Turning climate change rhetoric into action

Despite the best efforts of industry lobbyists, the debate over whether climate change is happening is over.  In Scotland, we have ambitious targets, but targets alone don’t remove emissions from the atmosphere. For that, we need equally ambitious action plans.

The Scottish Government has recently published a new Environment Strategy. It offers some long- overdue reassurance that our environment and biodiversity will be protected and enhanced in the face of the climate emergency. It also recognises that the climate and nature crises are intrinsically linked.

Like many government strategies, it is strong on vision, has lovely infographics, and describes processes.  There are some actual plans, such as SEPA’s sector plans, expanding forestry, and re-using vacant land. Other plans don’t really have the level of activity that most organisations would recognise as an action plan. In fairness, there is a commitment to outcome pathways, but we are not there yet.

As the UK Committee on Climate Change (CCC) said, Scotland and the UK now need to "walk the talk". Not least because we are hosting COP26 in November - international experts will not be much impressed by a nice infographic. 

A key area for action is industrial strategy. We need a Green Industrial Revolution that includes a massive investment in low-carbon infrastructure. People in cold, damp homes waste over £400 on gas every year, and fuel poverty is a challenge for many households. Retrofitting homes would employ thousands of people, and the resulting health benefits of warmer homes could save the NHS millions.

A real industrial strategy, including the creative use of public procurement, will stop the reduction of emissions by simply offshoring jobs. The recent loss of contracts to manufacture turbines for a wind farm off the Fife coast demonstrates the dismal failure of the Government to link climate action and industrial strategy.

This is something highlighted in the interim report of the Just Transition Commission. The report also stresses the importance of turning sectoral emission targets into detailed Just Transition plans. As they say; “To date this sort of planning has not been undertaken in as rigorous a manner as might be the case.”

Transport is responsible for more than a third of Scotland’s greenhouse gases, while estimates suggest air pollution causes upwards of 2,500 deaths every year. Electric cars will be part of the solution, but what is needed a real shift to public transport and active travel. This means a step change in the provision of low-emission buses and the early electrification of our railways. Aviation growth also has to be curbed and needs measures like a frequent flyer levy, if the polluter pays principle is to mean anything.

A lot of progress has been made in decarbonising electricity generation in Scotland, but that still leaves heat decarbonisation, which will require the roll-out of technologies like solar hot water and hydrogen and investment in district heat networks.

A recent WWF report clearly sets out the actions needed to reduce emissions in agriculture. I am not sure this week’s NFU report really steps up to the challenge with its steady-state message. We need a much more radical approach to land use and food production, as well as action on fertilisers and pesticides.

As this week's row over fossil fuel investments at Strathclyde Pension Fund shows, some parts of the public sector have some way to go in taking climate change action seriously.

Many of these issues are covered in a new Scottish Labour policy consultation paper.  The paper argues the action required to deliver on our climate change targets cannot simply be done by governments imposing top-down solutions. It requires grassroots action and social innovation, changing social norms and behaviour as much as technology. A (low carbon) net-zero economy can mean many more jobs, but we must ensure that there is a Just Transition, which doesn’t leave any community behind.

Scotland needs to demonstrate that we are not just a world leader in climate change ambition, but that we can also lead in climate change action.

New National Parks for Scotland

National Parks are beautiful and inspiring places enjoyed by many – so why don’t we have more of them?

I declare an interest, I love our National Parks. I have walked the hills of the Trossachs and the Cairngorms made easier by the infrastructure of our National Parks. As a child, I spent many a summer holiday in the Lake District, which remains one of my favourite places on earth. 

Our National Parks are very different places. The wild open spaces of the Cairngorms, contrast with the generally gentler terrain of the Trossachs or the Lake District. At my age, the sight of a tea shop or pub in the next valley is a welcome sight, even if it adds to the development!  National Parks are not museums. They are living places where people make their living as well as respecting the environment.

Last month, was the 70^thanniversary of the 1949 Act that gave rise to the UK’s National Parks. Yet another ground-breaking piece of legislation passed by the post-war Labour government. The Act followed years of campaigning activity – most famously the mass trespass of Kinder Scout in the Peak District in 1932. In Scotland, the Ramsay Report (1945) recommended five areas, which received a special status somewhat short of being National Parks.  

There is a Scottish Campaign for National Parks, which seeks to preserve and protect our existing parks. They also make a case for new National Parks in a well-argued report.  It makes the point that Scotland’s landscape ranks amongst the best in the world, yet out of 3,500 National Parks worldwide, Scotland has only two. Loch Lomond and the Trossachs (2002) and Cairngorms (2003).

