Chris Rogue and Stress Together on the Streets of Exeter

I first bumped into Chris Rogue in cyberspace, when we were both "tweeting" simultaneously using the #OccupyExeter hashtag. Here's an extract from that conversation:

@Rogue1210 – U #OccupyExeter arseholes take the piss. U cnt stamp out capitalism by fkin over the homeless!

@jim_hunt – Why do you say that Chris? How exactly are #OccupyExeter "fkin over the homeless"?

@Rogue1210 - #OccupyExeter is in the wrong place. Southernhay is where the private banks an RBS is. y nt there?

Following that exchange I figured talking to each other in person might be more productive, so I packed a handycam into my rucksack then searched for Chris on the streets of Exeter. To watch and listen to the resulting interview, please click here.

The COP17 climate change conference in Durban finally finished on Sunday a day and a half late. According to the final press release it:

Delivered a breakthrough on the future of the international community's response to climate change, whilst recognizing the urgent need to raise their collective level of ambition to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to keep the average global temperature rise below two degrees Celsius.

The press release itemises the "breakthrough" decisions as follows:

Governments decided to adopt a universal legal agreement on climate change as soon as possible, but not later than 2015. Work will begin on this immediately under a new group called the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action.

Governments, including 35 industrialised countries, agreed a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol from January 1, 2013. To achieve rapid clarity, Parties to this second period will turn their economy-wide targets into quantified emission limitation or reduction objectives and submit them for review by May 1, 2012.

As we reported at the start of the conference, UK Energy and Climate Change Secretary Chris Huhne went to Durban to:

Advocate a legally binding agreement under the United Nations.

So what did Chris come back from Durban with?  Well according to a Department of Energy and Climate Change press release:

In a major realignment of support, well over 120 countries formed a coalition behind the EU’s high ambition proposal of a roadmap to a global legally binding deal to curb emissions.

It seems the so called breakthrough is not in fact "a global legally binding deal" but merely "a deal to do a deal" as the Guardian puts it.  Another article from the Guardian, this time on the topic of "Europe's hopeless last stand in defence of the single currency", quotes second US president John Adams approvingly:

While all other sciences have advanced over the ages, that of government "is little better practised now than three thousand years ago".

That sums things up nicely for me too. Whilst Chris Huhne and the other COP17 delegates were slapping each other on the back, according to Reuters Canadian climate minister Peter Kent had this to say:

Kyoto for Canada is in the past … We are invoking our legal right to formally withdraw from Kyoto.

Apparently:

Canada kept quiet during the Durban talks so as not to be a distraction.

Whilst all this hot air was being emitted in talking shops around the world some other news concerning climate change has been published. According to the Independent today:

Dramatic and unprecedented plumes of methane – a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide – have been seen bubbling to the surface of the Arctic Ocean by scientists undertaking an extensive survey of the region.

The scale and volume of the methane release has astonished the head of the Russian research team who has been surveying the seabed of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf off northern Russia for nearly 20 years.

Now seems as good a time as any to remind the latest ad hoc climate change working group that back in September a number of engineering institutions from around the planet sent a message of their own to COP17:

The technology needed to cut the world’s greenhouse gas emissions by 85% by 2050 already exists.

The New Statesman has just published an article about the Isle of Wight entitled "A Paradise in the Making"!  They make this bold claim because David Green's EcoIsland Partnership has recently been launched with a fair amount of fanfare in a large marquee just outside the Houses of Parliament in London.

As Stephen Stead from Toshiba International describes the project:

The Isle of Wight is known for many qualities: its outstanding beauty, 13 award winning beaches and 500 miles of footpaths through unspoilt scenery, making it a favourite holiday destination for many. What it is not so widely recognised for – for the time being at least – is its pioneering approach to sustainability. It is, or at least it will be, with the help of several partners, a smart community – England's first EcoIsland.

At a time when many commentators struggle to define what a smart grid is, the prospect of describing a smart community is an even more daunting task.

Undaunted Stephen goes on to say that:

A smart community… can be considered as a community that exploits technology to provide cost and efficiency benefits. In the main, it is becoming increasingly aligned to one specific societal need – that of energy sustainability.

