COP27: Thousands expected to march for climate justice in global day of action

Thousands of people are due to take to the streets at the weekend in protests calling for climate justice.

More than 40 demonstrations have been planned across Britain and Ireland by climate and social justice groups, unions, cost-of-living activists and local communities.

March through Glasgow, 6 November 2021. Photo: COP26 Coalition/Oliver Midea

The list of places includes Edinburgh, Birmingham, Newcastle, Bristol, Cardiff, Dublin, Belfast, Nottingham, Leicester, Oxford, Norwich and Plymouth.

The protest are part of a global day of action on Saturday 12 November, in the mid-point of the COP27 UN climate talks in Egypt.

A year ago, during COP26, there were more than 300 worldwide protests, including an estimated 100,000 people marching in the host city of Glasgow.

This year, the organiser, the Climate Justice Coalition, is calling on the UK government to implement solutions to both the climate and cost-of-living crises.

In Edinburgh, the march passes points illustrating demands for climate justice. They include UK government offices in Sibbald Place, to draw attention to the opening of new oil and gas fields.

The UK government is considering approval of the Rosebank oil field in the North Sea, which contains 500 million barrels of oil.

Mary O’Brien, a grandmother of 10, from the Stop Rosebank campaign, said:

“If the UK Government were to approve the vast new Rosebank field it would be adding fuel to the fire that is engulfing our planet.

“Climate science is perfectly clear that new oil and gas is incompatible with the urgent action we need to take to cut climate pollution. 

“Projects like Rosebank only benefit oil companies at a time when they are already making billions in profits and causing widespread harm. “

The protests are also supported by climate and community groups. Joan Forehand, of Extinction Rebellion Scotland, said:

“None of us are going to be insulated from the climate crisis but there is terrible injustice and unfairness to this catastrophe. It’s only fair that loss and damage payments are given to those who will suffer the most from this crisis, through no fault of their own.”

Tina Louise, a community activist from Blackpool, said:

“It is impossible to stand by and accept the multiple problems people are facing.

“We are coming together in Blackpool on the 12th to demand action on the cost of living crisis, climate crisis, and the health crisis in our NHS.

“The government can and must act to stop new oil and gas projects, tax massive oil profits and support people here this winter, and those globally most affected by climate change.”

11 replies »

  1. Approve Rosebank, develop it, tax it and fund the NHS? As JP and many others on this BB note, cut down on oil and gas imports by utilising our own reserves.

    • That Paul is all we ask, But those with tunnel vision cannot see the light!

      You cannot achieve ‘NET ZERO’ by importing minerals in to a country which can produce and sustain utilising its own! Literally kicking the can down the road, by increasing other country’s emissions by them exporting their minerals to the UK is pure Lunacy! Wind turbines, wave technology is not the UK’s technology, it is bought from Japan, Denmark and America for a large fee and installed on UK onshore, (well until the onshore ban was introduced in England) and offshore paid for by the UK tax payer in huge subsidies…. Fund Fracking, Tax It, Fund the Black Hole which today’s pensions are causing by these OAP’s sitting on the M25! And Fund the NHS!!

      P.S. jack [Edited by moderator] illnesses and disease’s were here before the world started producing fossil fuels, so your red herring links are just that false information.

  2. Time to look a little further ahead, Paul. The “many others” bear a heavy responsibility for the shortfall in climate action. “Utilising our own reserves” is a concept which cannot stand when subjected to critical intelligent examination. Actions have consequences, as has inaction. We are not alone on this planet. Our behaviour directly affects others. Think!

    • Perhaps Rosebank production would be better than this?

      “A Canadian company, Reconnaissance Energy Africa (ReconAfrica), believes there could be a wealth of oil and gas under the ground in the north of Botswana and neighbouring Namibia.

      It holds exploration licences for a 34,325sq km area straddling the border of the two countries.

      Three test wells have already been drilled in Namibia.”

  3. I am intelligent, (ish), I have examined the concept, it is valid, it adds up.

    Of course there will be those lobbying for UK to export income to other countries, but there is overseas aid for that purpose. It does not require exportation of tax revenues on business, then a consequence of weak Sterling actually increasing cost of imports, adding to cost of living as well as less UK taxation for NHS-or green subsidies. I am not sure that USA require UK funding either.

    The laws of arithmetic and physics cannot be ignored, or interpreted, and facts cannot be incorrectly defined. Seems that is what it takes to make the “critical intelligent examination” work for the “we’s”, but I will still buy locally where I can.

    (Sorry jP, your wind turbines will have to be removed as utilising our own reserves is a concept that cannot stand! Strange concept I agree, but it seems to have come from anti critical intelligent examination!)