Previous expert reports recommended the establishment of at least four or five National Parks in Scotland. Most recently more Coastal or Marine National Parks with two possible areas shortlisted. The campaign argues for a national strategy to designate more National Parks and improve the operation and governance of the existing ones. The case has been developed by the Scottish National Parks Development project. 

The National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 was one of the first pieces of legislation passed by the Scottish Parliament after devolution. Section 2 of the Act sets out a broad criterion for an area to be designated as a National Park. On that basis, the campaign has recommended the areas identified below. Two of these areas, Borders and Galloway have developed more detailed plans. Argyll and Bute Council has published a report on a Coastal and Marine National Park (CMNP) for the Argyll Islands and Coast.

Another early piece of Scottish Parliament legislation, the Land Reform Act 2003, gives us proper access rights to the countryside. However, our path networks are pretty limited, and like most public services have suffered from austerity.

In England, the UK government has organised the Glover Review of designated landscapes, which has published an interim report. This suggests that there is much to do to improve access, increase funding, reduce housing costs and strengthen governance. There has also been a growth in non-statutory designations. 

Another new initiative is the concept of the National Park City. They seek to apply the benefits of traditional National Parks to cities. A campaign has been started to designate Glasgow as the first in Scotland. They join several campaigns across the world with similar aims, including London.

Apart from the usual free-market dafties like the Adam Smith Institute, few people are against National Parks in principle. The opposition tends to come from some commercial and landowning interests who fear more significant development restrictions. Despite a manifesto commitment, the current Scottish Government has done nothing to look at new designations, claiming to focus on the existing provision. 

There is plenty of criticism of how National Parks are run, including this grand rant by George Monbiot. So, any new National Parks would need to consider the governance arrangements.  Scottish legislation is pretty flexible on this issue.

In conclusion, I think there is a strong case for more National Parks in Scotland. It will raise issues from control and ownership of land to government financing and the broader rural economy. These are challenges we should face to protect and improve our natural environment for everyone.

Protecting our pensions and saving the planet

Pensions are meant to safeguard our future, but that future is threatened by the burning of carbon in fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas. It's also a poor investment, which is why there is a growing movement to divest our pensions from fossil fuel investments.

I was in London yesterday for our UK annual pensions conference, which included the launch of UNISON’s new guide on this issue. It is designed to help members of local government pension schemes push for changes in the investment of their funds. The aim is to explore alternative investment opportunities, allowing funds to sell their shares and bonds in fossil fuels and to go carbon-free.

This is an issue that UNISON Scotland has championed for several years with our ReIvest campaign partners, FoE and Common Weal. Scottish Local Government Pension Scheme funds have some £1.8bn invested in fossil fuel companies - that figure grows to £16bn across the UK.

New government regulations for fossil fuels have raised the costs of high-polluting industries and reduced their investment appeal. Equally, emerging clean and green technology has created new and lucrative business opportunities for funds. The UK government is also consulting on allowing pension schemes to dump fossil fuel investments by dropping ‘best returns’ legal rules.

In Scotland, all local authorities, including those who administer the local SLGPS funds, have a statutory duty to reduce emissions in accordance with the Climate Change (Scotland) Act. That is an additional reason for challenging investment proposals to invest in fossil fuels.

One of the strengths of this new guide is to challenge the conventional wisdom that fiduciary duty is a barrier to divestment. The law is actually quite clear, pension funds should consider any factors that have a  financial impact on the performance of their investments, including social, environmental and corporate governance factors. Trustees can take account of non- financial factors where they have good reason to think that scheme members share their view, and there is no risk of major financial harm to the fund.

The guide also sets out a range of actions anyone who is concerned about this issue can take - not just our union branches and members.

By investing in fossil fuel extraction, our local councils are attempting to take a short term profit from climate change. As public bodies, councils have a responsibility to work for the public good,  they shouldn’t be financially and politically supporting the most destructive industry on the planet. Fossil fuel investments undermine existing Scottish and local authority climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies.

Let's protect our hard earned pensions and leave a planet fit for future generations.

Let's not fry the planet to oblivion

The monsoon rain that hit Scotland in recent days should be a stark reminder that we need to take responsibility for climate change. As today's Scotsman editorial elegantly puts it; "It’s time we stopped pillaging the earth’s finite resources to create short-term gain for the few at the expense of the many."

The Met Office gave us a clear warning yesterday with global temperatures set to rise more than one degree above pre-industrial levels. This means the world is half way towards 2C, the gateway to dangerous warming. It is to be hoped that this new data will add urgency to political negotiations in Paris later this month aimed at securing a new global climate treaty. But I wouldn't hold your breath!

