GOVERNMENT FAILING IN ITS DUTY TO CUT CARBON EMISSIONS

THE biggest challenge facing the future of the human race is how the world tackles the threat of global climate change.

But the seemingly insatiable desire for energy creates a real policy conundrum for governments in dealing with these potentially conflicting demands. The ostrich like behaviour of certain politicians is not a legitimate option though and represents a gross dereliction of duty.

Five years ago, Derby City Council agreed to a 25 per cent reduction in its own carbon footprint by 2011/12. And in 2008, when I was still leader of the City Council, I announced Labour’s ambition to make Derby a sustainable city by 2025 – self sufficient in clean green energy.

That same year, the Labour government passed the Climate Change Act. It was the first of its kind anywhere in the world and brought in legally binding annual reductions in greenhouse gases. It was meant to ensure the UK played its part in keeping global temperatures below danger levels.

But the swings and roundabouts of local and national politics have derailed the local, national and international progress that was being made. Labour’s attempts to put Britain at the forefront of international efforts to tackle climate change are now in jeopardy.

When Labour lost control of Derby City council in 2008, the Liberal Democrats abandoned Labour’s five year plan to cut the council’s carbon footprint by 25 per cent. The drive to make Derby self sufficient in clean green energy by 2025 was also sunk without trace and nothing changed when Derby’s Conservatives formed a minority administration last year.

When the Tory led government came to power 12 months ago, David Cameron said it would be the greenest government ever, but his actions have failed to match his rhetoric.

The much heralded Energy Bill that is currently before the House of Commons represents a colossal missed opportunity. The ‘Green Deal’, which is the bill’s central plank, isn’t even linked to any carbon reduction targets and offers the least help to households with the lowest incomes.

Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change has adopted an illogical approach to tackling fuel poverty and climate change. He is phasing out Labour’s successful ‘Warm Front’ scheme and is effectively passing responsibility for fuel poverty to the energy companies instead.

But if carbon emissions from Britain’s homes are going to be reduced to enable the UK to meet the targets set by the Climate Change Act the government must do a lot better than this.

They also need to do more for the commercial sector too. For example, when I met representatives from East Midlands Airport this week, they spoke about their plans to make their ground operations carbon neutral by next year. They had wanted to use solar power to produce 36 per cent of the airport’s ground operations' energy requirements. But they have been forced to abandon these plans because two months ago the government slashed the feed-in tariff scheme that was introduced by the previous Labour government.

It seems this government is so obsessed with its austerity programme that it is incapable of finding a credible solution to the energy and climate change policy conundrum. By contrast, Labour stands ready to offer the necessary local, national and international leadership to deliver a low carbon future that is essential to our collective future wellbeing and prosperity.

NICK CLEGG CAN’T FOOL THE PEOPLE

On the anniversary of this appalling coalition government Nick Clegg claims the Lib Dems have been a moderating influence on the govt.

But the Lib Dems have voted to scrap EMA, abolish the Future Jobs Fund, eliminate child trust funds, put an end to the health in pregnancy grant, impose unprecedented cuts in public services , triple tuition fees, increase VAT to 20 per cent, cut tax credits, slash funding for sure start children’s centres, reduce the winter fuel allowance and much more besides.

Mr Clegg and his band of quisling MPs who have betrayed everything they said their party stood for should realise that: YOU CAN FOOL SOME OF THE PEOPLE ALL OF THE TIME, AND ALL OF THE PEOPLE SOME OF THE TIME, BUT YOU CAN’T FOOL ALL OF THE PEOPLE ALL OF THE TIME.

The truth is, Nick Clegg is propping up the most right-wing Tory-led Government that the country has seen for more than 70 years, which is undermining our economy and destroying our communities.

There may still be three parties on offer, but there are only two directions for the future of our country. And it’s only Labour that offers a progressive, compassionate, caring and economically viable future for the people of Great Britain

DERBY IS CRYING OUT FOR LABOUR

Following last week’s local election results, Derby’s Conservatives and Liberal Democrats should allow the Labour Party to take charge of the city.

The outcome of the elections saw Labour gaining three seats from the Conservatives and two from the Liberal Democrats, but the party remains four short of an overall majority.

Labour now has 22 councillors on the city council to the Conservatives’ 16 and the Liberal Democrats’ 12. But Labour has the moral authority to take charge of the council.

Across the city, Labour’s candidates secured almost 2,000 more votes than the Conservative and Liberal Democrats put together.

The only reason Labour didn’t win more seats is because of Derby’s electoral system. Unlike Nottingham and Leicester, where all out elections occur every four years, in Derby a third of the council’s 51 seats are elected in three out of every four years instead.

Derby stagnated under the leadership of the Liberal Democrats from 2008 to 2010 and hasn’t improved since the Conservatives formed a minority administration last year.

The city is crying out for a Labour local authority to stand up for Derby in the face of the massive cuts being imposed by the Tory-Lib Dem government.

STAND UP FOR DEMOCRACY - VOTE NO2AV

AV wouldn't make any difference in safe seats. So that rules out about half the constituencies in the country.

AV accentuates landslide elections. Labour would have fared far worse in the 1980s and could have been virtually wiped out in 1983 and 1987 elections if AV had been in place. It was a long haul back from those disastrous results even under FPTP, but we made it.

It’s hardly any consolation that a similar fate would have befallen the Tories in 1997 and 2001.

Psephologists agree that the Lib Dems would be the main beneficiary of AV enabling them to be permanent kingmakers. Consequently AV could consign the country to long-term, if not permanent right of centre coalitions – like the current appalling administration.

I don’t like the notion that candidates who initially come third can eventually win – that’s not democratic in my book.

It is for these reasons that I will be voting NO to AV on Thursday.

I urge everyone who cares about democracy, who cherishes the public services that Labour has built up since 1945 and who believe in progressive social change to join me in voting No to AV.