Whilst we wait to see whether Chris Huhne can achieve his stated goal of  a global "legally binding agreement under the United Nations" aimed at ensuring energy sustainability at the COP17 meeting in Durban, part of the UK Government's current drive in that direction is a target of 30% of the UK's energy to be supplied from renewable sources by 2020. Unfortunately, as the New Statesman article points out:

Renewables are, by their very nature, intermittent and unpredictable; extensive periods of depressed generation can be followed by excess production. Currently, at times of peak demand, alternatives such as dirty diesel, standby oil-fired power stations, or other equally unattractive options are employed. However, the majority of these are both expensive and bad for the environment.

Coupled with this is the problem faced by the distribution networks. These were not built to cope with either the levels or patterns of generation and demand connected to them. Nor were they built to handle the concept of local generation, such as solar and wind, feeding power back up lines which were only designed to have power flowing down them.

Solving that problem is where EcoIsland can help!

Toshiba and IBM are working with the island and other companies to develop innovative ways in which demand and supply can be managed and controlled in order to maximise potential use of renewable power sources – something it is hoped will reduce emissions and waste, while at the same time cutting the Isle of Wight's fuel bills by up to 50 per cent.

Stephen explains how all this might work by introducing his readers to the concept of:

The Negawatt, which provides hypothetical negative energy consumption by reducing usage at a given point in time. As energy prices rise, as reliance on intermittent generation increases and network constraints become more prevalent, the Negawatt will provide a significant balancing tool and will, somewhat ironically, become a key part of our energy mix.

However all this exciting new technology, along with its innovative new buzzwords, is not enough on its own. According to Stephen Stead once more:

The real key to sustainability is the engagement of individuals, companies and communities.

The EcoIsland Partnership does indeed appear to have managed to engage all these groups, along with national and local government.  We wish them well on the long road to 2020, by which time David Green anticipates that not only will EcoIsland be energy self-sufficient, it will be in the enviable position of being:

Able to export energy to "The Big Island to the North"!

Note that Stephen's article is also available in a New Statesman supplement sponsored by IBM, which you can download from the EcoIsland web site. Expect more articles from us on some of the other topics discussed therein in the near future.

Exeter Quakers by Jem Southam

On Monday December 5th Exeter Quakers issued a press release. Here it is in full:

Exeter Quakers express their support for the occupation on Cathedral Green

Exeter Quakers support the peaceful protest on cathedral green and share Occupy Exeter’s concern for global economic justice and sustainability.

‘We agree that our current economic system is unsustainable and that the world’s resources should go towards caring for people and the planet, rather than the military or corporate profits. We are impressed by the peaceful nature of the occupation on Cathedral Green and are glad that the cathedral authorities have not made any attempt to evict the campers. We hope this co-operation continues’ said Alison Mitchell, Clerk of Exeter Quaker Meeting.

‘Those of us from Exeter Quaker Meeting who have visited the camp have been welcomed and have respect for the way it is run. Everyone’s voice is heard before decisions are taken; there is no hierarchy and no one leader. This is similar to the way Quaker business is conducted. The process initiated by the Occupy movement, both in Exeter and beyond, is helping to create a path towards a more democratic and egalitarian future’ said Gerald Conyngham, Assistant Clerk.

Quakers have a long tradition of struggling for social justice, equality and simplicity, including involvement in the campaign against slavery and against all forms of violence, including opposition to nuclear weapons. Locally in Exeter, Quakers are trying to live in a more sustainable way both as individuals and as a meeting.

Exeter Quaker Meeting House is in Wynards Lane; we meet at 10.30 on Sunday mornings: everyone is welcome to join us.

It seems that none of the media organisations contacted by Exeter Quakers have thus far felt this news to be worthy of comment or publication.

This isn't the first time, that econnexus.org begs to differ.

P.S. We've now also recorded an interview with Alison Mitchell from Exeter Quakers. Here she explains why they support the peaceful protest by Occupy Exeter on Exeter Cathedral Green.