  4. Collyarithmetic is not arithmetic, nor are you any kind of authority on the laws of physics which for you seem to have no validity where geology is concerned. ‘Facts’ are frequently reinterpreted in the light of further research. As for your original statement, others may have their own ideas.
    “Other countries”, less guilty than our own, need help. We cannot save the U.K. from extinction by sacrificing “other countries”. – or by “utilizing our own (putative) reserves,”The concept of global solidarity is perhaps new to you. As you, in default of language, so frequently observe – DYOR
    Any more critically intelligent points? I’m sure there will be.
    In the meantime, buy wherever you like, regardless of consequences.

  5. Looking at previous from yourself and the data that Ruth has given regarding Wressle output, there has to be this pretty large lake of oil somewhere over the horizon as your arithmetic has claimed new oil is extra output. Goodness, if that large lake could be transported the price of oil might drop. Absolute nonsense claimed as intelligent contribution with frequent attempts to claim quantity in place of quality. Perhaps it is you who needs to do some research and look at the fact that oil wells have a finite life, quite short in respect of some, and when they dry, and demand elsewhere has already been supplied then that will be taken into account regarding new drilling. Maybe you have missed the fact that production is controlled to manage price? Those facts exist. They are easy to verify.

    Transfer of production to a local source. Except to deniers of facts, common sense, arithmetic, physics and years of historical press releases from OPEC+. Denying even one is not that intelligent.

    Yes, I will buy locally where I am able, 1720, and when I can research that the consequences are less than buying from over the horizon. Lobbyists from over the horizon will try and persuade me otherwise but they will need to come up with compelling evidence rather than gobbledygook.

  6. Farm shops for a start Alex. They exist in UK. A consumer can visit and purchase local produce and verify where and how the produce is produced, making certain standards of production are to their liking. Alternatively, they can pop to a supermarket and buy courgettes produced in Spain, with cheap migrant labour, and trucked all the way to UK puffing out transport emissions along the way. Local produced meat rather than imported with even greater concerns around means and standards of production.
    Wouldn’t it be great if the same could apply to energy! Channel 4, that bastion of the Tories (lol) suggested a while ago that Cornish lithium supplied such benefits to UK consumers compared to imported lithium and should be supported, so why should other energy inputs be viewed any differently? Dogma in place of common sense, is the answer Alex. An excuse for some, but not shared by myself.

    On top of all of that, Sterling value is largely determined by the balance of payments. So, for anyone who wants the costs of their overseas holidays controlled, or the costs controlled for things that are imported for their consumption that can’t be produced in UK, local production of things that can be produced in UK is beneficial, and if some product is exported that is also the case. Then there is local taxation, hence Shell pays little windfall tax in UK largely because they produce little of their profit in UK. A reality that the media and the opposition fail to notice, but still the reality. If such companies produced more profit in UK, the UK would benefit from extra taxation revenue and UK consumers would benefit via a stronger currency.

    Alternatively, Europe can pay $47 per MMBtu for gas (Dutch TTF, July 15th) whilst the same gas is priced at $7 per MMBtu on the Henry Hub (USA) before it might be exported to Europe.

  7. I have heard very little of Greta Thunberg in the mainstream corporate news-media since COVID hit the world. Nonetheless memorable was her apt, poignant description last year of the global-warming (non)efforts of fake or neo-environmentalist politicos as just more “blah, blah, blah”.

    It’s no longer prudent to have so much of society, including our primary modes of transportation, reliant on traditional sources of energy. Yet, even as bone-dry-vegetation regions uncontrollably burn, mass addiction to fossil fuel products undoubtedly helps keep the average consumer quiet about the planet’s greatest polluter, lest they feel and/or be publicly deemed hypocritical. It must be convenient for big fossil fuel.

    The industry and friendly governments can tell when a very large portion of the populace is too tired and worried about feeding/housing themselves or their family, and virus-variant damage still being left in COVID-19’s wake — all while on insufficient income — to criticize them for whatever environmental damage their policies cause/allow, particularly when not immediately observable.

    Unfortunately, global governmental decisions on curbing greenhouse-gas emissions have thus far mostly reflected the profit interests of the influential fossil fuel industry. And the mainstream news-media are too quiet on the industry’s growing lobbyist potency.

    Meanwhile, (neo)liberals and conservatives are overly preoccupied with vociferously criticizing one another for their politics and beliefs thus diverting attention away from the planet’s greatest polluters, where it should and needs to be sharply focused. Albeit, it seems to be conservatives who don’t mind liberally polluting the planet.

Add a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s