Question 1 Recent evidence suggests that the rate of global warming
has been seriously underestimated. In the future, associated
climate changes potentially pose the greatest threat
known to civilisation.
Assuming the candidate believes that we cannot continue
to draw energy from carbon emitting fossil fuels and
acknowleges the inability of renewable, wind, tide
and water power to provide sufficient energy and in
time, what are the candidates views regarding nuclear
energy? Is nuclear energy the only immediate, available
source that does not contribute to global warming and
potentially the only real green solution?"
Answer from Tim Glover
I agree that global warming is seriously underestimated.
A complete catastrophe cannot be ruled out. I also
agree that to start burning coal would be a disaster.
We must cut down on CO2 emissions urgently.
But nuclear energy is not "immediately available".
Plants would take a decade to build. Nor is it carbon
neutral - according to some studies, the CO2 released
in constructing a plant could equal the amount of CO2
saved in its operation. And, crucially, it is not sustainable.
Reactors "burn" uranium. There are no reliable
figures for uranium reserves, but the generally accepted
figure is just 50 years worth at current consumption
levels. Obviously increased consumption will reduce
this (claims that there are unlimited supplies in sea
water ignore insurmountable practical difficulties).
At best, nuclear is an expensive, damaging, and dangerous
stop-gap. At some point in the near future we will
be forced to face up to the limits of sustainable living.
Why not do it now?
The question makes the assumption that we need "sufficient
energy". But sufficient for what? The truth is,
we must learn to live within whatever limits the Earth
imposes. I actually believe that other sources, such
as wind, wave, woodland and solar, can provide sufficient
energy for a very good quality of life. But if they
cannot - we must tolerate a bad quality of life! Any
suggestion otherwise is a delusion. It is no use saying
that reductions in energy use are unacceptable. If
they prove to be unavoidable, we must to learn to live
with it.
Answer from Tony Slade It's unsound to dismiss renewables as unable
to provide the power we need in the timescale necessary.
There simply has been no long term plan for energy
production. Even the governments 10% levy on our bills
for research went to nuclear scientists to check out
the possibilities of other renewables. They concluded
nothing else would work..they have since announced
they were under pressure and it was a flawed statement!
This panic timescale recently announced to be self
sufficient in energy production and thus safe from
political power of the producers is another short term
panic. We need to seriously work on renewables hand
in hand with less power need from less packaging, turn
down the heat, educate people to show where power goes
and show them how to save money and universal free
housing insulation.
Nuclear Power has never solved its waste problems
which are hideously expensive and not included in electricity
generating costs, we cannot build enough stations fast
enough to replace stations closing and the safety history
has been kept secret where possible. Ipswich residents
are excluded from safety plans as we are 'too close'
to the source.
Question 2
If you were elected as MP for Ipswich, what would your
top priorities be for improving quality of life in
Ipswich, and addressing social inequality?
Answer from Tim Glover
Social equality and quality of life go hand in hand.
Unfortunately, there is huge inequality of wealth,
income and opportunity. Peter Mandleson claimed to
be "intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich", and this
attitude is largely responsible for our current social problems. It is not possible
to get "filthy rich" without some people being poorer than they deserve.
I am sure that our system of money is a major part of the problem. Our money
is created by banks, and lent out at interest - that is, banks demand back *more
than they lent out*. This must cause a transfer of resources from the general
economy to bankers. Our money system demands endless growth. Radical reform is
essential for a sustainable future.
On a local level, there are a number of ways to improve quality and equality.
Firstly, a move towards public transport, walking and cycling would help level
society as well as provide many other benefits. Too much money is spent on private
car infrastructure, and cycling in particular is very badly underfunded. Secondly,
council housing at a fair rent would promote equality (see below). Thirdly, the
council could improve the venues available to the public, notably the Caribbean
centre. Fourthly, we could encourage the use of public land as allotments. I
would also support more, and smaller, community based schools, and community
policing. On a more radical level, I support the Transition Town initiative,
and LETS.
Answer from Tony Slade I have been listening and talking to the people
of Ipswich for a long time now and it's clear a job
and a home are top followed by confusion and fear of
the bin recycling system, drink and drugs and crime
on the street and the frustration of the young men
racing their cars in town with apparent impunity.
A
blanket 20mph speed limit in town, a Green Party initiative,
would cut fuel usage and increase safety
dramatically.
All these matters can be improved by reacting
locally to local concerns and putting pressure on local
councilors
rather than blanket central control. A Green MP will
have the power to raise these real issues with that
backing of the National Party.
By encouraging coops
and other social groups gets people out into the world
and realise they are not
alone.
There are many practical ideas that the Green
Party promotes including low cost loans for local power
generation
that not only reduces power bills but cuts the enormous
wastage in long distance power lines.
Question 3
How would you address the need for good quality, affordable housing in the town?
Answer from Tim Glover
There is no need to do anything to make house prices more affordable. House prices
must and will come down to the point at which people can afford them. If they
can't be afforded, they can't be bought. I think it quite possible that the price
of flats will drop over 80% from their peak, adjusted for inflation.
High house prices are often blamed on "supply and demand". But "demand" in
the economic sense is nothing to do with wanting something - it is everything
to do with having the money to pay for it. A more accurate picture is that
price is a balance between supply of goods and supply of money.
