that police officers rule that a picket line causes “more than minor” disruption to the workplace it is picketing – after all, that’s the point.

But it’s not just the new laws which have shocked experts. It’s also how they came about this week.

How did the new laws restricting protests get passed?

Originally, Suella Braverman tried to sneak the new legislation into the Public Order Act, which passed earlier this year and came into effect just before the coronation. Rather than allowing these changes to face the usual scrutiny in the House of Commons, the home secretary had them added as last minute amendments to the bill in the House of Lords, after MPs had already voted on it. Her attempt failed – the Lords thought these measures were too draconian and voted them down, though they approved the broader new bill.

Undeterred, Braverman turned to a constitutional trick that’s never been used before. Because while new bills – known as ‘primary legislation’ – require line-by-line scrutiny in both houses, various laws already on the statute book give ministers powers to make small changes via something called ‘secondary legislation’. And secondary legislation doesn’t get nearly as much scrutiny, with both the Commons and Lords simply voting for or against.

The home secretary argued that another act passed last year by then-home secretary Priti Patel – the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act – already gave her the power to make these changes via secondary legislation. So that’s what she did this week, making it the first time ever that a government has used secondary legislation to push through a measure that had already been voted down by parliament.

The secondary legislation passed through the Commons on Monday, with the Tories taking full advantage of their majority. In the Lords, Green peer Jenny Jones filed a highly unusual fatal motion, a rare procedure used to try and kill off the passage of a bill. Normally, because it’s an unelected house, the Lords tweaks legislation passed by the Commons, but doesn’t ultimately vote it down. Jones argued that, because the government was bringing back a law which had already been voted down by parliament through a route which requires almost no scrutiny, this should be an exception.

Labour, although they complained about Braverman’s shenanigans, refused to back Jones, and abstained on the motion, meaning it passed. Police, Crime and Fire minister Chris Philp then enacted the new measures from midnight last night (secondary legislation doesn’t need royal assent). And so now, the police can shut down any protest they like.

The story doesn’t end there. Liberty is taking the government to court, calling the move “unlawful” and arguing that it broke many of the basic principles of the British constitution.

What do human rights campaigners say?

Katy Watts, a lawyer at Liberty, accused the government of “putting itself above the law” and said the move gives police “almost unlimited powers to stop any protest the government doesn’t agree with”.

And Beck believes we need to see this in the context of a much broader attack on our democratic rights. Noisy protests have been banned. The government is already attacking the right to strike, making it easier for bosses to sack people who vote to withdraw their labour. They’ve made it harder to vote, and harder to challenge them in the courts.

“Even if you’ve never been to a protest, you never know when you might need to,” she said.

With the new laws, there is a growing chance you’ll be arrested if you do.

Original article republished from openDemocracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

Continue ReadingHow police in England can now stop basically any protest