The right to peaceful protest is a fundamental human right, but it has been seriously undermined in the UK in recent years. The latest example of this is the arrest of the Chief Steward, Chris Nineham, and others at the recent Palestine Solidarity Campaign demonstration on 18th January and the subsequent bringing of charges against Ben Jamal, the Director of the PSC, based on claims which video evidence seems to clearly contradict.
The conditions which were imposed by the Metropolitan Police on the protest, preventing assembly at the BBC despite a track record of peaceful protests for over a year, are also concerning: they seem to rely on legal powers (a sweeping definition of āserious disruptionā) that the High Court have previously ruled to be unlawful, but have been left in effect while awaiting an appeal.
The Joint Committee on Human Rights, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and many others have made clear that recent legislation and other changes to the treatment of protesters by police and in the courts are disproportionate and pose a fundamental threat to the right to protest.
We add our voice to those calling for the charges against Chris Nineham, Ben Jamal and others to be dropped.
We also believe these events, along with the treatment of peaceful climate protesters, further strengthen the case for an urgent overhaul of the law on protest. These include the raft of anti-protest legislation which was brought in by the Conservative government without any clear justification; the removal of the legal defence for protesters in court of ānecessityā or acting to prevent a greater harm; and the existence of a parallel system of private law in the sweeping use of civil injunctions. A Labour government, especially one led by a former human rights lawyer, should not be upholding anti-protest laws which are disproportionate, unjust, and breach human rights.
This year, it will be a decade since the Paris Agreement was signed. Yet fossil fuel emissions continue to rise, and the window to avert the worst impacts of climate breakdown is rapidly closing. At this critical moment, the re-election of Donald Trump as president of the United States seriously increases the grave danger we are in.
Trumpās presidency will have a direct effect by further increasing US emissions. If he pulls the US out from the Paris climate agreement, and potentially even from the entire UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the indirect effects may be even more disastrous. Trump is a figure who emboldens climate deniers, authoritarians and the far right. If the wealthy, polluting US walks away from global climate negotiations, it greatly heightens the risk of other countries doing the same.
We ask you to use your position as UK Prime Minister, firstly to urge Trump not to pull out of the Paris agreement, and secondly, to do everything in your power to maintain and repair the principles of collective global action on climate change, and ācommon but differentiated responsibilityā.
This means the UK acting as an exemplar for a comprehensive, swift, and equitable fossil fuel phase-out: an end to new North Sea oil and gas drilling with a fully funded plan for workers and communities, alongside a comprehensive climate plan for the rest of the economy.
It also means the UK doing its fair share on climate finance. The pledge of $300 billion agreed at COP29 was entirely inadequate, targeting just a small fraction of the trillions needed, and it is highly likely to be delivered largely.as private finance and loans pushing countries deeper into debt. The UK must stand alongside developing countries challenging this, by increasing our direct contributions, implementing and demanding the highest standards of transparency, and unlocking domestic and international finance using the well-known āpolluter paysā principle.
Other disturbing measures included exiting the World Health Organization, and declaring a 'border emergency' paving the way to send US troops to the southern border.
News that Donald Trump's administration will withdraw from the 2015 Paris agreement on climate change is a heavy blow to our chances of averting climate catastrophe, but it comes as no surprise. It follows his withdrawal from the Agreement during his first term, as well as his threats to pull the US out of the Paris Agreement and the UN's Framework Agreement on Climate Change which is responsible for organising international climate negotiations. Nor do the threats to attack clean energy, which he called a "Green Energy Scam". His inauguration speech included his oft used threat to "Drill, Baby Drill" made during his election campaign.
Below are photos of our protest at the US embassy in London. Thanks to all who came, and especially to the speakers!
Trump plans to boost US oil and gas production, gut environmental protections and slash clean energy investment. Claiming global warming is a hoax, he intends to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement, even while the toll from climate disasters mounts in the US and around the world. We canāt let him derail global progress towards averting the worst of climate breakdown.
Another date for your diaries: there will be a 'Together against Trump' rally opposite Downing Street during Trump's inauguration: Monday 20th January, from 5pm.
