Funding radical climate action

Written By: - Date published: 7:10 am, August 30th, 2019 - 36 comments
Categories: activism, climate change - Tags: ,

This is cool.

Climate Emergency Fund have pledged $350k to Extinction Rebellion if other donors will come forward & match this number before the end of August.

The donation page is currently sitting at just over $256,000 with a few days to go.

Extinction Rebellion Harangey tweeted,

The Climate Emergency Fund (CEF) has pledged $350k to Extinction Rebellion, if others will match it. This epic match-funding promise follows a solidarity protest organised by XR and others which took place outside the Brazilian Embassy in London on Friday.
 
I hope they get there. These people know how to organise well, and ER in the UK has been extraordinarily successful at raising funds thus far. They’re radically changing public understanding of the climate emergency and paving the way for governments to take serious action.
 
The Climate Emergency Fund (CEF) formed this year in response to the escalating devastation occurring across our natural world and the need for urgent action and deep societal transformation. They provide grants to those “who demonstrate the intention and capability of disrupting the inadequate and immoral gradual approach governments around the world are taking to addressing the climate emergency.”

ER’s next planned action,

Worldwide Rebellion begins on Monday 7 October: Extinction Rebellion groups around the world will gather in key cities to call for action on the climate & ecological crisis we are facing

36 comments on “Funding radical climate action ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Ad 1
    30 August 2019 at 7:23 am

    Minister Shaw should be able to help you there.

    Funds collected by the Government from emissions trading are up to $420 million this year.

    Prior to the election Mr Shaw was pretty clear about how this revenue was going to be used to implement tax cuts, stating that "every single kiwi over 18 will also get a $250 dividend bonus at the end of the year based on the carbon tax revenue."

    He was a whole bunch less clear on where this money was being used when questioned about it in Parliament yesterday.

    Maybe he should just have a sit-down with Extinction Rebellion and go and spend it on something climate changey. That's after all what he's tasked with.

    We are also paying five cents on every litre of petrol to the Emissions Trading Scheme. Can anyone trace where that's gong for the environment? I can't.

    Rather than calling for more funding on climate change, this government should identify what the needs are are use the tax and trading funding they are getting, and then be able to demonstrate to the public where it's being effectively used.

    Shaw was supposed to be implementing the Kiwi Climate Fund for us all a while back.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11920649

    • solkta 1.1
      30 August 2019 at 7:42 am

      Prior to the election Mr Shaw was pretty clear about how this revenue was going to be used to implement tax cuts,

      No, Shaw was very clear about Green Party Tax Policy which is to put a tax on carbon and use that money to give a tax cut in the first bracket thus giving consumers the power to make green choices and save. The Emissions Trading Scheme is not Green policy and never has been.

      • bwaghorn 1.1.1
        30 August 2019 at 8:02 am

        That is the stupidest use for it . Any and all revenue should go into science and real world emmision reduction.

        If you want to cut taxes at the bottom do it by putting in a new top tier tax for over $150k . Oh and fix bracket creep while your there.

        • solkta 1.1.1.1
          30 August 2019 at 8:15 am

          Why not just increase the top tax rate and use that money for CC actions? Money is money.

          • bwaghorn 1.1.1.1.1
            30 August 2019 at 8:26 am

            Good luck selling that one .

            But really cutting the bottom rate so poor people can choose greener options!!! Fuck sake that is the greens woolly headed hopey wishy shit at its worst.

            • solkta 1.1.1.1.1.1
              30 August 2019 at 8:33 am

              The cut is for everybody. Products and services that use a lot of carbon would cost more.

            • solkta 1.1.1.1.1.2
              30 August 2019 at 8:35 am

              You think that greedy people would be more upset about raising taxes to help solve CC than to give poor people a break?

              • weka …
                30 August 2019 at 9:53 am

                this.

                My reading of the GP policy is that it seeks to help low income people (their social justice remit) and address climate change social change in a way that would work in our capitalist system without scaring the horses too much.

                Buy in from mainstream NZ was essential.

                • bwaghorn …
                  30 August 2019 at 11:06 am

                  Both things need doing but useing carbon taxs to cut the bottom bracket tax will achieve no carbon reduction. All carbon tax must be direct action . It just makes carbon tax a farce if it's used in any other way.

