[News] from [guardian.co.uk]
[News > UK news > Police]
Chief constable accused of undermining power station protest
Documents reveal head of Kent police urged owner of Kingsnorth to do more to disrupt environmental activists
Rob Evans and Paul Lewis
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 17 January 2010 16.42 GMT Article history
A chief constable was tonight accused of undermining the public's right to protest after documents revealed he urged the owner of a power station to do more to disrupt environmental demonstrators.
Mike Fuller, the chief constable of Kent police, told E.ON it was "grossly inappropriate" for taxpayers to be paying extra for policing of protests at Kingsnorth, and the energy firm should "intervene" beforehand to prevent them taking place.
He has been accused of straying from his duty under human rights legislation that requires the police to neutrally facilitate peaceful protest. Senior officers have repeatedly denied claims that they encourage corporations to scupper environmental activists through the use of high court injunctions. But in a private letter to the head of UK security at E.ON, Fuller urged the German-owned firm to seek "legal remedies" against activists, and suggested using injunctions.
Documents obtained by the Guardian show that he was particularly critical of E.ON for not taking quicker action against Greenpeace activists who had scaled a 200-metre chimney at Kingsnorth in protest against a proposed coal-fired station, which has since been suspended. A jury cleared the six protesters of causing £30,000 of criminal damage in 2008, after they argued the action was legally justified because they were trying to prevent climate change causing greater damage.
Fuller said the protest had required "a significant number of police resources", adding: "There is more that E.ON needs to do to protect their own interests."
The chief constable said his "counter-terrorism security advisors" could assist E.ON in improving security around the site. He wrote that he was "surprised" that E.ON had not already used injunctions to "restrain" protesters and said it should in future take legal action "in advance of protests, where possible, and if not as soon as possible after" they start. He added: "Any potential shortcoming on E.ON's part may be converted into an additional financial burden on the police, paid for by the council tax payers of Kent. This seems grossly inappropriate in the circumstances."
Ben Stewart, one of the six activists acquitted, said: "The kind of injunction the police suggested could have resulted in thousands of Greenpeace members being banned from taking part in peaceful protests anywhere near Kingsnorth."
Fuller said he had "never strayed from his duty to remain impartial when policing protests". He said he wrote the letter after the incursion by protesters onto E.ON's property when thousands of pounds of damage had been caused.
"My concern was that E.ON should improve their own site security, which if neglected could cause unnecessary costs for the policing of protests, not that individuals who wished to protest should be prevented from doing so." But Kent police has been criticised in official reviews of its handling of the Climate Camp protest at Kingsnorth in 2008, particularly over the use of stop and search. Last week, Fuller told the high court that his force had illegally stop and searched 11-year-old twins and others.
Correspondence previously obtained by the Guardian showed the force also put pressure on the local council to assist with automatic number plate recognition cameras to track protesters. When the council voiced objections, officials were told that senior officers were "less than impressed, given the importance of this operation as the new power station build is likely to create a considerable number of jobs".
More recently, Fuller is understood to have filed last minute objections to drafts of a national review into policing of protest, produced by the chief inspector of constabulary, Denis O'Connor. His report led to a current review of public order tactics, and the home secretary, Alan Johnson, has told police that they must help to maintain Britain's "open democratic society".
[News> Politics > Boris Johnson]
Boris Johnson acts to boost London's recycle rates
London mayor, Boris Johnson, backs US scheme Recycle Bank which gives people shopping vouchers to value of recycling
Hélène Mullholland
guardian.co.uk, Monday 18 January 2010 00.05 GMT Article history
The mayor of London Boris Johnson will today outline plans for a scheme that rewards recycling households as he aims to cut the amount of rubbish going to landfill sites.
Johnson is backing a London-based trial of an American scheme called Recycle Bank, which gives householders shopping vouchers or donations to charity to the value of how much they recycle.
Johnson estimates a typical London household would make £14 a month under the scheme, one of a series of proposals contained in a draft municipal waste strategy.
Figures show the capital's recycling rates lagging behind both the rest of the UK and other international cities.
Johnson, who chairs the London Waste and Recycling Board, wants to save £90m per year through more recycling, better co-ordination and greater investment in less polluting technologies.
Just 25% of the four million tonnes of household waste generated each year by Londoners is recycled, with half going to landfill sites. The remainder goes to incinerators. Johnson is writing to all London borough leaders to ask them to redouble their efforts in recycling and, reminding them of pressure on future council tax bills if they fail to act.
[Business > Royal Dutch Shell]
Shell faces shareholder revolt over Canadian tar sands project
> Investors call for review of oil production in Alberta
> Tar sands deliver less than 2.5% of total oil and gas production
Terry Macalister
The Guardian, Monday 18 January 2010 Article history
Shell chief executive Peter Voser will be forced to defend the company's controversial investment in Canada's tar sands at his first annual general meeting, after calls from shareholders that the project be put under further scrutiny.
