It’s time for the government to show real leadership on COP26: Barry writes for The New Statesman

Barry wrote for The New Statesman this week on the Governments lack of leadership and strategy at regarding COP26, which the U.K is due hold later this year in Glasgow. The article can be read in its entirety below;

So the government has fished around and finally found a President for COP26. Perhaps it’s now time to be even more adventurous and come up with a strategy.

Success at the climate conference in Glasgow this year is essential if we are to keep alive the realistic hope of a world in which every child alive today does not have to live through climate catastrophe.

But success requires careful planning and diplomatic choreography. It requires an understanding not only of the science, but of the political blockages and differing national interests that can prevent us keeping within the 1.5 degree threshold that science has now set as the safe limit of global warming.

The job of COP26 was set out five years ago in the Paris Accord. Then the world had agreed a 2 degree target and countries pledged emissions reductions to achieve it. But even then they knew that all their pledges would not keep within their 2 degree target – let alone the 1.5 degree target that the Intergovernmental Panel has now established as the true tipping point.

The first goal of COP26 therefore was for countries to increase the amount of emissions reductions they were prepared to promise. Four figures tell the story. Paris projected business as usual: 59 gigatonnes of CO2 a year by 2030. Each country’s Paris pledges: 53 gigatonnes of CO2 a year by 2030. Below the two degree threshold: 40 gigatoness of CO2 a year by 2030. Below 1.5°C threshold: 24 gigatonnes of CO2 a year by 2030.

At Paris in 2015 the world pledged to reduce its annual emissions by just 6 gigatonnes – from 59 to 53. To stay below the 2 degree threshold we need to more than triple that ambition. To stay below the 1.5 degree threshold we need to increase our effort by six fold. And COP26 is when we need to do it.  That is just to give us a better than 50-50 chance of meeting these targets. Ask yourself if you would cross a bridge with only a 50-50 chance of getting to the other side.

If this were not daunting enough, COP26 will inherit the failure of last year’s COP25 to agree how countries can cooperate by trading emission reductions or helping each other to reduce theirs. It will have to address the issue of double counting of reductions that immediately puts countries like Brazil, Russia and China at odds with the EU and many of the Least Developed Countries.

As hosts the UK will be expected to show real domestic leadership. The government must therefore secure cross party support for the policies that will deliver  its own carbon budgets for 2027 and 2032 and for setting the UK on track to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. This is necessary, but simply secure its own base; a strategy must sit on top.

It is essential to identify the alliances that will be able to effect political movement. Countries that were once key allies like Mexico are now less committed to swift emissions reductions and the UK will need to seek much broader cooperation with like-minded countries in Europe, Africa and Latin America and countries of the Climate Vulnerable Forum. The group known as the High Ambition Coalition played a critical role in Paris and it should form the bedrock alliance from which the presidency should reach out.

The ghost at the COP will be the USA as it leaves the Paris Accord and the next US president is elected. But the dominant figure at the COP will be China. Only real action by China will be able to prevent other countries looking at the US exit and asking: “If America is not prepared to cooperate, then why should I?”

That is why the EU-China Summit in Leipzig this September is so vital. The European Green Deal, proposing carbon neutrality in Europe by 2050 must be leveraged to bind China in and encourage her onto a pathway to Net Zero. Our climate diplomats should already be hard at work with both the EU and China to deliver this partnership.

To that end it is important to remember that China is hosting her own COP only a month before Glasgow. This is the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) COP15 in Kunming. It will be the biggest international conference China has ever hosted and is tasked with setting the global biodiversity strategy and targets for the next decade.

We must do all we can to ensure their COP is a success. In this respect it is worth noting that the UK has not increased its contribution to the funding mechanism for the CBD since 2010. Now might well be the time to double the relatively small amount – £210million – we pay to the Global Environment Facility! Such a gesture would not go unnoticed; nor I suggest, would it go unrewarded by cooperation in Glasgow.