In Scotland, we have ambitious, world leading climate change legislation, but have yet to meet any of the interim targets. As my old gran used to say "promises butter no parsnips". The climate change equivalent might be; "Ambition won't save the planet".

The Stop Climate Chaos Scotland coalition has recently published a manifesto for next year's Scottish Parliament elections. We have been taking its proposals around the party conferences in recent weeks, with well attended fringe meetings and lots of interest from delegates. At each event party spokespersons have been broadly supportive, but more cautious when it comes to detailed action. All the party leaders have signed a commitment that their manifesto's will be consistent with the ambitions of Scotland’s Climate Change Act.

I was speaking at one of these events on one of the more challenging policy areas, transport. Transport accounts for a quarter of Scotland’s greenhouse gas emissions, but is the area of least progress, both in policy and in emission reductions.

We need to make a significant shift to public transport by disincentivising the car where alternatives exist. That's because cars are the largest source emissions, 40% of the total, and road traffic miles are forecast to increase by 25% between 2002 and 2020.

This is not just an environmental issue, it's also one of social justice. That's because supporting car use disproportionately benefits higher earners. 30% of Scottish households do not have access to a car, and 53% of Scotland’s poorest people do not have a driving licence. It's also a gender issue because nearly 40% of women in Scotland do not have a driving licence, compared to 20% of men

An active travel policy with greater emphasis on walking and cycling also has obvious health benefits. Not to mention the 2000 deaths per year from air pollution.

Then we have air travel. Air Passenger Duty is soon to be devolved and almost all the debate has focused on reducing it. Air travel is the highest emitter per passenger kilometre - domestic flights in particular. A 50% cut in APD would put an additional 60,000 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Again, it's also a social justice issue because half the public don’t fly. They rely on other forms of transport that don't operate on a level playing field with air travel. Air travel is exempt from VAT and aviation fuel is tax free. Lower carbon train fares and bus fares are going up rapidly.

Credit to Kez Dugdale for highlighting the cost of cutting APD in her conference speech. Supporting low paid workers through tax credits, is a better use of the tax revenue than promoting more polluting flights.

The Met Office data means action on climate change is more urgent than ever. There will be no where else for our children to go once we have fried the planet to oblivion. We should make some big strides in Scotland next year by facing up to difficult policy change like transport. Not just for the environment, but for social justice as well.

P.S. Support Scotland's climate change march in Edinburgh on 28 November.

 

 

Scotland's world leading climate legislation needs world leading action

This is a crucial year for the planet as world leaders meet in Paris in December to thrash out a new international agreement on climate change. As Lord Stern, and others, warned last month, pledges made to date in advance of the UN talks will not be enough to keep global warming rises below the 2 degrees Celsius threshold. Scotland, with its claimed world-leading legislation, must step up its efforts to ensure future targets are met.

Action in the public sector and the energy industry will be particularly significant for UNISON Scotland members.

We are pleased that the Scottish Government is now introducing a statutory duty for public bodies to report on climate change duties, something UNISON Scotland urged at the outset. However, it is disappointing that the delay has meant the loss of several years in establishing a consistent and reliable reporting regime. The new reporting format could also be stronger as set out in our submission to the consultation.

As we also warned, voluntary reporting has fallen considerably short of what is needed. Some local authorities have not reported at all, others report in different year, or choose what categories of emissions to report on (even in different years). This means aggregation of emissions data and comparison from one to another is not reliable.

Reporting is of course only the first step - public bodies need to take action. One way they could do this is by supporting trade union Green Representatives. The current public sector duty is far too 'top down', relying on outdated heroic leadership models. We need to win over the workplace and Green Reps can be part of that. Where it has been tried, it has also helped spread the message into local communities.

Another issue the public sector can help with, particularly through pension fund investment and planning, is the carbon bubble. A carbon bubble is inflating because the value of fossil fuel companies continues to be based upon the assumption that all their known fossil fuel reserves will be burned. Yet the scientific reality is that to avoid catastrophic climate change, we cannot afford to burn more than one third (perhaps less) of all known fossil fuel reserves. This risk is not even being assessed in Scotland yet.

Then there is procurement. UNISON Scotland and the 'Ten Asks' coalition have set out a number of ideas to strengthen the procurement regulations on environmental issues. With some £11bn being spent in the private sector this could have a big reach.

The public sector reporting delay has coincided with four years of missed emissions reduction targets. In March, the UK Committee on Climate Change said for the fourth time that more action is needed in Scotland to meet future targets, particularly in low-carbon heat, energy efficiency, the public sector, transport, and agriculture and land use sectors.