Andy and Jim discuss social justice and inequality

We here at econnexus.org rather fortuitously found ourselves filming events on Exeter Cathedral Green on the afternoon of Sunday 27th November 2011. After filming a conversation with photographer "Stone" Naylor we then listened to Nicci Wonnacott from the International Women's Arts Group explain why she had helped organise the Women Occupy Exeter "happening".

Amongst many other things Andy told us that:

There are homeless people and people who do have homes to go to… camping out every night here.

Mainly we're here because we're against financial inequality, but it's also an attempt to show an alternative model of democracy. A more direct and participatory form.

There is no leader… Everyone has as much authority as everyone else here.

We are against inequality, and we're for social justice.

To watch and listen to the complete interview, please click here.

As recorded in the minutes of their General Assembly meeting on December 1st 2011, Occupy Exeter would like to talk to musicians, performance poets (and I would suggest visual artists and performance artists of all shades also) who might be willing and able to support the movement by adding some "fun stuff" to the area of Exeter Cathedral Green.  For the moment at least, if that idea appeals to you then please do get in touch using the econnexus contact form.

In case it helps stimulate some ideas, here's one example of what they have in mind, kindly supplied by the International Women's Arts Group with their Women Occupy Exeter "happening" last weekend:

Women Occupy Exeter on Exeter Cathedral Green, by "Stone" Naylor

Here's another sort of art that is currently on loan to the Occupy Exeter site by an anonymous benefactor. It's a "statue" that we haven chosen to call "The Fallen Angel". If anyone knows the whereabouts of its creator(s) and/or the work's official title please let us know.

Fallen Angel

According to those same OE minutes mentioned at the start of this article, musician Dave Clinch has offered to do a free gig on the Occupy Exeter site. More details as soon as we have them.

In the meantime here's some poetry to be going on with.

Nicci from the IWA group at "Women Occupy Exeter"

Yesterday's post about photographer "Stone" Naylor explains how econnexus.org happened to be filming events on Exeter Cathedral Green on the afternoon of Sunday 27th November 2011.  After talking with Stone we also listened to Nicci Wonnacott from the International Women's Arts Group explain why she had helped organise the Women Occupy Exeter "happening".

Amongst many other things Nicci told us that:

Our overall aims at International Women's Arts stand for multiculturalism and peace.

To watch and listen to the complete interview, please click here.

"Stone" Naylor talks to econnexus.org

To cut a rather long story short my partner Kasia is a member of the Exeter based International Women's Arts Group. The group recently created a Facebook page entitled "Women Occupy Exeter", and expressed their desire to "support the 99%" by:

Creati[ing a] space for women to discuss visions for positive social change Sunday 27th November. Our plan is to make an afternoon occupation and bring some colour, fun and love to the camp. Please come and perform, make art, drink tea, look beautiful and bring a small gift from nature to help us enshrine a space.

They also said:

FILM MAKER NEEDED!

This Sunday from 12.00 filming on Cathedral Green, Art Action, Women Occupy Exeter event.

Perfect opportunity for student film maker or for someone who wants more experience.

Whilst it's a very long time since Kasia and I were "students" in the conventional sense of that word, we definitely want more experience at making films. By 11 AM on Sunday morning nobody else seemed to have volunteered, so we packed our handycams into our trusty rucksacks and headed off to the appointed place at (slightly belatedly!) the appointed hour.  We also took with us some flowers, some fruit, some Xmas cards, and perhaps most importantly of all in the circumstances, some hot tea!

By the time we left it was starting to get dark, and we'd snapped some stills, and recorded a couple of DV tapes worth of video. We'd also listened to lots of people from the Women Occupy Exeter group, the Occupy Exeter movement itself, as well one or two passers by, some of whom were more vociferous than others! I had also been invited to participate in the Occupy Exeter General Assembly, but my somewhat ageing little grey cells couldn't get to grips with the necessary protocols in the brief time available. Nonetheless my presence at the assembly was duly minuted.

