| Pollution | MR Online

Radical action now is the only sensible option: Tinkering at the fringes of neoliberalism won't deliver the changes society and the environment desperately needs, writes IAN SINCLAIR

Originally published: Morning Star on February 8, 2018 by Ian Sinclair (more by Morning Star)  | (Posted Feb 10, 2018)

Britain faces a number of serious and interlinked threats to the public’s health and future wellbeing. Tinkering around the edges, gradual reform or triangulation-style politics are simply no longer commensurate with the challenges bearing down on us. Radical action, implemented right now, is the only realistic option.

Research consistently shows Britain has one of the highest levels of inequality and one of the lowest levels of social mobility in Western Europe.

However, the Guardian reported last year that the government’s own Social Mobility Commission found “policies have failed to significantly reduce inequality between rich and poor despite two decades of interventions by successive governments.”

Headed by former Labour MP Alan Milburn, the study noted there had been “too little” progress since 1997, with many policies implemented in the past no longer fit for purpose.

The study warned “that, without radical and urgent reform, the social and economic divisions in British society will widen, threatening community cohesion and economic prosperity,” noted the Guardian.

Pollution is also a significant problem, with around 40,000 deaths every year in Britain attributable to exposure to outdoor air pollution, according to a 2016 Royal College of Physicians report.

In response, the government announced in July that the UK will ban the sale of all new petrol and diesel cars and vans from 2040.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan criticised this measure, arguing Londoners needed action on pollution right now, but, while Khan has introduced several important measures, including the rollout of an Ultra Low Emission Zone in the capital, the Commission on the Future of London’s Roads and Streets criticised Khan himself in October for not going far enough.

The Green Party has also highlighted the hypocrisy of Khan talking a good game on “healthy streets” while backing the plan for the Silvertown Tunnel — that is, a new urban motorway — in east London.

Turning to climate change, the future is looking bleak. A new forecast published by the Met Office last month assessed that annual global average temperature could reach 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels during the next five years, already breaking the hopeful goal of the 2015 Paris climate accord.

Indeed, the United Nations news service recently noted “pledges made under the Paris Agreement are only a third of what is required by 2030 to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.”

Sir David King, the former chief scientific adviser to the British government, fleshed out the danger of climate chaos in 2014, saying: “What we are talking about here is an existential threat to our civilisation in the longer term.

“In the short term, it carries all sorts of risks as well and it requires a human response on a scale that has never been achieved before.”

What is required, according to the respected climate scientists Professor Kevin Anderson and Professor Alice Bows, is for the wealthier nations to immediately adopt a de-growth strategy — wholesale systems change on a far greater scale than the allied mobilisations that “won” the second world war.

So who should we look to for assistance in implementing the radical policies that will address these threats?

The redesigned Guardian newspaper sees itself, in the words of editor Katharine Viner, as the repository for “thoughtful, progressive… and challenging” thinking.

However, it is important to remember the Guardian strongly opposed Jeremy Corbyn’s bid to become leader of the Labour Party, instead lending its support to New Labourite Yvette Cooper.

Before and after Corbyn was elected, a string of Guardian columnists, including Polly Toynbee, Jonathan Freedland, Suzanne Moore and Martin Kettle, were let loose, spewing invective, half-truths and nonsensical arguments to undermine the Islington North MP and the movement behind him.

“The Guardian represents a whole batch of journalists, from moderate right to moderate left — ie centre journalists — who, broadly speaking, like the status quo,” Tony Benn memorably wrote in his diaries.

“They like the two-party system, with no real change. They’re quite happy to live under the aegis of the Americans and Nato … they are very critical of the left … they are just the Establishment. It is a society that suits them well.”

A Corbyn-led Labour Party winning the next election on the back of energised social movements offers the best chance for significant progressive change in my lifetime.

But, while it is essential to defend Corbyn from Establishment attacks, those who wish to address the threats I’ve listed above need to understand they will almost certainly need to push beyond Corbynism in its current guise.

If Corbyn and his core leadership team can be persuaded and/or pressed to be more radical, that’s great, but, if not, then the grassroots needs to be prepared to go further to achieve change.

For example, on the environment, though Corbyn’s Labour Party put forward many good proposals in their 2017 general election manifesto, Greenpeace noted “there are some important areas for improvement,” including the party’s continuing promotion of North Sea oil and gas and its “cautious support” for airport expansion in south-east England.

More importantly, the Labour manifesto, like the Tory Party, championed economic growth, precisely the ideology and economic path that is propelling the planet over the climate cliff.

We desperately need radical, joined-up thinking. For example, a reduction in private car use and increased funding for public transport would have a number of positive knock-on effects for society beyond helping to reduce carbon emissions. A reduction in air pollution, less noise and improved quality of sleep, fewer road deaths, safer streets meaning more people walking and cycling, leading to more people exercising and less obesity and depression. All of these would lead to a reduction in stress on the NHS.

This kind of holistic thinking has long been the mainstay of the Green Party which, let’s not forget, stood aside 30 candidates for another progressive candidate they thought had a better chance of winning the seat at the last general election.

It is the Green Party who have been questioning the concept of economic growth and discussing, long before Labour, the idea of a universal basic income and land value tax.

Last month, Green MEP Molly Scott Cato suggested extending VAT to all processed and factory farmed meat to help combat climate change and encourage healthier eating habits.

Though Corbyn is riding high at the moment, joining forces with the Green Party would massively strengthen the movement that has made his leadership so successful.

As the title of Canadian author Naomi Klein’s generation-shaking book about climate change and capitalism argues, the size and all-encompassing nature of the climate crisis “changes everything.”

“It means there is a whole lot of stuff that we have been told is inevitable that simply cannot stand,” she explains. “And it means that a whole lot of stuff we have been told is impossible has to start happening right away.”

You can follow Ian Sinclair on Twitter on @IanJSinclair.

Monthly Review does not necessarily adhere to all of the views conveyed in articles republished at MR Online. Our goal is to share a variety of left perspectives that we think our readers will find interesting or useful. —Eds.