Billions of pounds remain invested in fossil fuels through local government pension funds, even though three-quarters of councils have declared a climate emergency, a new report reveals.
The study, by Friends of the Earth and the Platform environmental collective, found that local government pension funds held investments of £9.9 billion in fossil fuels. Oil and gas investments accounted for £6.5 billion and coal for £3.4 billion.
The report, described as the most up-to-date review of local government fossil fuel investments, is based on responses to freedom of information requests to every local authority that administered a pension fund for the 2019-2020 financial year.
The authors said the findings were likely to be an underestimate because they looked only at investments in the world’s top 200 fossil fuel extraction companies. If all fossil fuel producers and service companies had been considered, the total figure would be more than £10 billion, the report said.
About 75% of UK local authorities have declared a climate emergency. Despite this, the study revealed that 90 pension funds have fossil fuel investments: 78 in England, 11 in Scotland, 8 in Wales and one in Northern Ireland. 6.8 million people depended on local government pension funds across the four nations.
Fossil fuel investments accounted for 3% of the total value of local authority pension fund investments (2% of oil and gas and 1% for coal).
Nearly three-quarters of fossil fuel investment (£7.1 billion) was made indirectly through investment funds.
Rianna Gargiulo, divestment campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said:
“Declaring a climate emergency may garner good headlines but too often it seems to stop there. Councils can’t make a bold claim about saving the planet while continuing to invest in fossil fuels. Local authorities have the power and duty to ensure local workers not only have a pension for their retirement, but also a future worth retiring into.
“Instead of stubbornly sticking with old systems of investment that worsen climate breakdown, councils should invest in renewable energy and social housing. These are the areas that benefit communities and households and are a better investment in every sense.”
10 companies accounted for 70% of local authority pension fund direct investments, the report found.
Of these, BP, Shell and BHP accounted for 40% of total direct investments across all local authority pension funds in the UK. The top 10 also included Mitsubishi, Mitsui, Anglo American, Glencore, ENI, COP Holdings and EOG Resources.
The top 10 funds with the biggest investments in fossil fuels were:
- Greater Manchester (£1,012m in fossil fuels out of total fund value of £22,035m)
- Strathclyde (£508m out £22,702m)
- West Midlands (£508m out of £14,768m)
- West Yorkshire (£503m out of £13,214m)
- Nottinghamshire (£2421m out of £5,770m)
- Merseyside (£240m out of £8633m)
- Tyne and Wear (£238m out of ££8,453m)
- South Yorkshire (£230m out of £8454m)
- Kent (£210m out of £4,110m)
- Teesside (£201m out of £4,110m)
The top three (Greater Manchester, Strathclyde and West Midlands) accounted for 20% of all the local government pension fund fossil fuel investments.
The proportion of the value of a fund from fossil fuel investments ranged from a high of 4.91% for Teesside Council to a low of 0.87% for the Environment Agency.
The local authority pension funds with the highest proportion of investments in fossil fuels were:
- Teesside (£201m out of £4,110m)
- Dyfed (£114m out of £2,378m)
- Dorset (£128m out of £2,705m)
- Warwickshire (£94m out of £2,025m)
- Royal Borough of Greenwich (£53m out of £1,160m)
- Greater Manchester (£1,012m in fossil fuels out of total fund value of £22,035m)
- Gloucestershire (£100m out of £2,245m)
- London Borough of Wandsworth (£103m out of £2,385m)
- Shetland Isles (£20m out of £459m)
- Somerset (£97m out of £2,270m)
“Fossil fuel investment risks”
The report concluded that investing in fossil fuels was increasingly costly and a financial risk. It cited a Financial Times article which reported that UK public pension funds had lost £2b on oil investments in the past four years.
It also said it was a political risk, with government data showing that the UK public was increasingly concerned about climate change.