All in all we now have a lot of material to sift through, but nonetheless our first rather hastily produced video is now available for all to see. Photographer "Stone" Naylor has won awards for his pictures of events at the Glastonbury Festival over the last 21 years. He was on Exeter Cathedral Green along with all the rest of us on Sunday afternoon, and he took some pictures of Women Occupy Exeter too. However we learned that Stone had another reason for being there at that place at that time. To watch and listen to his reasons for deciding to "Occupy Exeter" this week, please click here.

Regular readers will know that the  17th Conference of the Parties (COP17) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change  begin in Durban, South Africa in less than a week. At the same time and place the 7th Session of the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties (CMP7) to the Kyoto Protocol will also take place.  The question now is what if anything all these discussions will achieve apart from a modicum of global warming from all the hot air that will doubtless be emitted by the attendees?

Today Chris Huhne, the UK Energy and Climate Change Secretary, set out the UK Coalition Government's position on energy efficiency and energy security in a speech at The Grantham Institute for Climate Change. Amongst a variety of other things Mr. Huhne said that:

In transport, heating, and industry, in generation and efficiency, we must renegotiate the terms of our relationship with energy. If we succeed, our climate will be safer, and our economy more competitive. Change on this scale cannot be achieved by Government alone. Yes, we have a role to play: we must set a clear policy direction, using the right combination of incentives and regulation to drive down emissions, build investor certainty, and encourage green growth.

Businesses must also respond. Only the private sector can provide investment and innovation at the scale we need. New products and technologies must make their way to market.

Individuals have a responsibility too. We must all think again about the energy we use – and the energy we waste.

Each part of this energy equation must be balanced: otherwise, we cannot hit our carbon targets cost-effectively.

Mr. Huhne then went on to discuss a variety of "market failures":

Climate change is the biggest market failure the world has ever seen. As we have seen in the financial and housing sectors, when markets fail and the public is exposed to risk, the state is not just licensed but obliged to correct them. Future risk must be hedged: it is out of fear for British pension pots and British jobs that we support smarter regulation of casino capitalism. When faced with systemic risk that cannot be contained, only clear objectives supported by a comprehensive framework can provide certainty and security. That is the principle on which our domestic policy rests. It is also the argument we will be making in Durban next week, when we can tackle a fundamental question: where are the international talks heading?

Call me an old pessimist if you will, but the recent meeting of the G20 leaders did nothing that I could see to address the risks inherent in the all too obvious failure of our financial and housing markets. On the basis of that outcome, not to mention the outcomes of previous climate change talks, I will be astonished if at the end of the day the discussions in Durban make any significant contribution to ameliorating what Chris referred to as (and repeated for emphasis by your editor):

The biggest market failure the world has ever seen

As far as I can see "Casino Capitalism" as Mr. Huhne calls it (or "Capitalism as Currently Constituted" as I call it) is still alive and well and living on Wall Street, whilst Governments and regulators around the globe remain powerless to do anything about it. Even if you leave the sometimes contentious question of "climate change" itself out of the equation,  the same argument applies in spades to energy security. Market forces haven't solved that problem yet. It seems unlikely they ever will. Chris Huhne appears to largely agree with me, but he disagrees with me on one point though. Regarding the COP17/Kyoto talks in Durban he had this to say this morning:

A global deal covering all major economies is not a luxury. It is not an optional extra. It is an absolute necessity.

The UK has always been an advocate of a legally binding agreement under the United Nations. Why? No pressing international problem has been solved without one. Not chlorofluorocarbons. Not banks lack of capital. Not the arms race. This commitment to a global deal is woven deep into our political DNA: all the major parties agree. Indeed, it is so important to both coalition partners that it was in the Coalition Agreement. But for many of those gathered around the negotiating tables in Durban, times could not be tougher.

Europe is gripped by a currency crisis of constitutional proportions. The United States is preoccupied with jobs, growth, and a looming Presidential election. And the Middle East and North Africa are consumed by questions of political reform. In these circumstances, we cannot hope for too much. That risks perpetuating the myth that each year will be either the making or the breaking of a global climate treaty. Yes, a global deal may be out of reach today. But we can –and must – provide a clear signal that it is our objective. For time is running short. We are walking down a dangerous path.