Not just in the US, but around the world, so many woke up with grief and horror to the discovery that Donald Trump had again won the US election. We don't need to have any illusions about the status quo - the US's long history of abuses of power and its unapologetic contribution to climate breakdown - to understand that Trump's second presidency is a catastrophe.
At a crucial point where our heating climate is already increasingly erratic and dangerous, and we are very close to tipping points, he will pull back hard from global efforts to reverse the acceleration of fossil fuel pollution. Withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement is almost certain, as well as cutting or ending the US's contributions to climate finance, essential for the countries in the front line of climate change.
Maximising US fossil fuel production will be a priority: "drill, baby, drill".
It is not just the direct increase in emissions caused by these actions we need to consider, it's the potential domino effect. We know that even those governments who claim to take climate breakdown seriously already prefer words to action when it comes to cutting pollution. Rich countries have all consistently failed to meet their responsibilities on climate finance. With the US set to drop all of its commitments, it is hard to see others stepping up.
There are some changes Trump may find harder to make than he expects. With jobs from Biden's Inflation Reduction Act largely in Republican-voting areas, others in his party may push back on getting rid of these. Economic incentives to renewable energy investment will remain with technology costs having fallen fast. And Democratic controlled state legislatures still have powers to act in their own domain. But we know that Trump and his allies do not respect democracy, and they will control the entire machinery of government.
We know that there are many in the US who also have very immediate fears from a Trump government - and with good reason. These are dark days ahead. We must stand with them as they fight for their rights and safety.
We also must not let our own government or any corporations off the hook. The standards we have to hold them to are: 'Is this in line with climate science and human rights?', 'Is it fair and just?', 'Is this genuine action, not just greenwash?' Trump's active malevolence cannot be a reason to let other nations to get away with warm words and too little action on climate.
Another threat here is the emboldening of the far right, in the UK and across Europe. We need to face up to this and the related risk of climate denial.
We know we cannot save everything. But everything which we can save is worth saving.
It states: "Congress agrees that climate change poses a systemic risk to working class communities, but at a time of rising geopolitical tension does not believe that we can abandon fossil fuels until we know how the jobs and communities from the North Sea fields will be protected. Congress notes with dismay that the new government has adopted a target to stop drilling in the North Sea before any plan for jobs has been agreed."
and calls for "an industrial strategy policy that maximises our domestic energy strengths for national security, with all assets and options part of the solution: nuclear, renewables and oil and gas production"
Unison, UCU and NEU spoke against the motion, and it went to a card vote, passing by by 2,712k for to 2,457k against.
By passing the motion, Congress agreed to campaign for a national maximum working temperature, a heat wave furlough scheme and a climate action plan, and to support Heat Strike when temperatures go above 36C. Heat Strike is not a legal union strike but can include direct actions, protests, workplace lunchtime walkouts, awareness raising, lobbying of politicians or community actions.
Both had the same core - a recognition of climate change as a class issue, and the need for a rapid transition away from fossil fuels based on a just transition, public ownership and a national climate service.
GMB had submitted an amendment to the original PCS motion. As you can see this contradicts the intention of the original motion (what we'd call a wrecking amendment) and Unison and PCS did not accept its inclusion in the composite motion.
GMB and Prospect abstained and Unite said they were supporting the motion 'with reservation', so the motion was carried.
There are clearly contradictions between these motions, and debates will inevitably continue. It's important that these are framed in the context of the climate crisis as an urgent global issue that affects all workers. We're very grateful to all those who held that red line strongly at TUC.
Among much else, C18 commits TUC to "a year of green trade union activity including engagement with community and climate justice groups". We think this could be a very useful platform for activity where we can take the initiative.
Watch this space for further discussion and action.
Motions proposed by Unison and PCS would commit the Trade Union movement to the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuel and invest in climate jobs. The GMB has proposed amendments which if accepted would remove this clear commitment to rapidly transition away from fossil fuels.