The Scottish Government's own reporting is better than the UK government and more transparent, but actions can still be a vague and data fudged. For example, carbon assessment is only done on direct spending like bridges and roads, instead of also looking at the consequences such as car use on these links.

To meet long term targets in a country like Scotland we need to make transformational changes in sectors like agriculture. A quarter of emissions come from agriculture. Land management practices like fertiliser use should be linked to subsidies and greater effort made to meet forestry planting targets.

In the energy sector we should ensure that environmental justice and social justice go hand in hand. For example, energy subsidies for renewables and other forms of energy are paid for by consumers irrespective of ability to pay. Renewable heat projects and community energy are at a small scale and need national incentives to promote at the scale required. Community energy needs to be made easier with council involvement, loan guarantees and expert help.

The big shift is needed in transport, even if that is possibly the most difficult. There is a nervousness in government about public reaction to this, but there is growing evidence that the public gets it. Climate challenge fund projects may not have resulted in much emission reduction, but has been helpful in raising awareness. We need to think about reducing the need to travel, creating sustainable communities without any need for commuting. The real lesson from countries like Denmark is that they join up their thinking on these issues and produce integrated solutions.

An obvious concern for our members will be the impact on jobs. Many are right to be sceptical about just transition arrangements as renewables have delivered fewer jobs than promised, particularly in manufacturing and the supply chain. Despite industry claims, fracking is unlikely to provide more than a handful of jobs, certainly compared to energy efficiency. The new Fair Work Convention could take a sectoral approach to education and skills as well as just transition.

In Scotland we have ambitious targets to tackle climate change, but not always the joined up thinking and vital action to achieve those targets. World leading legislation needs world leading action.

 

Global Divestment Day

If we are to save the planet for future generations, it's time to take action against the power and influence of the fossil fuel industry.

13th-14th February is Global Divestment Day. Thousands of people across 6 continents taking collective action to show the strength of the growing global divestment movement and demanding our institutions go fossil free. The call for action in the UK comes in the form of a series of events targeting the health, faith, university, local authority and bank decision makers, as well as personal and political action.

As a pensions negotiator, I recognise that occupational and personal pensions are an important part of the campaign. The Scottish Local Government Pension Scheme invests £26bn of our members money and too much of this has been invested in ways that are harmful to our members.

There are several reasons why pension funds should stop supporting fossil fuel companies including:

• Climate change. The carbon emissions of coal are higher than for any other fuel in the world. Recent estimates show that the vast majority of the world’s coal reserves will have to be left in the ground in order to avoid devastating climate change.
• Destroying lives in the global south. Coal mining is responsible for devastating local pollution in the global south as well as the displacement of thousands of people from their homes.
• Carbon bubble. Banks and other financial players have created a carbon bubble in the global economy. Only a small fraction of fossil fuel resources can be burned without breaking international commitments to tackle climate change. This means most fossil fuel assets are worthless. A sudden correction of the current overvaluation of fossil fuel companies could cause a new global financial crisis.

These are all good reasons for those making investment decisions to divest, even under the constraints of fiduciary duty. Those of us lucky enough to benefit from decent pensions should ensure they are used for good, not evil.

Divestment has been used effectively throughout history to place social and economic pressure on an industry or government that is causing harm. By publicly withdrawing financial support, fossil fuel divestment addresses the root of the problem - the unchecked expansion of fossil fuel companies on an endless quest for profit.

There are a range of actions you can take today and tomorrow on the campaign website. Either in Edinburgh or online. The planet and our children require us to take climate change seriously. #divest

 

 

Action on climate change

I was giving oral evidence to the Scottish Parliament Local Government and Regeneration Committee this morning on the Draft Report on Proposals and Policies (RPP2) for tackling climate change in Scotland. A more readable summary has been prepared by SPICE.

Recent international reports have highlighted the world’s high carbon emission trajectory and the impact has been evidenced through the record Arctic ice melt in 2012, the hottest decade on record for global temperatures, and a growing body of evidence linking extreme weather events to climate change. In Scotland we have world leading climate change legislation. However, delivery needs to match the rhetoric and these latest proposals and polices fall short of what is required. 

There is an over reliance on proposals over policies, as well as on the EU increasing its climate change target. As the Stop Climate Change Coalition (SCCS) emphasised at the time of the Bill’s passage through Parliament, we need to make a strong start otherwise the task becomes too great and future government’s will argue they are unable to meet the targets. This means we need more action in the form of proposals not vague policies. Unless all proposals described are fully implemented and the EU changes its level of ambition, Scotland will meet just one annual target between now and 2027. 