A coalition of institutional investors has forced a resolution onto the agenda calling for the Anglo-Dutch group's audit committee to undertake a special review of the risks attached to the carbon-heavy oil production at Athabasca in Alberta.
Co-operative Asset Management and 141 other institutional and individual shareholders raise "concerns for the long-term success of the company arising from the risks associated with oil sands."
Shell, which will hold its AGM in May, has been one of the lead companies in moves to develop oil reserves that are either mined or sucked out of the ground using expensive and energy-intensive techniques. BP and Total of France are also engaged in the sector.
Shell has insisted that "unconventional" hydrocarbon sources such as tar sands are all justified to ensure that the world does not run out of oil too soon.
But environmentalists have condemned their exploitation as "the biggest environmental crime in history" and said it must be stopped before it tips the planet over into runaway climate change.
Al Gore, former US vice-president and Naomi Klein, the author and campaigner, urged the Canadian government to abandon its support for tar sands at the climate change talks in Copenhagen.
Shell disputes the scale of the pollution but also says it will use carbon, capture and storage techniques to mitigate any negative impact. This argument has not stopped environmentalists – or shareholders – from opposing the plans.
"Given Shell's level of commitment to oil sands there is a greater obligation to shareholders to reassure how it would cope under a number of scenarios," said Niall O'Shea, head of responsible investing at Co-operative Asset Management.
"What if carbon capture and storage proves too costly in the oil sands? What if sustained high oil prices and carbon regulation lead to switching away from marginal, high-cost, high-carbon sources? And then there's the cost of cleaning up the locality. Companies must be more rigorous and transparent with their investors," he added.
John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK said he was pleased that the Co-op and other investors were putting the oil company on the spot.
"The exploitation of the tar sands is an environmental scandal on a massive scale, and is set to become a campaign battleground for years to come," he said.
But Shell played down the significance of the shareholder rebellion over tar sands and pointed out this unconventional source represented less than 2.5% of total oil and gas production.
"The resolution is basically a request for further information around the economics and other aspects of our oil sands operations. The resolution is submitted by shareholders representing some 0.15% of our total outstanding shares," it said in a formal response.
But Catherine Howarth, chief executive of FairPensions, which has coordinated shareholder opposition to the tar sands investments, described the move as historic. "All (shareholders) are united in registering concern with the risks involved in Canadian oil sands. We expect that Shell's 2010 AGM could prove a watershed in the history of corporate accountability," she said.
[News > UK news > Police]
Chief constable accused of undermining power station protest
Documents reveal head of Kent police urged owner of Kingsnorth to do more to disrupt environmental activists
Rob Evans and Paul Lewis
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 17 January 2010 16.42 GMT Article history
A chief constable was tonight accused of undermining the public's right to protest after documents revealed he urged the owner of a power station to do more to disrupt environmental demonstrators.
Mike Fuller, the chief constable of Kent police, told E.ON it was "grossly inappropriate" for taxpayers to be paying extra for policing of protests at Kingsnorth, and the energy firm should "intervene" beforehand to prevent them taking place.
He has been accused of straying from his duty under human rights legislation that requires the police to neutrally facilitate peaceful protest. Senior officers have repeatedly denied claims that they encourage corporations to scupper environmental activists through the use of high court injunctions. But in a private letter to the head of UK security at E.ON, Fuller urged the German-owned firm to seek "legal remedies" against activists, and suggested using injunctions.
Documents obtained by the Guardian show that he was particularly critical of E.ON for not taking quicker action against Greenpeace activists who had scaled a 200-metre chimney at Kingsnorth in protest against a proposed coal-fired station, which has since been suspended. A jury cleared the six protesters of causing £30,000 of criminal damage in 2008, after they argued the action was legally justified because they were trying to prevent climate change causing greater damage.
Fuller said the protest had required "a significant number of police resources", adding: "There is more that E.ON needs to do to protect their own interests."
The chief constable said his "counter-terrorism security advisors" could assist E.ON in improving security around the site. He wrote that he was "surprised" that E.ON had not already used injunctions to "restrain" protesters and said it should in future take legal action "in advance of protests, where possible, and if not as soon as possible after" they start. He added: "Any potential shortcoming on E.ON's part may be converted into an additional financial burden on the police, paid for by the council tax payers of Kent. This seems grossly inappropriate in the circumstances."
Ben Stewart, one of the six activists acquitted, said: "The kind of injunction the police suggested could have resulted in thousands of Greenpeace members being banned from taking part in peaceful protests anywhere near Kingsnorth."
Fuller said he had "never strayed from his duty to remain impartial when policing protests". He said he wrote the letter after the incursion by protesters onto E.ON's property when thousands of pounds of damage had been caused.