                  • solkta …
                    30 August 2019 at 11:21 am

                    The idea is to move tax from things that we do want, like wage income, and onto things we don't want like carbon burning. Tax is tax, it makes no sense to look at carbon tax as a separate thing.

        • SHG 1.1.1.2
          30 August 2019 at 1:36 pm

          Any and all revenue should go into science and real world emmision reduction

          Unless the science involves genetic modification, in which case it’s thoughtcrime, thanks Greens

          • weka 1.1.1.2.1
            30 August 2019 at 1:41 pm

            industry should stop wasting everyone's time trying to get society to accept GE so it can use GE rye to keep industrial dairying going. None of that is sustainable or a real solution to CC.

            • solkta 1.1.1.2.1.1
              30 August 2019 at 2:02 pm

              The thing there too is that lowered emissions is only one of supposed benefits of this grass. Along with that comes increased yield which just means more cows and therefore no gain re CC.

              • SHG …
                30 August 2019 at 4:37 pm

                Plants that require less water, plants that convert more CO2 into biomass, plants that produce more oxygen, plants that don't require pesticides… nah, ban them all

                • WeTheBleeple …
                  30 August 2019 at 5:27 pm

                  A monoculture that will collapse the entire ag industry when some pathogen overcomes it. Dreamers and schemers these industrialists, not much thinking involved.

                • weka …
                  30 August 2019 at 7:42 pm

                  "Plants that require less water"

                  But still require too much.

                  "plants that convert more CO2 into biomass"

                  But are still grown in a system that depletes soil, doesn't rebuild soil and store carbon, and that uses biomass to overstock (GHGs!), destroy waterways, and wreck the land. Plant trees and build soil instead.

                  "plants that produce more oxygen"

                  What? Grow trees.

                  "plants that don't require pesticides"

                  Go organic, we already have this tech and it's far less damaging and far more restorative than what you are suggesting.

                  "… nah, ban them all"

                  And replace with farming systems that 1) actually mitigate climate and 2) regenerate the land.

                  Like I said, stop wasting everyone's time.

            • bwaghorn 1.1.1.2.1.2
              30 August 2019 at 6:56 pm

              There was an article on news hub in the 29th about an US gm grass that is showing possible sign of lowering methane output and nitrogen loss.

      • Dukeofurl 1.1.2
        30 August 2019 at 12:27 pm

        "Emissions Trading Scheme is not Green policy and never has been."

        Thats correct , but they voted for its implementation. Then it became so twisted that you wouldnt consider 'Todays ETS' to have much resemblance to the original one.

        • solkta 1.1.2.1
          30 August 2019 at 1:52 pm

          Yes they voted for it because it was better than nothing, but the policy was and still is to replace it with a carbon tax.

          • weka 1.1.2.1.1
            30 August 2019 at 1:55 pm

            Is it Peters/NZF holding us back on that or are Labour resistant too?

            • solkta 1.1.2.1.1.1
              30 August 2019 at 2:05 pm

              Labour policy from what i understand is to retain the ETS.

            • Macro 1.1.2.1.1.2
              30 August 2019 at 2:16 pm

              It was Peters who placed the ETS Bill on HC's desk (or caused it to be placed there). NZF didn't want – and still don't want – a Carbon Tax.

  2. Ad 2
    30 August 2019 at 8:53 am

    Solkta:

    "No, Shaw was very clear about Green Party tax policy which is to put a tax on carbon and use that money to give a tax cut."

    Exactly what I said. A tax cut. Learn to read.

    "The Emissions Trading Scheme is not Green Party Policy…"

    It is now that they are in government. Shaw is the Minister responsible.

    The post from Weka is about how to find a whole bunch of money for climate change. Weka completely forgot that the Greens are in charge of this policy, and as Minister and leader of the Green Party he has tonnes of unallocated money to actually do something to achieve that policy's outcomes.

    So far they are not.

    They have spent a term designing legislation, and it's a long, way from being implemented.

    It's well overdue that Minister Shaw actually showed how he is being effective in using the taxes he is getting to alter climate change, just as the activists cited in the post want him to.