There is a lack of transparency in order to inform independent assessment of these plans. RPP2 actually provides less information than RPP1.  It no longer distinguishes between UK, EU and Scottish policies as clearly as did previously, nor does it provide estimates of costs for proposals. In the current financial environment that is obviously important as is a full account of the costs and benefits by sector. 

The plans simply don’t provide a credible route to reducing emissions at the rate required, let alone build a low carbon economy. It is hard to identify an increase in policy effort in RPP2.  Certainly the ‘step change’ in effort advised by the UK Climate Change Committee is not apparent. For example, in the transport sector there is an actual reduction in effort and no Scottish Government polices to address the issue. 

Councils are of course facing a very difficult time as they are bearing the brunt of the spending cuts and their workforce is being slashed by a much higher proportion than other public services. Despite this they are key players and many are doing excellent work in specific areas.  However, it is not easy to make an overall assessment of progress across their full remit and their duties under the Scottish Climate Change Act due to lack of consistent data on activities and emissions savings. Again this is something we warned would happen without mandatory annual reporting. 

On the ground I have to say that there is only limited evidence of the culture change required. As we warned the guidance is vague and over reliant on heroic leadership models. Green Workplace initiatives that build support for cultural change from the bottom up are the exception and councils with a good record on this like South Lanarkshire are rare. Procurement was to be an important driver, but the Scottish Government has dropped ‘sustainable’ from its Procurement Bill and that sends out the wrong message.

Planning should play an important part in meeting climate change targets but hard pressed planning officers are juggling to many other competing priorities. Development plans should have an explicit statement to show how they will contribute to the reduction of emissions.

While local authorities want to play their part in reducing emissions their capacity to do so is being undermined by the cuts. There are examples of positive action but there is not enough sharing of good practice and reporting is inconsistent. Top down leadership models hamper the engagement of staff. Today's report by the Sustainable Scotland Network highlights some of these problems and makes sensible, if modest, recommendations for change. 

Getting it together on climate change

Scotland is rightly proud of it's ground breaking climate change legislation. In 2009 the largest civil society coalition Scotland has ever seen, campaigned successfully for legally binding targets to reduce Scotland’s climate change emissions. UNISON Scotland was pleased to be part of that coalition.

However, as is often the case in politics, there is a but as this video shows. The most recent emissions data for Scotland showed that not only had the targets for emissions reductions for that year been missed, but that greenhouse gas emissions in Scotland had actually increased by 2%. This is despite the recession that would have a downward impact on the numbers, even without government action. The Scottish Government’s action plans to meet the climate change targets have fallen short and there is a real contradiction with plans to boost oil output and other spending that will increase carbon emissions. Tom Ballantine's piece in the Scotsman explains this in more detail.

We all accept that this isn't easy. UNISON focused on two areas where we warned the planned actions would not match the rhetoric. As we predicted the public duty guidance has turned out to be a toothless document, gathering dust on shelves. Heroic leadership models simply don't work. Climate change action needs to be built up from the bottom and the plans failed to recognise the key role of workers in driving effective action.

And that leads to our second point. Most emissions come from workplaces, therefore any strategy that ignores that fact is bound to fail. Green workplace initiatives have worked well when they have been run, demonstrating worker support for tacking serious action. But they have simply not been encouraged or supported at the level required.

If you cant get to today's parliamentary lobby organised by SCCS, write to your MSP, tweet or take some other action to help show that people across Scotland still care about climate change.

Climate change

I was speaking at the STUC Climate Change Conference in Edinburgh today. My theme was Climate change: from law to action.

For the benefit of the climate change deniers I started with a brief recap of the climate change science evidence. The Guardian does a great interactive guide. For Scotland it means our temperatures have risen in every season over the past 40 years, we are 20% wetter with a shorter snow season and fewer frosts. So Scotland gets a bit warmer - not many complaints likely over that! However, it also means an increase in extreme weather events like heat, drought and rainfall, plus a sea level rise of between 10-18cm by 2050. This all has serious consequences for public services, markets, business and health.

For these reasons Scotland has adopted the strongest climate change legislation in the world. Targets to cut emissions by 42% by 2020 and 80% by 2050, together with annual targets of at least 3% per year. These targets are backed up by mitigation and adaptation strategies and a commitment to sustainable development. All public bodies have a duty to tackle climate change by assessing their impact and influence, taking action and measuring progress. Sadly the guidance is a bit weak with no statutory reporting and a very top down approach.

This is why we need to keep campaigning. Scotland is fortunate in having a powerful campaigning coalition on this issue in Stop Climate Chaos Scotland with a collective membership of 2 million. Targets are fine but they are beyond normal political cycles. So we need further steps on issues like green procurement, energy efficiency, transport and just transition strategies. The recent Spending Review prioritised roads over public transport and housing. So we need to keep Government on its toes. Targets are being met, but that is more due to the economic downturn than practical action to tackle climate change.