The reason that house prices have reached such grotesque levels is that the banks
lent more and more money. And the more money that went into houses, the more
they went up, and therefore, the more the banks were willing to lend. This giant
house of cards is now collapsing. There is no money, and prices will fall, and
continue to fall. For those who lose everything in the collapse, I firmly believe
that the council should own and maintain a significant stock of council houses,
which should be let at a fair rent.
The issue of quality is harder to address. Many new build homes are of poor quality,
and many older homes badly need refurbishing. The only body able to do this in
the current climate is the Council. With rising unemployment, there is a great
opportunity to use labour to build and refurbish homes. This would be paid for
in a local currency, so that no borrowing and no debt is necessary. Space is
too short to discuss this further here!
Answer from Tony Slade The concept of the council house funded by
the local housing dept makes so much sense but they
were not intended to be a permanent home if incomes
improved, just a stepping stone. In practice this didn't
happen and the housing stock stagnated and then along
came Thatcher and allowed them to be bought at discounts
but banned building of new ones.
Housing Associations have done a good job and by mixing
social housing in all new builds it has been encouraging
but higher percentages can be achieved as shown by
Green Parties around the country. Attention also needs
to be placed on energy efficiency and addressing the
700,000 empty or poor condition homes. This Green Party
rebuild program on affordable loans makes so much sense
to get the housing stock back in use and will generate
local cooperation and sense of unity socially.
21% of our carbon total emissions and the Green Party
have seriously costed a 25% reduction in that in 5
years
Question 4
Some people have a fear of the level of immigration to the area. What would
you do to promote a positive, multicultural community spirit?
Answer from Tim Glover
Most people do not want to leave their home. Many migrants
are forced to move to escape wars, or other hardships.
Many others just come to work, and intend
to return home to their families.
Unfortunately, it is a human instinct to mistrust "outsiders". And
much damage has been done by Labour's disgraceful and phoney "war on terror",
which has actively attempted to instil fear and prejudice towards Muslims, and
by extension, anyone with darker skin.
However , as long as people are generally content with life, there will be no
purchase for this fear and prejudice to grow. If people have sufficient food,
comfortable homes, and sufficient free time and money to enjoy their leisure,
if the gulf between haves and have-nots was closed, and if everybody felt self
respect, and respected by others, there would be no food for resentment and tension
to grow. Therefore, the same measure that improve quality of life, and social
equality for everybody, as described above are the best possible ways to promote
social harmony.
There are also positive steps that can be taken to help newcomers to integrate
in their new home. For example, English language courses should be available
for everyone.. The cost is justified, because improved integration benefits everybody.
We should also press the police force to reach their target on fair representation
of minorities.
Answer from Tony Slade The recent influx of immigrants from mainly
Eastern Europe has disturbed many people by the shear
volume in such a short space of time, this was badly
handled causing strains on the local communities and
infrastructure.
I find dealing with just about every nation religion
and culture in my business daily that most people are
polite and well integrated unless they have been the
subject of abuse. Interaction between people will eventually
remove the fear factor on both sides; we all have so
much to learn from each other. A long term social program
is needed to blend these groups together and I think
in Ipswich very successfully.
Question 5
As Ipswich Green Party's parlimentary candidate, how will you promote your
local party?
Answer from Tim Glover
I think it is a very important function of the green
party to present a radically different analysis of
our problems, and a radically different vision of
the future.
Publicising our views and our proposals is the entire reason for the existence
of the party.
One simple step is to make frequent comment, as the green party on local issues
in local newspapers. We should also make sure we are known by the media, so
that our views are sought on local issues.
Door - to door campaigning, including leaflets, newsletters and door knocking
is a very effective way of making ourselves visible, recruiting new members
and of listening to, and understanding the concerns of local residents. This
requires
a certain amount of fundraising, and fundraising events can also be a good
source of publicity.
The Ipswich Green Party already has an active and dedicated core of members,
and to a large extent, our job is to build on what is already being done. As
a member of the Ipswich Green party, I intend to take an active role in promoting
our party, whether or not I am selected as the parliamentary candidate.
Answer from Tony Slade They can bring support on many levels to encourage
local initiatives and raise the profile of the Party.
It is an exciting prospect and looking around the
country where the Greens have done well they go on
doing well and earning respect from the local people.
I feel we should gain many more members to share the
load from those currently hard pressed and allow us
to address many more issues.
Candidate Profiles
Tim Glover
I have had lifelong and active interest in global
justice and green issues. In 1985 I was co-ordinator of
Ipswich FoE, and in 1995 established the Green
Alternative Society at Essex University. I am a member of
several charities working in the developing world, and of
the Stop the War coalition. My firmest beliefs are in compassion,
justice and sustainability.
I believe the Earth is at a crucial point in history. As a society, we have lived
beyond our means for too long, and we must make urgent and profound changes
to our economic system and lifestyles, before change is forced upon us.
As a green MP I would do my utmost to spread this
message, and work for urgent and undamental change. Tim Glover
Tony Slade
This forthcoming General Election is important for the Green Party and I feel
strongly our message is ready to be received as everyone has become aware of
the destruction we cause to our planet, the costs of fuels has never been so
apparent and the financial system that supports global free trade is in severe
trouble and affecting everyone.
There is another way and we must get that message
across without scaring or alienating people who are
stressed enough and we need to listen and work with
people locally.
I have been a Green Party member since 1987and stood
in various local National and European Elections including
previously in Ipswich. I was Euro Rep to European Greens
88 to 94. National speaker on Transport 89 to 94 and
member of the International Committee 88 to 95
I am keen to use that experience and get success for
the Green Party in Ipswich. Tony Slade