Persuading countries of the global south to increase their ambition will require realism about their financial capacity. The Green Climate Fund was established to provide that support to enable countries to mitigate and adapt to climate change. The $100billion a year target has seen a total of just $19.2billion pledged since 2014 of which only some $6billion has yet been allocated to projects.

The UK is recognised as a leader in green climate finance and must press for global reform of the sector and the incorporation of climate risk onto both private and public sector balance sheets. If mitigation and adaptation is to happen at the pace and scale required, private sector finance must play a huge role. Green bonds and other financial instruments must be part of the strategy that a UK presidency is well placed to develop.

21 years ago, when John Prescott was negotiating the Kyoto Agreement, it was recognised that countries had “common but differentiated responsibilities”. The full meaning of that phrase is still being worked out. Countries like the UK or the USA, which have benefited from polluting our planet for 250 years, need to recognise that other countries who are poor are now suffering existentially. Payment for “loss and damage” is a key demand for many of the Least Developed Countries. They want to see rich nations recognise the damage they have caused and compensate them for it. If the UK made the first financial contribution towards loss and damage, that might just be the game changer that could unlock the politics.

A full link to the article can be found here https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/02/its-time-government-show-real-leadership-cop26

Geopolitics and the Energy Transformation: Barry writes for The Times Red Box

Barry wrote for The Times Red Box last week and appeared in Thursdays edition. The article was titled; “Renewable energy will power new era of foreign policy.” The article can be read in its entirety below.

From coal and whale oil to crude and shale, the geopolitical map has been moulded by the need to control energy supplies. Distribution pinch points such as the Suez Canal or the Strait of Hormuz have been flashpoints for conflict and the projection of global power has relied upon the ability to maintain security of supply.

Nobody who recalls the past 50 years of statecraft as it has responded to the 1973 Opec oil embargo, successive wars in the Middle East, or Ukraine’s dispute with Gazprom of Russia, would doubt that fossil fuel has dominated the trade and power relations between nation states and been a root cause of geopolitical instability and conflict.

All that is changing. The transformation in energy that is seeing the world move from fossil fuel to renewable technologies will bring with it new power relations that will profoundly shape our century.

The inevitability of this shift is not simply a matter of the rapidly declining cost of renewables — the latest auction of solar power in Saudi Arabia recorded an all-time low of $17 per MW/hour — which are now outcompeting oil and gas prices without any subsidy. Nor is it simply a matter of the health and climate problems associated with fossil fuels. The World Health Organisation estimates that air pollution kills seven million people each year.

Unlike fossil fuels, renewables are widely available in many forms in most countries, promoting domestic self-sufficiency. Renewables are not stocks that are used and then depleted; they are flows that are constantly recharged and are therefore less vulnerable to choke points. They can be deployed swiftly and easily at a local community scale and are compatible with decentralised energy production and consumption, and have marginal costs. Solar and wind have cost reductions of approximately 20 per cent every time capacity is doubled.

Control of the energy resources enables a country to protect vital domestic production and leverage political interests abroad. So just as the geographic concentration of coal, oil and natural gas has moulded our political landscape since the industrial revolution; it is the dispersed nature of renewable energy that will erode those traditional patterns.

States that have been historically energy rich nonetheless start the energy transformation with significant advantage. Countries such as the UAE are investing the wealth of their oil reserves to develop the infrastructure for a renewable future alongside the other elements of social and physical infrastructure that are part of a developed economy.

But renewables are also turbo charging emerging economies such as India which is predicating a growth in renewables of 50 per cent of its entire generation capacity in just four years. In sub-Saharan Africa the reduction of fossil fuel imports will have a double benefit in the reduction of import costs and in the creation of new jobs and opportunities in the domestic production of solar, wind and hydro power.

The democratising impact of this should not be underestimated. As local communities become self-sufficient in electricity, countries can leapfrog the model of a centralised fossil fuel grid that would take years to connect every community and rural village.