Next year's local government elections is a good opportunity to put some focus on local actions to tackle climate change. Too many  councils put the Climate Challenge plaque on the wall and do little else. They should all build emission cuts into their Single Outcome Agreements and the work of their Community Planning Partnerships. They should have local targets and adaption strategies that they report on annually. Sustainable development education should be undertaken in all schools together with Food for Good policies in all catering facilities. Waste management and energy conservation should be part of these strategies together with support for public transport, cycling, pedestrian facilities and access to land.

All public bodies and employers should recognise that more than half of all emissions are work related. Workplaces produce ten times as much waste as we do in our homes. That's why engaging workers in climate change is essential. Heroic leadership is not enough. Unions like UNISON have Green Workplace strategies that can help raise awareness and take important practical steps. Workers engaged in these strategies are also more likely to take them into our communities and the home. It can also cut waste at a time when the public pound is being stretched beyond breaking point.

So strong legislation with ambitious targets is great. But let's not get complacent. We need practical actions to deliver these commitments and really tackle the most serious threat to the planet.

General Well Being

There is a growing interest in looking at alternatives to Gross Domestic Product as the sole measurement of a country's performance. The term "gross national happiness" was coined in 1972 in the small Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan by the former King Jigme Singye Wangchuck. At first offered as a casual, offhand remark, the concept was taken seriously, as the Centre for Bhutan Studies with some assistance from Canada, developed a sophisticated survey instrument to measure the population's general level of well-being.

Even the Prime Minister supports the concept. In 2006, just five months into his time as Conservative Party leader, he described the task of gauging people's wellbeing as one of the "central political issues of our time". In government, the Office of National Statistics has been asked to produce measures to implement his "long-stated ambition of gauging general wellbeing." There is apparently some 'nervousness' in Downing Street on this issue. Not surprisingly as reflected in the Daily Record comment; "It sounds crazy - especially coming from a Tory Government whose economic policies spell misery for millions of people." Indeed! But the ONS started to collect the data last April.


In France, Nicolas Sarkozy, announced that he intended to include happiness and wellbeing in France's measurement of economic progress. He was accepting recommendations made by two Nobel economists, Joseph Stiglitz and Amartya Sen, who called on world leaders to move away from a purely economic concept of gross domestic product, which measures economic production, to wellbeing and sustainability.

Canada already does some polling on wellbeing and John Helliwell from their statistics office has been to the UK to advise when he commented;  "Canadian statisticians and researchers also poll subjective wellbeing across the country, but the data have thus far not attracted much policy attention. What is or could be dramatically different in the UK is for the government not just to undertake more widespread and thorough collection of subjective wellbeing data, but also to give them a central place in the choice and evaluation of public policies. That would be a global first."

Stiglitz is of course an economic advisor to the Scottish Government. I also understand that the Scottish Parliament, Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee may be asked to look at this issue. Patrick Harvie MSP is on record as a keen supporter of this approach. 

Still not convinced? Well none other than the OECD is championing the cause and has a major piece of work underway called the Better Life Initiative. The OECD is probably better known for its rather dry treatment of economic data so their eleven dimensions; housing, income, jobs, community, education, environment, governance, health, life satisfaction, safety and work-life balance is very interesting. Britain comes out fairly middling on the current assessment with 68% of Britons satisfied with their life against an OECD average of 59%. However, since the 1970's, evidence suggests that we are no happier despite increasing material wealth and improving health. 

The summer edition of The Geographer, newsletter of the Royal Scottish Geographical Society has a number of articles on this issue and good overview from their Chief Executive,Mike Robinson. He highlights the Spirit Level analysis and the work of Eric Weiner in his book Geography of Bliss. Weiner compared the happiest and most miserable countries and concluded that "Money matters, but less than we think and not in the way that we think. Family is important. So are friends. Envy is toxic. So is excessive thinking. Beaches are optional. Trust is not. Neither is gratitude."

If you want to take some practical actions then support  Action for Happiness. This is a movement of people committed to building a happier society. They want to see a fundamentally different way of life where people care less about what they can get for themselves and more about the happiness of others. They emphasise this has positive outcomes for everyone. It's not just a 'good' thing to do.

The final word from my fellow Liverpudlian John Lennon, quoted by Mike Robinson in his article:
"When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down 'happy'. They told me I didn't understand the assignment, and I told them they didn't understand life."