The report urged local councils to support local investment priorities in 2021. Robert Noyes, campaigner and researcher at Platform and a report author, said:
“After a decade of austerity and the devastating economic impact of Covid across the UK, local councils can and should be using their pension funds to support local investment priorities.
“Instead of making risky bets on fossil fuels, let’s channel the wealth in our pensions to local communities and build a better world beyond the pandemic. Whatever your stake in your pension – imagine what world you want to retire into – and push your pension to invest in it.”
Platform and Friends of the Earth had carried out comparable studies in 2015 and 2017. In 2019-2020, they found that the value of fossil fuel investments had fallen about 40% since 2017.
In 2019-2020, a bigger proportion of fossil fuel investment was through indirect investments through equity funds, compared with 2017.
- Divesting to protect our pensions and the planet: an analysis of local government investments in coal, oil and gas by Platform, Friends of the Earth England, Wales, and Northern Ireland and Friends of the Earth Scotland
If ever there was a time to avert planetary disaster, this is it.
No matter what the issue, climate, population, ecology, financial, ethical, political, social, future options, past mistakes, this present time appears to be the catalyst for all subsequent events.
That can be seen everywhere around us.
Perhaps blame no matter how percieved is only divisive. Division is destructive. Unity or perhaps majority of purpose is what is needed. Not greed or profit, but peaceful and unifying in purpose and resolve to solve all our differences.
Perhaps not what is wanted by some at least. Some fear concensus of agreement, because it reveals strategies and agendas that are not to be openly disclosed to the public for fear of exposure and fury at their actions. Those that have sown division will fall if all the lies and hidden agendas are made public by universal consent.
That may already be happening. Hence the desperation to hang onto old failed and destructive systems in all walks of life.
Therefore only if we all, or perhaps only most of us work together can these problems be solved in any meaningful way.
To just reconstruct the old failures and prop them up with lies and greed can only fail dismally and we all suffer from that. There are hurdles to that of course, and we see all too many of them here on Drill or Drop.
The question can only be, what do we do to become a united species with only one agenda, that of living as one species, not warring against each other and living with the planet and its ecology and the healthy continuation of all life on Earth. Only then can we begin to evolve out of this present catalytic stage of absolute change in everything we do say and think.
The alternative doesn’t bear even thinking about.
Divided we fall. United we rise.
[Typo corrected at poster’s request]
Hmm. Burning books? Exxon and Shell distorting and censoring the reports of their own scientists warnings about continuing fossil fuel only energy and the inevitable effects on the panets ecosystems? Isnt deliberate censorship the equivilent of burning books? Hmm. “Stopping the press working is no different to burning books”? Interesting question which has an interesting answer?
Scientists reveal how the fossil fuel industry misled the public about climate change
Big Brother Ineos “activists” plans to cut down a Belgium forest “suspended” by a court injunction?
Ineos faces emergency legal action to block Antwerp plastics plants
Giant plastics project suspended in a big win for the environment
Please explain how ethics are served by “kids” (children) working in horrific conditions before and since the first industrial revolution throughout the entire history slavery? And that worldwide enslavement of children has hardly escaped the darker corners of the fossil fuel industry either. Then or now. What industry is served by the child labour slavery enforced on cobalt extraction or gold mineral extraction, or sweat factories do you think? Oh yes! The fossil fuel industry. Surprise! Surprise! Shock Horror!
Grim photos show filthy children as young as FOUR toiling for up to ten hours a day in mines, farms and factories across the US 100 years ago
The problem is one of exploitation of anyone of any age, or human resources of any race, of mineral, flora or fauna since human history began. The problem is that the industrial systems are based upon slavery of one sort or another. Finance systems freely admit that slavery is the most profitable system. Therefore all efforts are made to ensure that continues by any or all methods. That is the real world problem. That is what must change.
Without facing up to these realities, no matter how painful and embarrasing they are, no substantial change to human activity presence on this planet will have any effect whatsoever.