As the world becomes less reliant on fossil fuel, Russia, which generates 40 per cent of its fiscal revenues from gas and oil, is not positioned well to compete against its Chinese neighbour, which accounts for 40 per cent of the total global investment in renewables. Latest figures show Russia had less than 15,000 patents in energy renewables; the United States had 100,000, while China had 165,000.

Oil and gas exporting countries such as Iran, Iraq and Nigeria could see their economies devastated by a rapid decline in fossil fuel rents because they have not adequately prepared for the transformation in energy. Their resilience is poor precisely because they have not sought to use their historic wealth to diversify their economy or invest in other forms of socio-economic development.

For countries such as Iran and Nigeria where fossil fuel rents represent 10 per cent of GDP such a loss of revenue could bring with it domestic political instability. Subsidies and services that citizens have come to expect may no longer be affordable as government revenues decline. Subsoil assets should have been transformed into surface assets of human, social and physical capital. In too many countries they have not.

Mark Carney and Michael Bloomberg have long argued for a better understanding of the specific financial risks of climate change and the energy transformation in the work of the Financial Stability Board. They have alerted the world to the potential shock to the global financial system from a sudden shift away from fossil fuels that would create stranded assets. It is often said that the Stone Age did not end because of a lack of stone and the fossil fuel age will not end through a lack of oil, gas or coal. It will probably end with stranded assets.

The map of the modern world, its trade routes, the power of its nation states and its military battles have all been fashioned by the exploitation of fossil fuel energy. New renewable technologies do not rely upon these geographically concentrated stocks and for that reason they can disperse power and create new alliances as every country taps into the geothermal, hydro, solar, tidal, wave and wind energy it possesses. Managing this energy transformation is the fundamental issue of international relations in the 21st century.

Barry Supports Halt to the Planned Deportation Flight to Jamaica

I am supporting this important campaign to halt the planned deportation charter flight to Jamaica, scheduled for Tuesday 11th February 2020. I have signed the  letter below that demands that this flight and all subsequent charter deportation flights are suspended until the Windrush Lessons Learned Review has been published and acted upon and the Government has provided answers to the questions below.

I have seen first-hand the devastating effects of the Windrush scandal. Over the past few years I have helped a number of my constituents to resolve their situations with the Home Office. Some have lived lawfully in the UK for up to 60 years, with decades of qualifying years paying National Insurance contributions, then suddenly stripped of their residency, employment, pension rights and told to leave the UK. We have searched NHS archives, tried to trace the records from schools that have been demolished decades ago, in an attempt to prove that the person is legally in the UK. All because of the Hostile Environment policy that all to late demanded a commonwealth citizen provide a document that they were never given.

I will continue to support my constituents effected by the Windrush scandal in obtaining swift and fair compensation for the destruction this scandal has caused to them and their family’s lives.

Nadia-Whittome-Letter-800x0-c-default.jpg
aa-800x0-c-default.jpg

Barry awarded Padma Shri

Over the weekend Barry was awarded the Padma Shri, the fourth highest civilian award in India. In a statement, Barry said;

“The award of the Padma Shri is a singular honour which I will humbly accept* on behalf of Labour Friends of India for the work it has done with the Indian diaspora in the U.K. for the past 21 years. The vibrant Indian community in my constituency of Brent North is one of the great cultures that have seen the London Borough of Brent named as London Borough of Culture(s) 2020. They represent the very best of the inclusive diversity that is and must always remain at the heart of our Borough as well as underpinning the values of both the world’s oldest and of its largest democracies.”

*I understand that UK protocol means I am unable formally to accept a foreign award until Her Majesty the Queen permits me to do so.”