"My concern was that E.ON should improve their own site security, which if neglected could cause unnecessary costs for the policing of protests, not that individuals who wished to protest should be prevented from doing so." But Kent police has been criticised in official reviews of its handling of the Climate Camp protest at Kingsnorth in 2008, particularly over the use of stop and search. Last week, Fuller told the high court that his force had illegally stop and searched 11-year-old twins and others.
Correspondence previously obtained by the Guardian showed the force also put pressure on the local council to assist with automatic number plate recognition cameras to track protesters. When the council voiced objections, officials were told that senior officers were "less than impressed, given the importance of this operation as the new power station build is likely to create a considerable number of jobs".
More recently, Fuller is understood to have filed last minute objections to drafts of a national review into policing of protest, produced by the chief inspector of constabulary, Denis O'Connor. His report led to a current review of public order tactics, and the home secretary, Alan Johnson, has told police that they must help to maintain Britain's "open democratic society".
[News> Politics > Boris Johnson]
Boris Johnson acts to boost London's recycle rates
London mayor, Boris Johnson, backs US scheme Recycle Bank which gives people shopping vouchers to value of recycling
Hélène Mullholland
guardian.co.uk, Monday 18 January 2010 00.05 GMT Article history
The mayor of London Boris Johnson will today outline plans for a scheme that rewards recycling households as he aims to cut the amount of rubbish going to landfill sites.
Johnson is backing a London-based trial of an American scheme called Recycle Bank, which gives householders shopping vouchers or donations to charity to the value of how much they recycle.
Johnson estimates a typical London household would make £14 a month under the scheme, one of a series of proposals contained in a draft municipal waste strategy.
Figures show the capital's recycling rates lagging behind both the rest of the UK and other international cities.
Johnson, who chairs the London Waste and Recycling Board, wants to save £90m per year through more recycling, better co-ordination and greater investment in less polluting technologies.
Just 25% of the four million tonnes of household waste generated each year by Londoners is recycled, with half going to landfill sites. The remainder goes to incinerators. Johnson is writing to all London borough leaders to ask them to redouble their efforts in recycling and, reminding them of pressure on future council tax bills if they fail to act.
[Business > Royal Dutch Shell]
Shell faces shareholder revolt over Canadian tar sands project
> Investors call for review of oil production in Alberta
> Tar sands deliver less than 2.5% of total oil and gas production
Terry Macalister
The Guardian, Monday 18 January 2010 Article history
Shell chief executive Peter Voser will be forced to defend the company's controversial investment in Canada's tar sands at his first annual general meeting, after calls from shareholders that the project be put under further scrutiny.
A coalition of institutional investors has forced a resolution onto the agenda calling for the Anglo-Dutch group's audit committee to undertake a special review of the risks attached to the carbon-heavy oil production at Athabasca in Alberta.
Co-operative Asset Management and 141 other institutional and individual shareholders raise "concerns for the long-term success of the company arising from the risks associated with oil sands."
Shell, which will hold its AGM in May, has been one of the lead companies in moves to develop oil reserves that are either mined or sucked out of the ground using expensive and energy-intensive techniques. BP and Total of France are also engaged in the sector.
Shell has insisted that "unconventional" hydrocarbon sources such as tar sands are all justified to ensure that the world does not run out of oil too soon.
But environmentalists have condemned their exploitation as "the biggest environmental crime in history" and said it must be stopped before it tips the planet over into runaway climate change.
Al Gore, former US vice-president and Naomi Klein, the author and campaigner, urged the Canadian government to abandon its support for tar sands at the climate change talks in Copenhagen.
Shell disputes the scale of the pollution but also says it will use carbon, capture and storage techniques to mitigate any negative impact. This argument has not stopped environmentalists – or shareholders – from opposing the plans.
"Given Shell's level of commitment to oil sands there is a greater obligation to shareholders to reassure how it would cope under a number of scenarios," said Niall O'Shea, head of responsible investing at Co-operative Asset Management.
"What if carbon capture and storage proves too costly in the oil sands? What if sustained high oil prices and carbon regulation lead to switching away from marginal, high-cost, high-carbon sources? And then there's the cost of cleaning up the locality. Companies must be more rigorous and transparent with their investors," he added.
John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK said he was pleased that the Co-op and other investors were putting the oil company on the spot.
"The exploitation of the tar sands is an environmental scandal on a massive scale, and is set to become a campaign battleground for years to come," he said.
But Shell played down the significance of the shareholder rebellion over tar sands and pointed out this unconventional source represented less than 2.5% of total oil and gas production.
"The resolution is basically a request for further information around the economics and other aspects of our oil sands operations. The resolution is submitted by shareholders representing some 0.15% of our total outstanding shares," it said in a formal response.
But Catherine Howarth, chief executive of FairPensions, which has coordinated shareholder opposition to the tar sands investments, described the move as historic. "All (shareholders) are united in registering concern with the risks involved in Canadian oil sands. We expect that Shell's 2010 AGM could prove a watershed in the history of corporate accountability," she said.
※コメント投稿者のブログIDはブログ作成者のみに通知されます