Fiddling around with the edges of individual problems solves nothing. The source of the human corruption greed and lies are where the real problems originate. And that is where all these problems must be addressed as a matter of urgency.
So the question regarding pensions, is how much of the pesion fund investments actually support human slavery?
The answer to that, including the most profitable issue of human child sex trafficking and exploitation, is perhaps an issue that doesnt bear any scrutiny at all. Its just another example of just how embedded human slavery is in financial and corporate and government interests and financial support.
Not pretty, but true.
Human Trafficking & Modern Slavery: The Role of Finance & Tech
Really? Is that the question?
Don’t believe that was the subject, but if that is an individuals concern they can make their own decisions.
Maybe they will be happy with that decision, maybe not going forward, but PhilC has very clearly shown how others trying to take over those decisions can lead down numerous paths each with it’s issues, and those other individuals not having any responsibility for that decision.
Of course, individual activists can try and influence companies to improve their “ethics” but believing they can control other’s investments is another fantasy not born out by the facts. It certainly is not in respect of pensions, where those contributing (the employees), can decide whether to take the standard package offered, or vary their choice. Do not get confused with the employer’s contribution-that is part of the EMPLOYEES rights, and that can be invested where they like. Maybe some would be happy with a few Councils stating they had removed pension contributions to some areas only for it to be the reality that a high proportion of employees then opted out and plonked their contributions straight back into those same areas? That’s what you get with virtue signaling.
Really? Is that not a question that should be asked? I was following on from your comment on the previous page which said, and I quote:-
“Please explain how ethics are served by kids grubbing cobalt-a known carcinogen-in the DRC, and suffering the consequence? And then there is ocean mining.”
So it was you that raised the question of child exploitation and slavery, not me. I simply expanded upon that to include the subject of investment in pensions funds. The very topical subject issue I notice that you didnt attempt to make. But the subject wasnt lost, I retrieved it from your post. That is all that was required for me to expand the issue into the subject relationship of pension fund investments.
So:- “Don’t believe that was the subject, but if that is an individuals concern they can make their own decisions.” was at your suggestion for the related subject matter of child exploitation and slavery. Not mine.
So are you against free speech to open up any avenue that you yourself raised in your post? How do you justify that? I make no claims as to what the results of exploration of these issues may be, or should be, or even can be. I merely point out the situation as it stands with pension fund management and the inevitable consequences of that.
I use no silly labels or name calling. I merely present the facts for consideration and correct any innacurate claims by those who dont seem to want to do the necessary research to verify their position.
“Maybe they will be happy with that decision, maybe not going forward, but PhilC has very clearly shown how others trying to take over those decisions can lead down numerous paths each with it’s issues, and those other individuals not having any responsibility for that decision.”
No Martin, If you raise the subject and it was indeed an interesting one, then you cannot complain that it can be further explored can you?
So your comment is in fact untrue, I make no effort to “take over” any subject, I merely expanded on your comment. Was your comment an example of “very clearly shown how others trying to take over those decisions can lead down numerous paths each with it’s issues”? Perhaps your own words could equally describe your own post couldnt they.
In fact the question of whether pension fund managers should not be concerned about what is invested in. What the real world consequences that has on all these issues. Climate change. Fossil fuel pollution. Financial volativity and the impending burst bubble of the fossil fuel monopoly.
The ethics of pension funds or hedge funds claiming they are not responsible for the consequences of their actions, just so long as the money rolls in is a very valid question.
That is precisely why these issues need to be examined. Perhaps once these issues become public knowledge, there will be further consequences on just what is invested in, and what will be the inevitable result to human slavery and child trafficking, all animal life and the entire planetary ecological system that keeps all of us alive. Perfectly valid.
The fact that these “conversations” reveal an all too obvious effort to close down the entire subject by those for whom the fossil fuel, and now apparently the human traficking and child sex exploitation slavery issue, seems to be something that must be brushed under an apparently bulging wriggling carpet muffling the victims cries for help?