Barry-LFI-John-Prescott-800x0-c-default.jpg

Barry’s Christmas Message to Constituents

As you may know, I send my Christmas Card to many of my constituents at this time of year. Every year the card is designed by a pupil in my constituency and this year the winner is Mia Ogrigri, year 4 at St Joseph’s Roman Catholic Primary School. I am sorry that due to the General Election I have not had the time to send out my card this year but the design is below for you to enjoy. Thank you to the hundreds of pupils that took part in the competition, it was a really hard one to judge.

xmas-card-winner-2019-new-1200x0-c-default.jpg

Barry meets with Naomi Klein

Barry met recently in Parliament with world renowned author and social activist, Naomi Klein to discuss international climate change. Barry met Naomi and school climate strikers with Shadow Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Rebecca Long-Bailey and Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn.

The Green New Deal will be at the forefront of Labour’s 2019 election campaign. The Green New Deal envisions a prosperous, zero-carbon society as the alternative to our current world ridden with political, economic and ecological crises. A Green New Deal will transform the economy through unprecedented investment in technology, infrastructure and people.

Barry-Naomi-Klein-1-800x0-c-default.jpg
Barry-Naomi-Klein-RLB-and-JC-800x0-c-default.jpg

Barry’s Latest Letter to Constituents on Brexit

Today, Barry sent out his fifth Brexit letter to all constituents who have contacted him regarding the issue. Below you can read this letter:

 

Dear constituent,  

 Brexit Update from Parliament 

 I am once again writing to update you on recent Brexit events. 

 For many of you this will be the fifth Brexit letter you have received from me in the past two years. As before, I will avoid going over old ground. 

Since my previous letter we have seen  

  • A change of Prime Minister, 

  • The publication of Yellowhammer papers showing the potential damage of a No Deal Brexit to the UK,  

  • The expulsion of 21 MPs from the Conservative Party,  

  • An attempt to illegally prorogue Parliament,  

  • The decision of the Supreme Court,  

  • The Benn Act,  

  • The conclusion in principle of a different agreement with the EU,  

  • The Queen’s Speech,  

  • Nine consecutive defeats for the Government,  

  • The Prime Minister sending the letter to the EU to ask for an extension,  

  • The introduction of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill  

  • Its successful passing through 2nd reading, 

  • The defeat of the Government’s timetable which sought to curtail scrutiny and amendments.  

At each stage I have begun to draft a further update to you, only to find that events have moved on so swiftly as to render the information out of date!  

In these updates, I have tried to write with as little party-political bias as possible. The language of some politicians and the division in our country has upset me greatly. As you know, I voted and campaigned to remain but I believe that if we are to leave, it should be with a deal that protects jobs, environmental and social standards, and above all the peace process in Northern Ireland. That is why I have done all that I can to prevent a No Deal exit. 

I shall try to set out the major elements of the agreement that the Prime Minister has negotiated and what I consider to be the problems with it. 

Other than in the relation to Northern Ireland, the Johnson agreement makes no changes at all to the Withdrawal Agreement which was rejected by all sides in the House of Commons three times. This means that the UK still pays the ‘Divorce Bill’ of £39 billion and citizens’ rights and the transitional arrangements are unaffected. 

However, the changes to the Irish Protocol are significant and I believe worse. 

The Johnson agreement creates a separate customs area for Northern Ireland (the so called border down the Irish Sea) and leads to higher costs both here and there. It also means that if the UK does diverge from the EU in its rules and standards over time, it will be more difficult for Northern Ireland to remain a fully integrated part of the UK without introducing a hard border between itself and the Republic. This would be contrary to the Good Friday Peace Agreement. I will not risk that. 

The Johnson plan also removes the safety net of trusted rules and laws that have protected us in the past (against the wishes of the Trade Unions and environmental organisations). It explicitly rejects any possibility of negotiating a new customs union with the EU (against the wishes of our businesses and trade unions). It prevents a close future relationship with the Single Market and increases barriers to trade with the EU opening up the danger of a Trump style trade deal with America that could damage our National Health Service. (Please find a link to my speech on the danger to our NHS here: https://www.barrygardiner.com/recent-news/2019/10/24/barry-closes-for-labour-during-the-queens-speech-debate-on-the-nhs/ and to a recent Dispatches Programme about the secret meetings the government has held on these matters here: https://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/on-demand/70263-001.) 