This is an important moment for TUC delegates to support motions which would give impetus to putting the climate crisis at the top of the TU agenda and seriously get behind demanding an urgent transition with huge investment in the jobs which could make a difference.
The GMB amendments should be rejected. We need a clear and unambiguous commitment to end fossil fuels in line with the urgency of the climate crisis.
The details of the motions and debates are covered in the Green Jobs Alliance (GJA) special newsletter which poses the questions - 'Will our movement be on the right side of the science and the right side of history after the TUC Congress this year?' This is essential reading for all and especially for TUC delegates.
The GMB flesh out their support for gas in a motion on industrial strategy, this is a motion which would, if passed, disastrously demand continued fossil fuel investment by the government. Unite's motion on the transition in North Sea oil and gas fields has adopted the slogan, 'no ban without a plan'. But we need both. A ban cannot not be counterposed to a plan, both are urgent and necessary. The detail of these motions are discussed in the GJA newsletter, and the full TUC agenda is here (climate motions from p15 onwards)
Sun 8th Sept: What should a new government do for jobs and climate in a climate crisis?
Sunday 8th September, 6.30-7.45pm, Meeting room 1c, Brighton Centre, hosted by CACCTU
The climate crisis is a class and trade union issue, already impacting the lives and livelihoods of working class people globally. Tackling it requires urgent action on fossil fuels and active leadership across the union movement is essential. This is not an issue any trade unionist can ignore.
An end to fossil fuels, a just transition and a plan to deliver this and huge public investment in the transformation of the economy have never been more urgent.
After 14 years of Tory government, Labour has swept to power on a wave of disillusionment and anger at the Conservative Party. This is an opportunity to fix much that has been broken in this country, to build a fairer society, and, crucially, to take urgent action on the existential threat of climate breakdown, which is already causing destruction around the world, hitting those who have done least to cause the crisis hardest. Will that opportunity be taken?
Time to act on climate
Globally, every month since June 2023 has set a new temperature record for that month. This excess heat has resulted not just in heatwaves, drought and wildfires but in supercharged storms able to carry higher rainfall loads, resulting in catastrophic floods in many regions, and here in the UK, farmers suffering from the abnormally wet winter.
But despite these clear signs of climate breakdown, which underline the dangers of making irreversible changes to our climate and potentially triggering tipping points, climate action here in the UK has stalled. Rishi Sunak spent his last months in power attempting to garner popularity by pushing back Net Zero targets alongside a mission to drill 'every last drop' from the North Sea.
The previous government's climate plan was recently found in court (for the second time) to be inadequate to achieve the UK's national and international climate targets. It's time for a new plan.
Time to invest in the future
For decades the level of public investment in the UK has been significantly lower than that of comparable countries. The Labour government has promised to deliver tangible improvements to peopleās lives; to repair the damage to public services caused by austerity; and to get the UK back on track to address the climate crisis. These are all essential, but if public spending continues to be constrained to austerity levels, it is hard to see how these aspirations can succeed. The transformation that is needed cannot be left to the market, nor can solutions be limited to those which are acceptable to industry lobbyists. There is widespread support for public ownership in key sectors such as energy and transport.
Time to get off fossil fuels
The climate crisis demands a rapid transition away from fossil fuels and no new oil and gas exploration or infrastructure. Labour's pledge not to issue any more licenses for North Sea drilling is vital, but on its own won't be enough. Last September, the Rosebank oil field, the largest undeveloped oil field in the North Sea, was given consent for drilling. The resulting CO2 emissions would be more than the annual emissions of all 28 low-income countries. It's essential that this field, and others which have recently been licensed are not developed. Labour will be in a strong position to do this if the forthcoming legal case against Rosebank approval is successful (following the groundbreaking Supreme Court judgement that downstream emissions must be taken into account in planning decisions).
We need a just transition for workers and communities who have depended on fossil fuel jobs which are already in decline. Jobs in North Sea oil extraction have already halved in the past decade, a trend which will inevitably continue as reserves decline. In the shift to renewable energy that can give this country genuine energy security, an industrial strategy for a just transition is essential.