The rest of what you say is merely the usual flak that can be safely ignored….hmmmm…..ignored is an interesting word isnt it?
Divest your council
Across the UK, local authorities continue to invest around £10 billion in fossil fuels through their pension funds, despite more than 75% of councils declaring a climate emergency.
As the government prepares to host this year’s COP26 climate talks, our new report reveals that local authorities are still backing the industry responsible for the climate crisis and pouring billions into the companies blocking climate action.
As we recover from the pandemic, we can choose to stick to old systems of investment that keep accelerating the climate crisis, or we can invest local money in ways that matter for local people and their future.
It costs nothing to make this change, and six councils have already committed to divest fully. It’s time to ask why your council has not.
How much does your local authority invest in fossil fuels?
Our interactive tool lets you see exactly what your local authority’s pension fund invests in. [Open dashboard in new tab].
Click here for an explainer on how to use the dashboard.
Have a look and see how much your Local Council has invested in fossil fuel industry and what to do about it.
No, what it reveals is someone who believes he should make the choices for someone else. And that is the real issue here. In respect of pensions that is a fantasy. I am not saying that everyone will make correct decisions in your eyes, or mine, but it is their choice.
Maybe Mr. Maxwell was trying to make better choices for his employees?? LOL.
Fortunately, the law was changed as a result, but I do recall the outrage at the time amongst those who had believed their pensions were secure from others meddling.
Of course some may want pension investment into not for profit organisations. That would be rewarding.
Are you still obsessed with this human slavery and child exploitation aspect of pension fund investment Martin? Does it have some element of relevance to the fossil fuel industry that you dont want to be explored perhaps?
Drawing further attention to it is somewhat counter productive if that is the case, isnt it? Maybe I should look a little further into this, as it seems to have deeper implications regarding the pension fund investment that I wouldnt otherwise have anticipated?
You seem to be stuck in another of those obsessive fantasy loops Martin? Perhaps someone might give you a jolt and read what I actually said out loud for you?
It was you who raised the issue of human slavery and child exploitation relating to pension fund investment in the first place. Not me. I only further explored that related to the subject matter of the Drill or Drop heading.
Isnt free speech one of your claims? But not for anyone else it seems?
No, I didnt think you would be happy Martin. But I can always ask. Which is one of those social enquiries that I am accustomed to making.
Not Happy Now?
[Comment edited at poster’s request]
It appears that the issue of human slavery and child exploitation is not only restricted to electric car batteries, but mobile phones and electronics in general. Im sure weve gone through all this before ages ago, but as the subject is raised yet again, the issue will bear another look.
MINING COBALT: CHILD EXPLOITATION IN THE RESOURCE-RICH DRC –
So the fossil fuel industry is very definite implicated in the child exploitation of cobalt and is not in the slightest way confined to electric vehicles.
So perhaps that is why the issue is such a sensitive subject and so fearful for the fossil fuel industry to admit to? Figures. More clarity.
Not that it excuses anyone investing in the fossil fuel industry or any industry or any investor, in pension funds, particularly not in The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Actually, I did not raise the issue of human slavery. I raised a different issue, that you wrongly assumed to refer to human slavery, in order to create a narrative! Child exploitation may be closer, but not always the case in the situation I referenced. (Of course, investment into Glencore would exclude the child issue from DRC cobalt, but I would guarantee that would not be acceptable to activists either.)
Which just goes to show that it would be better for people to make their own decisions on serious issues such as pensions rather than have others impose them, who have difficulty with simple facts and misrepresent what they read. Yes, those same people might have the same difficulty but then it is their choice and their responsibility.