 

The proposed Bill in a little more detail 

The proposed Bill has no clauses on workers’ rights and this paves the way for deregulation of existing protections. Ministers could either cut existing EU derived rights (Schedule 5A(1)(b)) or decide not to keep pace with evolving standards (Schedule 5A(3)(bii)). The Bill does not even provide a way of allowing Parliament to oppose such deregulation. 

Clause 30 of the Bill and the Withdrawal Agreement provides a pathway for the UK to fall onto hard Brexit WTO terms with the EU at the end of the transition period in December 2020. Ironically this is why some Conservative MPs have said they support Johnson’s deal.  

The idea of Parliament having greater oversight over the negotiations of the future partnership was subverted in this Bill to empower the Government rather than parliament. Rather than implementing the Snell/Nandy amendment (which called for Parliament to be able to “set the negotiating mandate for the future relationship”), Clause 31(3) reduces Parliament to observer status and bakes in the terms of the Political Declaration. 

 In Brief Summary  

The Johnson Bill:  

  • Explicitly rules out a customs union – endangering peace in Northern Ireland. 

  • Clears the way for UK/US trade deals – endangering our National Health Service. 

  • Removes the objective of close EU alignment, increasing barriers for UK companies 

  • Weakens basic protections for workplace, consumer rights and protections. 

All of this has major consequences for our country and for us here in Brent North. And even though the government secured enough votes to let its proposals move forward in parliament they tried  to rush it through parliament without giving us the time to read the small print. When MPs demanded more time the Government decided not to proceed with it and brought back the Queen’s Speech Debate. 

At the beginning of this letter I remarked on how quickly events keep moving. Since I started drafting this letter to you, parliament has voted for a General Election on December 12th. Labour will be the only party that goes into that election committed to giving YOU the final say on Brexit. The Tories will support the Johnson deal outlined above. The Lib Dems say that even if a second referendum voted to leave they would ignore it and revoke Article 50. Labour believes the public should have the choice between a credible Leave deal that would protect jobs and peace in Ireland, and the option to remain in the EU. 

That is the bottom line on Brexit: Only Labour will give YOU the final say. 

I will continue to work in the best interests of our community here in Brent North and our country as a whole. 

Yours sincerely,

Barry Gardiner 

Barry speaks at the British Chambers of Commerce

Last week, fresh from Parliamentary voting duties, Barry was pleased to be invited to speak at The International Trade Summit hosted by The British Chambers of Commerce.

Barry was there to give an update on developments in Parliament, with respect to Brexit and to provide information on Labour’s approach to international trade policy. Including how a Labour government would support exporters and and increase the number of UK companies trading internationally.

Barry also advised those in attendance on the future opportunities of international trade of where the U.K. is a current leader and a possible future leader.

Barry-BCC-800x0-c-default.jpg

Barry addresses Extinction Rebellion in Trafalgar Square

Last week Barry addressed Extinction Rebellion protesters at Trafalgar Square during their peaceful, direct action to raise awareness of the climate emergency.

Barry spoke about the necessary action that was needed to reach net zero on carbon emissions by 2030 under a Labour government.

Speaking of Labour’s plan for Climate Change and the Green Industrial Revolution as well as action taken by the group Barry said;

“That is the hope, that is what we have to look forward to. To create a world in which the natural environment, climate change and our economies are aligned instead of a world where they are tearing each other apart. What you have achieved and what you are achieving is amazing. You have forced politicians to actually pay attention, not just here, but right round the world.”

Barry-XTR-1-800x0-c-default.jpg
Barry-XTR-3-800x0-c-default.jpg