Climate Change day

Political parties contesting the Scottish Parliament elections are marking "climate day", organised by the Stop Climate Chaos Scotland (SCCS) coalition. SCCS is a coalition of around 60 organisations in Scotland (including UNISON) that are campaigning on climate change. Together SCCS represents over two million people in Scotland, an amazing 40% of the population.

A range of proposals are on offer today as the parties highlight their green credentials and related proposals from their manifestos. These include a range of practical measures to help meet Scotland's radical carbon reduction targets.

One of the issues UNISON is highlighting is the importance of a strong public sector duty and the promotion of Green Workplaces. Scotland has the toughest targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions of any country in the world – and our local authorities and other public bodies have a major part to play in making a success of our ambition. Thanks to campaigning by UNISON and others in SCCS, public bodies have statutory duties under the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009. Yet the Scottish Government does not plan to require public bodies to report on what they are actually doing to reduce emissions – making it difficult to monitor their performance and therefore their overall progress.

If you can only do one thing for climate change today then please go to the SCCS Livestream webpage from 7.30-9pm tonight for the first ever online election debate on climate change. From the comfort of your own home, you'll be able to watch a lively discussion between party spokespeople, and post your climate change questions to them live The debate will be hosted by former BBC (Reporting Scotland) journalist, Alan Mackay.

Big Climate Connection

The Stop Climate Chaos Coalition is calling on people across the UK to connect with other people in their communities on the 5th or 6th of November and lobby their MPs. SCCS is Scotland's biggest member coalition representing nearly 2 million Scots calling for action on climate change.



The world needs a global solution to climate change delivered by a fair, ambitious and binding agreement under the United Nations. The UK should deliver real leadership: leading by example to deliver on a low carbon economy at home, and leading in the global negotiations to push for richer countries to provide support for action in developing countries.
 In the next few months there are two key opportunities for MPs to influence the global and domestic climate change agenda: the Energy Security and Green Economy Bill and the UN Climate Conference in Cancun.

In the Energy Security and Green Economy Bill, introduce enabling legislation so a strong Emissions Performance Standard (EPS) for fossil fuel power stations can be set to enable delivery of a decarbonised electricity supply by 2030.

At the Cancun International Climate talks in December the UK should support the establishment of one common climate fund to help developing countries adapt to climate change, develop in a low carbon way and protect their forests. The UK should also champion innovative sources of public climate finance and guarantee that UK money for adaptation in developing countries will be provided as grants rather than loans.

Lots of materials to support the Big Climate Connection can be viewed at the SCCS website.

And on the subject of climate change please support stronger duties on public bodies. Scotland has tough targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and our local authorities and other public bodies have a major part to play in achieving these targets. Thanks to campaigning by UNISON and others in Stop Climate Chaos Scotland, public bodies have statutory duties under the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009. Yet the Scottish Government does not plan to require public bodies to report on what they are actually doing to reduce emissions – making it difficult to monitor their performance and therefore their overall progress. You can respond to the current consultation through our Green Workplaces page.

Just Transition

I spoke at the Stop Climate Chaos Scotland fringe meeting at the SNP conference yesterday evening. This is part of a series of fringe meetings at the party conferences to promote the SCCS manifesto for next year's Scottish elections. The meeting was chaired by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, John Swinney MSP.

My contribution was on the need for a 'Just Transition' to a low carbon economy.

There is a broad agreement across the political parties on the benefits a low carbon economy could bring to Scotland. However, without a just transition there could be some economic dislocation as workers in high carbon industries are impacted, leading to a potential loss in public support for the measures we have to take to cut emissions.

The Scottish Government recognised this in the 2009 Joint Communique with the STUC that covers the need for a just transition strategy that addresses the economic, employment and social impact of moving to a low carbon economy. The SCCS manifesto proposal to deliver on this commitment, supported by the STUC, is the establishment of a Scottish Forum for a Just Transition. This would be a partnership body that would advise on the necessary training for new skills, promote Green Workplaces and maximise the employment opportunities.

I gave a couple of practical examples of current Scottish Government initiatives that contribute towards a just transition including the Energy Efficiency Action Plan and the forthcoming Scottish Water Bill.

Just transition is the key to winning support for tackling climate change. We need to highlight the opportunities to build the economy and create quality employment. But this won't happen by accident. We need to put practical measures in place now.

NHS Green Workplaces

I did two presentations at the NHS Scotland Event 2010 conference in Edinburgh today on Green Workplaces.

Health boards, like the rest of the public sector, will have to contribute to achieving the ambitious greenhouse gas emission reductions in the Climate Change Act. Whilst this is a challenging new duty, it is also an opportunity to make savings that do not impact on patient care. As workplaces are responsible for half of all emissions, they are key to meeting emission targets.