Free speech? Yes, I believe in it and do not believe people should be told whether they should take part, or not, if they are adult and clearly educated enough to decide for themselves-such as Kathryn. I do not believe I tell people on this site they can or should not express their views, I simply point out when they are factually incorrect, or there is a different side to the story. It’s the same thing I would do when socialising face to face, otherwise there is a monologue. Why should the Internet be different? Without that, some might actually believe that there is a different reason than taxation for red diesel being red or get confused with which country hosts the Ineos head office. So, yes to free speech as long as there is also the opportunity to make sure it does represent reality, or if it is referring to fantasy that is made clear by the same free speech. Great stuff, that does not need the sort of moderating that some call for. They can read, or not, when it is in written form. No charge for that-it is free, after all.
“Please explain how ethics are served by kids grubbing cobalt-a known carcinogen-in the DRC, and suffering the consequence? And then there is ocean mining.”
Your own words prove otherwise Martin.
All the rest of your post is just the usual obsessive fantasist fixations not the real world.
The Code for Crown Prosecutors (CPS)
“The Code for Crown Prosecutors is a public document, issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions that sets out the general principles Crown Prosecutors should follow when they make decisions on cases.
Human Trafficking, Smuggling and Slavery
updated: 30 April 2020 |Legal Guidance, International and organised crime
In cases where there is no evidence of trafficking, but there is non-sexual exploitation, prosecutors should consider charging under section 1 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 (slavery, servitude, forced or compulsory labour). The consent to any of the acts of exploitation does not preclude a determination that the child is being held in slavery or forced labour.
In determining whether a child is held in slavery or forced labour, regard may be had to all of the circumstances, for example, any work or services which constitute exploitation described in section 3 Modern Slavery Act (for human trafficking) can be taken into account. The vulnerability of the child should also be considered, for example the fact that they are a child, their family relationships and any mental or physical illness or disability. It was Parliament’s intention that the breadth of this offence will cover wider exploitation, particularly in relation to child victims, who may be forced to beg or pickpocket.
Where the evidence of exploitation does not reach the thresholds required for these offences, other legislation should be considered. Children can be exploited, for example, through forced begging. In addition to a safeguarding response, prosecutors should consider offences under the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 of cruelty to persons under sixteen (section 1), as well as the specific offence of causing or allowing persons under sixteen to be used for begging under section 4 of the Act.
If exploitation of a child involves benefit fraud and trafficking for exploitation could not be evidenced, offences under the Social Security Administration Act 1992, the Fraud Act 2006 and the Theft Act 1978 could be considered.
Where a child has been inappropriately removed from their family and held elsewhere, depending on the facts of the individual case, offences of child abduction (sections 1 and 2 of the Child Abduction Act 1984), false imprisonment or kidnapping may be appropriate.
Where there is no evidence of movement (for trafficking) for child sexual exploitation, there are a wide range of offences to tackle sexual exploitation of children under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Attempts to shoehorn conduct into related offences of human trafficking or slavery can sometimes derail cases, particularly in cases of child sexual exploitation. Although the trafficking offences can be used they are not necessarily central to the case. Other alternative serious sexual offences involving the exploitation of children may be more accurate to actual offending and be easier to explain – particularly to juries. These offences allow for substantial penalties. See Child Abuse and Sexual Offences.
Child trafficking and exploitation is often accompanied by various types of control such as violence, the threat of violence, sexual abuse, alcohol and drug abuse, emotional abuse, manipulation through cultural practices and imprisonment to suppress victims and ensure their compliance. For that reason, victims may not fully cooperate with an investigation or prosecution for fear of reprisals. Offenders may also attempt to abduct or coerce the child whilst criminal proceedings are on-going and while the child is being cared for by the local authority.
Children are also exploited by committing criminal acts on behalf of their trafficker / exploiter. Examples include cannabis cultivation, organised street crime and begging. Where it is found that the child committed an offence as a direct result of their situation, prosecutors should follow the CPS guidance on suspects in a criminal case who might be victims of trafficking or slavery and consider the statutory defence for slavery or trafficking victims.”
Child exploitation is the same definition as slavery. The children are human beings, hence they are in a condition of Human Slavery.