    • weka 2.1
      30 August 2019 at 9:43 am

      That's not what the post is about. The post is about the cleverness of a UK and I think a US organisation in raising funds privately for radical climate action. Nothing to do with government incremental change functions. Or NZ other than providing a link in case Kiwis want to donate.

    • weka 2.2
      30 August 2019 at 9:48 am

      "The Emissions Trading Scheme is not Green Party Policy…"

      It is now that they are in government. Shaw is the Minister responsible.

      I suspect your general point in your comments is worth exploring, but this conflation of GP policy and government policy is daft and a distraction from that. You're not that dim, so hopefully you'll soon get on with making your point more clearly without indulging your need to bash at the same time.

      If you want to link this to the post, one of ER's primary goals is that governments tell the truth about climate change. I think Shaw is doing ok on that as GP leader, but haven't looked at it in terms of him as Minister. Might be worth doing.

      Glad you think the Minister for Climate Change should be engaging with ER, very radical of you but I approve.

    • solkta 2.3
      30 August 2019 at 9:53 am

      A tax cut if a carbon tax was introduced. Don't be a fuckwit.

      Each party doesn't drop their policy when they become part of the government, obviously. They would not be able to compete with each other next election otherwise.

      Also, learn how to use the site. There is a little "reply" tab that you can click.

  3. soddenleaf 3
    30 August 2019 at 9:39 am

    Invade Brazil, carve out a u.n protectorate, banish all non indigenous people, that's the only way to save the Amazon. Brazil won't. Now multiply to every other issue relentlessly bearing down on planetary bio collapse, and you find the same lack of willingness to unseat the status quo doing all the damage. They hate their grandkids, it’s just that simple, the world hates its future generations.

    • bwaghorn 3.1
      30 August 2019 at 11:11 am

      Why just Brazil. Most of the planet was forested once maybe we should start small . Say invade the uk then we could launch into Europe.

    • Dukeofurl 3.2
      30 August 2019 at 12:24 pm

      For NZ the pollen record shows a massive increase in fires after arrival of the Maori.

      This paper for the Journal of Polynesian Society says for the South Island the forest cover went from 80% to 15%.

      http://www.jps.auckland.ac.nz/docs/Volume118/Volume%20118%20No%202/5%20Maori%20fire.pdf

      Slash and burn is a a traditional form of agriculture practiced in many countries although increased populations in remoter areas requires more burning.

      • weka 3.2.1
        30 August 2019 at 12:58 pm

        other variables in that time might include natural fires and historic changes in climate, and how the three variables interacted.

        The thing of value to learn from what Māori did and experienced is to think through what it would be like living on an island and watching your food sources disappear slowly over time when there is literally no other way to replace them. Māori adapted. Don't know why the rest of us are to stupid to see what is going on now despite new technologies like scientific research and mass media and a pretty good understanding of ecological and climate sciences.

        • Poission 3.2.1.1
          30 August 2019 at 1:31 pm

          The science and the historical record show there was a change in the way Maori responded following the climate change in NZ from the climate optimum to the little ice age by abandonment and northward migration

          https://ojs.victoria.ac.nz/jnzs/article/view/3987/3554

          The analogue to today (in nz) is what the response ( return to normative climatic behaviour) would we expect from the outcomes of the montreal protocol, to preferred climate states such as the southern annular mode.

          The scientific consensus suggests the large scale cancellation of circulation changes in the SH. How would NZ adapt to more persistent periods of colder and wetter weather.

          • weka 3.2.1.1.1
            30 August 2019 at 1:38 pm

            thanks, I tried to find something about that NZ climate change but got swamped by google hits about AGW.

        • WeTheBleeple 3.2.1.2
          30 August 2019 at 5:31 pm

          Absolutely. Kaitiakitanga didn't happen overnight. Extinctions, the little ice age, warfare… Maori learned sustainability via extreme hardship. Must we repeat this – or learn from it?

  4. JohnP 4
    30 August 2019 at 11:14 am

    Yes, Extinction Rebellion sound fun but there's a really unsettling attitude towards state power etc that's not really in any meaningful way concealed…

    Good long read here.

    https://libcom.org/blog/extinction-rebellion-not-struggle-we-need-pt-1-19072019