Andrew Simms has written about the mesmerized inertia we live in. In the face of global environmental catastrophe, we cannot act. What will it really take to wake people up?
…why did anyone think it was a good idea to call our species ’sapiens’?
Max Mosley has won his case. The underlying issue was whether Mosley’s right to personal privacy should be subordinated to the News of the World’s right to free speech. This raises an important question, whatever you think of his father’s politics or his own behaviour.
Should the rights of an organisation prevail over that of a human being?
In any case, the News of the World would have more of my sympathies if it did not suggest it was on a moral crusade, proclaiming “Our motto is truth. Our practice is the fearless advocacy of the truth.”
Given the universal condemnation of events in Zimbabwe, how should businesses respond?
Those with operating subsidiaries in the country, have been offering some interesting accounts of their activities. In the end, those with a controlling stake in their Zimbabwe operations will probably be regarded as complicit in what is going on there. Unless they step out from behind their corporate veils and start actively lobbying the Mugabe regime for change.
Why does Tesco do it?
The company has been accused of behaving aggressively in Thailand by undercutting small local stores. It’s response is to sue an individual for libel, claiming £16.4m damages. What about addressing such acustaions in its corporate responsibility reporting? Unfortunately, the relevant web page of the Thai website doesn’t appear to cover the issue.
Whether or not Tesco was acting agressively the Thai courts will no doubt determine. But to begin a huge legal action of such a nature seems to me, well, just…aggressive.
According to The Economist - “Voters have good reason to worry about energy, security and their environment. But they may have to get used to more pricey petrol. Historically cheap gasoline, partly as a result of low taxes, has enabled what even George Bush has called an American addiction to oil. More pricey oil might be one factor that reduces carbon emissions.”
It is good to see that enviornmental issues are now an accepted part of mainstream politics. Or will they be confined to electioneering?
The EU and the IMF amongst others are very worried about sovereign wealth funds (SWFs). What they say is that there should be transparency and good governance for such funds. Transparency and good governance are of course good things and should indeed be adopted. But will this alter what the SWFs do? Why should it?
What they don’t want is interference from governments through their investments. But it is no argument to say that good governance means the SWFs should not use their funds for ‘geopolitical ends’, rather than commercial ones. Why not? What is wrong with investing for a good outcome for the people they govern - and thinking of that in terms which go beyond simply commercial returns?
The real worry is that power will pass out of the hands of the West - through the very means which the West has been offering the rest of the world for years: the markets. Should really have thought of that before now…
Tesco is willing to ‘work with government’ to draft legislation to stop itself selling alcohol more cheaply than water.
Why can’t it do this on its own? Because such voluntary action ‘could be commercial suicide’. While I suspect legislation would be a good thing, could we first see what the financial figures are for the cheap alcohol promotions which are the main issue here? Are the large supermarkets really as vulnerable as those who are actually committing suicide through binge drinking?
The Northern Rock experience is a good lesson in stakeholder values
The company is worth about £300m today. But its stakeholders (especially the UK government, which is the proxy for the public) risks £60 billion. That’s a ratio of 200 to 1.
So who do you think should decide what happens to it?
Since no-one in power seems to know, isn’t it time for a national competetion as to how to change the public’s consciousness and behaviour on climate change?
The same should happen in every country in the world.
There’s just one rule: only the world can win.
So the UK is to go for nuclear technology.
Could this be related to the recent overhaul of the planning system?
And it would be nice to see the 250,000 year management plan - which is of course perhaps the minimum timeframe needed to look after all that nuclear waste. No doubt John Hutton will personally guarantee that nothing goes wrong over the next few million years. If only such long term thinking applied elsewhere.
Powered by WordPress