Perhaps you should be protesting about the practice of slavery and child exploitation, not attempting to avoid the word definition.
Back to correct terminology again isnt it. The right terminology for the right disgusting crime is slavery, whether you “mention” it or not.
End of discussion.
Thanks for pointing out my text. Nothing there about child slavery . Maybe some aspects of child exploitation, except a bit of research needed to determine how much.
No, my words, as referenced by you, state one thing-fact-and you immediately try and misrepresent.
As I have stated, there are good reasons to keep activists away from someone else’s pension pot! If they can not avoid misrepresenting there would be nothing left to put into the pot. Your posts demonstrate the issue perfectly, so thanks for making the case.
And, as an ASIDE, I do believe child slavery and exploitation are issues to be seriously concerned about. I don’t need to do a search on the Internet and regurgitate what I find to demonstrate that. And, of course, if anyone else is concerned that their investments may be encouraging such they can and should act accordingly and not rely upon others, such as Councils, to do it for them. (Does anyone believe a Council has the knowledge, time, and willingness to do that?) Mind you, 1720 suggests it is too difficult for individuals to do. You can either agree with that, and not bother, or do some research, and take the responsibility. 1720 would not want an investment into HS2, I would. We would both probably support either decision on environmental grounds. So, it would be best if we both had the opportunity to decide for ourselves. No fantasy, just the real world. It is what individuals do.
Well – would you know it – UNISON oppose third party know alls (or is that Maxwellian Lobbyists) from pressurising employers into fiddling with the pension scheme. The principle that the members interests comes first, and they need to be consulted remains.
All this, following a ground breaking review.
Extract from the link – file:///C:/Users/andre/Downloads/UNISON-ShareAction-LGPS-responsible-investment-final-report-319_2.pdf
2. Modern Fiduciary Duty
UNISON believes that modern fiduciary duty requires that pension fund investments are
made in the interests of scheme members, that the financial obligation is not to maximize
returns but to ensure there is enough resources to meet the pension benefit obligation.
Therefore councillors and officers, who make, develop and influence these investment
decisions should consult scheme members when drawing up policies on such issues as,
climate change, executive pay or labour rights issues in the supply chain.
The Law Commission’s ground breaking review of fiduciary duty stated, that the principle
duty is to pay pensions and that when taking non-financial matters into consideration,
decision makers should not preference their own views. Rather, they should consult scheme
members and not disinvest from say tobacco companies unless members of the scheme
support such a decision
Dear me! This really has touched some very raw nerves in the fossil fuel protagonists hasnt it? Who would have thought they were so vulnerable to the truth?
So in answer to that avoidance of responsibility, perhaps all the exploited children and enslaved adults should be automatically awarded UNISON membership for life no matter where they are forced to live?
That would settle the hash of avoiding the responsibility for the actions of investing in pension funds which would then be conforming to the principle that the members interests comes first, and they need to be consulted remains. The children and the adults being subjected to exploitation and slavery would then be members whose conditions of slavery would be prevented by UNISON’s own attempt at modifying the Human Rights Act. A very simple task to achieve I would have thought.
As you raised the issue. I am sure that was rightly in horror and in protest of such a contravention of Human Rights and you are outraged at UNISON attempting to avoid their ethical and moral responsibility, isn’t that so? I would agree with your outrage at such a horrific declaration by UNISON.
I suggest you should write to UNISON and suggest the vast ethical and moral hole in their policies needs to be addressed by awarding all children and adults being subjected to exploitation and slavery across the world, to be awarded membership of UNISON by default.
Then their human rights would have to be taken into account by any investment in the ethical and moral aspects of pension funds and hedge fund management.
Then perhaps UNISON would nominate you for being a third party know all (or is that Maxwellian Lobbyist) for pressurising employers into fiddling with the pension scheme?
Perhaps also the International Human rights Act Commission should look into that, and the inalienable rights of Natural Law, Common Law and the Law of the Land, all of which are fixed and cannot be amended or modified by subsequent acts or declarations.