A interesting point came out of the procurement session. Scotland is already benefiting from having a co-operative model in procurement, compared with the competitive English model with a myriad of organisations doing their own thing.

My key message was that the traditional top down model simply doesn't deliver the necessary culture change. Staff surveys show that organisations that follow this model end up with staff that do not know about the environment policy and care even less. In contrast an approach that includes genuine staff involvement can generate whole organisation support. This approach fits in well with the NHS Scotland partnership model.

The TUC Green Workplaces project provides all the resources an organisation and their trade unions need to develop a really exciting project. There are good Scottish and UK case studies in most sectors. The approach is to negotiate a green workplace agreement that starts with an audit, then hold staff awareness sessions leading to genuine staff engagement. This should be focused on practical measures like energy saving and green travel plans. The TUC provides a handy 20 questions checklist to get started.

Green workplaces are more efficient, better places to work and contribute to a healthier Scotland and a safer planet.

Environment and the budget

I was in the Scottish Parliament yesterday giving evidence to the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee on the budget strategy. Part of a panel representing Stop Climate Chaos Scotland, a coalition of more than 60 organisations with a combined supporter base of over 2 million people in Scotland.

The committee was concerned that the financial crisis will be used as an excuse to drop or at least downgrade actions to tackle climate change. There is some evidence that budget cuts will impact on this, and in particular, the availability of funds to spend and save. I argued that tackling climate change was an opportunity not a cost. Energy efficiency, active travel and green workplaces can all contribute to more efficient as well as more environmentally friendly public services. The public sector has to lead by example and early action is cheaper than delay as highlighted in the Stern Report.

A particular concern is procurement where centralisation is damaging the prospects of smaller local suppliers. I gave some current examples including the proposal to source books for libraries and schools from one supplier. In practice that means from outwith Scotland with a much greater carbon footprint.

This committee is also responsible for Scottish Water and therefore I warned against proposals to privatise or mutualise Scottish Water. Selling off our water and sewage industry at a cut down price, dumping debt, dividends, profits and fees on the charge payer would be a real stealth tax. Water is probably Scotland's greatest asset and at a time when countries across the world are returning to public ownership, it would be plain crazy to even consider privatisation.

Greening the Workplace

Congratulations to our South Lanarkshire Branch on their successful Climate Challenge Fund bid. The ideas they come up with for greening the workplace could lead the way for similar union work across the public sector.


The project will focus on encouraging reduced emissions through energy efficiency and greener travel options. Members will be able to borrow energy monitors to check their energy use at home and develop alternative public transport plans for each workplace.

This project will demonstrate the contribution trade unions can make to tackling climate change in the workplace by engaging with our members on the issue. By doing so members will not only start to reduce their own emissions but will be more likely to demand action in the workplace. More than two thirds of carbon emissions are work related.
Most workplace projects on cutting carbon are led by employers. A bottom up project, promoted by the trade union, stands a much better chance of winning workforce support and making the real changes needed. UNISON Scotland campaigned for the Climate Change (S) Act 2009 to be as strong as possible with a clear duty on the public sector, ensuring it leads by example. All public bodies need to comply with that duty from January next year and we are calling for negotiated green workplace agreements to help them do that.

We have issued guidance to Scottish branches and there is now a detailed UNISON Greening the Workplace toolkit that shows just how to do this. In times of financial crisis greening the workplace is not just good for the planet - it makes economic sense as well.

Climate Change & Public Bodies

Scotland has arguably the strongest climate change legislation in the world in the Climate Change (Scotland) Act. The legislation commits Scotland to reducing emissions by 42% by 2020 and 80% by 2050 - targets which are among the most ambitious in the world.


Targets are important but delivery is what matters. To that end we lobbied successfully for a statutory duty on public bodies to take account of climate change in the exercise of their functions.

The Scottish Government is now developing guidance on how public bodies should deliver on this duty. Yesterday was the first meeting of the Advisory Board tasked with preparing that guidance. It includes representatives of all the main groups of public bodies and myself representing the Stop Climate Chaos Scotland coalition.

The first meeting was an opportunity to explore different approaches to the construction of the guidance. There will be a number of informal stakeholder workshops in March followed by a formal consultation later in the year. The guidance will come into effect on 1 January 2011.

Today the UK Committee on Climate Change reported that the Scottish target was "feasible but difficult" without a wider international agreement. Professor Jim Skea from the committee said: "A step change will be needed to unlock potential emissions reductions in Scotland, but we believe this to be achievable with new policies." He went on to say: "Given a new policy framework the opportunities are there for Scottish people and businesses to drive down emissions and build a low-carbon economy."

That is certainly right and as usual it will require the public sector to lead by example.