Labour has swept to power on a wave of disillusionment and anger at the Conservative Party. Itās an opportunity to fix much that has been broken in this country, to build a fairer society, and also to take urgent action on the existential threat of climate breakdown, which is already causing destruction around the world, hitting those who have done least to cause the crisis hardest.
We need to invest in the future
For decades the level of public investment in the UK has been significantly lower than that of comparable countries. The Labour government has promised to deliver tangible improvements to peopleās lives; to repair the damage to public services caused by austerity; and to get the UK back on track to address the climate crisis. These are all essential, but if public spending continues to be constrained to austerity levels, it is hard to see how these aspirations can succeed.
We need a workforce for the climate emergency
Any credible strategy to tackle the climate crisis needs to also be a jobs strategy, as set out for example in the Campaign against Climate Changeās 2021 report, Climate Jobs: Building a Workforce for the Climate Emergency. There are jobs to be created around the country - in insulating homes and installing heat pumps, in public transport, in renewable energy, in shifting to a zero waste economy, repairing, reusing and recycling. And in the rural economy, where farming is already being hit by climate breakdown.
The climate crisis demands that we need a rapid transition away from fossil fuels and no new oil and gas exploration or infrastructure. Jobs in North Sea oil extraction have already halved in the past decade, a trend which will inevitably continue as reserves decline. A just transition plan, shifting to renewable energy that can give this country genuine energy security, is not just needed for the climate, it is essential to protect these workers and communities.
A CACCTU response to Uniteās āNo Ban Without a Planā campaign.
Launched on 17th of May, Uniteās No Ban Without a Plan campaign aims āto ensure that a future Labour government drops its planned ban on new licences for oil and gas exploration in the North Sea, until a genuine programme for the just transition of work is operationalā.
As an organisation campaigning for climate justice, our response to this is unequivocal.
We stand in full solidarity with militant action to ensure that the transition away from oil and gas is one that is fair to workers and their communities: protecting incomes, providing good new jobs on at least equivalent terms and conditions, and guaranteeing furlough where there are unavoidable gaps in employment or where a worker needs to retrain.
Equally, we stand in solidarity with the millions of workers, worldwide and in the UK, whose livelihoods, homes and lives are threatened or have already been destroyed by the climate impacts of fossil fuel burning. A ban on new licences, as part of a phase-out of fossil fuel extraction, is therefore non-negotiable; it is not a bargaining chip, a 'concession' to be granted or withdrawn, but an existential necessity for all of us.
On the positive side, the campaign hints at movement in Uniteās position on oil and gas - a recognition that a transition away from fossil fuels is both necessary and inevitable, and can, with the right policies and investment, be achieved without mass job losses. A move towards identifying and bargaining around the terms of such a transition certainly looks like a step forward.
However, we have serious concerns about the rhetoric framing the campaign. We also feel that it misrepresents the situation in the North Sea in some significant ways:
1. A ban on new licences, as promised in Labourās election manifesto, will not in itself make a significant difference to continuing extraction. It usually takes more than ten years from licence issue for a field to start production, and they have said they do not intend to revoke the large number of licences already issued. These include the vast Rosebank field, whose reserves, if burned, would generate more than the combined annual emissions of the 28 poorest countries. This is not a particularly strong climate policy, nor is it in any way an immediate threat to jobs.
2. North Sea oil and gas are already in sharp decline. The Scottish Herald reported last November that 200,000 jobs supported by the North Sea oil and gas sector had been lost over the last decade. The real threat to jobs is not having a transition plan for the energy sector and its workforce.
3. As regards āenergy securityā, even the UK government acknowledges that 80% of oil from new fields such as Rosebank would be traded on international markets, making very little difference to prices or to the proportion of oil products used in the UK that come from UK waters. The amount of oil from new licences sent to UK refineries would account for less than 1% of the fuels used in the UK in 2030.
As for the language used, we believe it plays too readily into the populist demonisation of climate action as an authoritarian assault on workersā freedoms and standards of living, which ignores both the threat climate breakdown presents to workers and their own agency in shaping a transition.