There is also the Nuremberg Code which has very precise and legally binding conditions on child exploitation and human slavery resulting from the evidence that emerged from the concentration camps and extermination camps in Germany Hungary and Poland in WW2. It is plainly obvoius that child exploitation and human slavery and all the other aspects of inhuman exploitation fall very much under the Nuremberg Code international legislation.
You may not be aware, but there is a new Nuremberg Commision being prepared which may well address the issues of pension fund management amongst many other issues that have become clear in recent times. The Human Rights Act and the Nuremberg Code as it stands are very clear on the rights of those who are subjected to child exploitation and human slavery.
The subjects seem to be a jealously guarded icon of the fossil fuel industry. So much so it seems, that they seek to hide behind modifications and illegal definitions that seek to modify and restrict human rights across the world.
So the fossil fuel industry protagonists claims of agreeing that the horrific acts of child exploitation, human slavery and all the other aspects of human exploitation are illegal and should be stopped worldwide are hypocritical as they hide behind such attempted modifications of the Laws that protect Human Rights worldwide. Not only that the UNISON declaration is essentially illegal under international law but are at the very least ethically and morally reprehensible in the extreme.
What an interesting discussion this has become?
Fascinating to see the hypocrisy of the fossil fuel protagonists admitted even by themselves isn’t it? All the worms are hatching out it seems?
[Typos corrected at poster’s request]
Well, hewes62, I find the UNISON view interesting, but it seems to be stating the obvious. Trustees are there within a pension fund to have that responsibility and whilst there may be an employer representative there should also be an employee one as well. So, if that happens, the employer is usually in the minority if there is a disagreement. Certainly that is the case within my pensions, and if it was not, then I could easily vote accordingly when Trustees come round for renewal/removal.
I would also expect anyone near my pensions to have some grasp of Total Quality Management, especially the Right first Time bit. Loads of corrections because they didn’t get it right first time would not get my vote, due to the Cost of Non Conformance. At least with Trustees, they can be removed!
(Just checked the message is reasonably correct, NOW to press the post.)
Indeed, but good that they are stating it, probably to ward off those who are selling (or trying to force upon the pensioners) duff investment advice.
Many moons ago Arthur Scargill was lobbying for the Mineworkers Pension Scheme to be invested in UK coal mines! Fortunately sanity prevailed and the gov now give a guarantee to a well funded pension scheme. But because the scheme has done well (maybe invested in tobacco), there is lobbying for the gov not to take its cut, and increase the pensions. Dilemma – give money to the tax payer, or let the pensioners spend it?
On another issue, the week has landed, and in it an interesting letter about green campaigns. ”we were told to buy diesel cars and we did, then we were encouraged to but wood burning stoves, and we did etc etc”. I cannot remember being lobbied to buy a wood burning stove, but the same old song continues to be sung.
Yes, the wood burning stove thing!
My local company has just gone bust, and the site is now available for rental.
Perhaps the advent of the beavers getting people worried about the sourcing of the fuel?
It seems that the first rush of stoves were the wrong sort, and now the more modern ones are supposed to prevent the emissions the first ones didn’t. Shame if you invested in the first ones! And a double whammy if you did the diesel thing! (That was well thought out. NOT. Not only the emission thing, but UK imports a large chunk, around 50%, of the diesel it uses, so not even a local refining capacity that would have at least returned some taxation to the Exchequer.)
The big issue around me is the number of people who seem to believe their wood burning stoves are there to burn domestic rubbish, including plastic and some even more unsavoury rubbish from the smell. Very odd as local rubbish is taken away to incinerators that do the same, but have appropriate filtration systems AND generate electricity.
Then, there are those who were told to save the planet by fitting solar panels, so leased their roofs to companies, and now find they can not sell their houses. There are indeed a lot of verses already to the song. There will be more.
Good. Didnt I say end of subject?