Time is indeed running short, but personally I very much doubt that the "clear signal" that Chris says he is hoping for, let alone some actual action, will emerge from Durban. The G20 leaders ignored what the UN had to say in Cannes last month. Pigs certainly didn't fly on that occasion. I'll start believing in such things if and when I see even one tiny piglet struggling uncoordinatedly into the azure skies over Durban, just in time for Christmas. What are the risks that international talks will start heading somewhere useful for a change, do you suppose?

We reported at the beginning of the month on the sudden demise of MF Global Inc.  If you recall Jon Corzine, an ex "Democratic" governor and senator, and (coincidentally?) also an ex CEO of Goldman Sachs, presided over the seventh largest bankruptcy in U.S. history.  The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, one of the regulators charged with keeping an eye on shady dealings on Wall Street on behalf of U.S. taxpayers, has just released a long statement about the affair. Amongst other things CFTC Commisioner Scott D. O’Malia has this to say:

Segregation of customer funds is fundamental to our markets. The Commodity Exchange Act expressly prohibits intermediaries like MF Global from (i) commingling customer and proprietary funds (i.e., house funds) and (ii) using customer funds to support proprietary transactions. It appears that MF Global failed this fundamental responsibility.

To the the uninitiated it sounds a lot like the CFTC were failing in one of their fundamental responsibilities also, since what they "expressly prohibit" happened anyway. Addressing that point Mr. O’Malia has this to say:

While it’s tempting to compare the MF Global proceedings to the Lehman Brothers Inc. (“LBI”) bankruptcy, it is important to keep in mind that MF Global is unique because customer funds are missing from the segregated account. In the LBI bankruptcy, there was no shortfall in the segregated account, which meant that selling the segregated account, with its customer positions and funds, to Barclays was a straightforward process. In contrast, since the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) placed MF Global into insolvency on October 31st, MF Global customers with positions have received an inadequate percentage of their total funds. Customers that thought it prudent to liquidate their positions prior to the insolvency (the “Cash-Only Customers”) have received none of the funds used to secure their trading at all. The inability of MF Global customers as a whole to access their funds has affected trading in futures markets, and has shaken public confidence in our customer protection regime.

With the public's confidence duly shaken, the CFTC propose:

To renew public confidence in segregation and to assure the public that MF Global is an isolated incident, the Commission should immediately take action.

To the uninitiated this sounds a lot like closing the stable door after the horse has already bolted. It seems:

The Commission should also take longer-term actions to increase public confidence. Without disclosure to its customers, MF Global dramatically changed the risk profile of its proprietary operations and its incentives relating to customer intermediation. That is unacceptable. The Commission should adopt improved transparency measures to give customers more comprehensive information on the risk profiles of the intermediaries with which they entrust their hard-earned money.

The Commission must use MF Global as its own teachable moment and reconsider its final and proposed rulemakings under the Dodd-Frank Act. First and foremost, we must reconsider the proposal that would limit investments of segregated customer funds. Somewhat prematurely, this proposal is being hailed as the solution to the MF Global problem. At this time, we have not identified the cause of the segregation shortfall, and any action that we take obviously cannot be the solution until we have greater clarification on what caused the problem.

The uninitiated wonder if The Commission have noticed that many people were unhappy about "the risk profile of [financial firms] proprietary operations" and the associated "transparency measures" long before MF Global disappeared down the drain. Possibly The Commission might ask itself if that's one reason why some of those uninitiated in the ways of The Masters of the Universe are currently occupying Wall Street and other streets around the Globe?

In conclusion Commissioner O’Malia states that:

Many have said that the failure of MF Global was not systemic and that we are lucky. I don’t view it in the same light. I am certain that the thousands of individuals who have lost money or can’t get access to their rightful property don’t share that sentiment either.

Your humble reporter hasn't personally lost any money courtesy of Jon Corzine and MF Global, but nonetheless he doesn't feel lucky either. All this makes him wonder once again "What if the globe wasn't governed by politicians and bankers?". Surely it couldn't be any worse, could it?