So you agree with me. No asides required.
Wouldnt it have been quicker (and less words for Paulus to struggle with) to have simply said that right from the start?
No, you got it wrong again. Asides aside. Avoidances avoided.
“In cases where there is no evidence of trafficking, but there is non-sexual exploitation, prosecutors should consider charging under section 1 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 (slavery, servitude, forced or compulsory labour). The consent to any of the acts of exploitation does not preclude a determination that the child is being held in slavery or forced labour.
In determining whether a child is held in slavery or forced labour, regard may be had to all of the circumstances, for example, any work or services which constitute exploitation described in section 3 Modern Slavery Act (for human trafficking) can be taken into account. The vulnerability of the child should also be considered, for example the fact that they are a child, their family relationships and any mental or physical illness or disability. It was Parliament’s intention that the breadth of this offence will cover wider exploitation, particularly in relation to child victims, who may be forced to beg or pickpocket.”
Better ask someone to read what I actually said and is shown clearly above out loud to you Martin?
What a beautiful clear and frosty morning! Makes you glad to be alive doesnt it!
However, then our thoughts inevitably go to those who are trapped in child exploitation and slavery around the world. And what financial mechanisms, such as the fossil fuel industry and the pension funds, unwittingly, or perhaps knowingly, support such inhuman insanities.
And now we are free to explore that, since its always a sense of freedom when leaving behind the desperate fossil fuel protagonists narrative control freakery that pervades certain aspects of the Drill or Drop contributors and to nove forwards isnt it.
Now we can explore just how deeply the fossil fuel industry and the relationship with the financial industry is involved in many other international crimes and carefully concealed activities that are never seen or heard of on the mainstream media. And how those aspects are perhaps unwittingly promoted and supported by pension fund managers and hedge fund managers in the UK.
As I said at the top of the page, its way past time that the deeper and darker aspects of the fossil fuel industry were exposed. Only then can the path ahead can be seen to a free and open society future. Hopefully without merely redefining and propping up the present decrepit and corrupt systems in order to preserve profit flow contrary to human values and the planets entire ecological systems.
The effects of the monopoly of the fossil fuel industry has on the planets wildly fluctuating climate and the sixth extermination event in the Earths history. And the fact that 1 in 5 deaths are due to fossil fuel pollution bear some further exploration.
Forest fires across the world from USA west coast to Australia and up to Siberia, throughout Europe and even in the UK, have exacerbated the pollution and respiratory systems of countless millions of humans and animals. 2020 was the hottest year on record. January 2021 is the coldest on record. It would be interesting to explore the causes of those fluctuations. So maybe that is where to start some further investigation as to the causes and the consequences of the rapidly changing climate on planet Earth.
The cries that all that is a result of people in the UK using wood burning stoves is a fascinating diversion away from the facts of the worldwide forest fires. That is an indication that the fossil fuel industry protagonists always like to blame the people for the worldwide problem of pollution they themselves promote and create, and never themselves, who are by far the greater if not the only cause. A standard false strategy throughout the fossil fuel industry.
There is an increasing aspect of flash flooding in the UK and across Europe and elsewhere, that is almost certainly a result of the same cause, rainfall and storms, unprecedented and increasing volatility in wild climate systems, and the change in the jet streams across the planet due to the expanding atmosphere.
There are more political aspects as well to be discussed. But they are forbidden subjects on the mainstream media who never mention what and who really cause wars and division in political systems in order to take over human and mineral resources. The resulting corruption, sex slavery, child exploitation, child traficking, human slavery and some far less mentionable aspects of those who want to exploit such inhuman activities that dont bear even thinking about, let alone writing about here on Drill or Drop.
But that is probably best left alone for now, since we have already seen how sensitive and protective some are to conceal any exploration in those forbidden areas.
And some try to avoid the entire subject by diverting into irrelevant moans and whines about word count?
Sad really isnt it?
Have A Nice Day.