Monthly Archives: March 2013

News stories that endorse our position on key issues – Bedroom Tax, Immigration, NHS privatisation


Bedroom tax will be costly disaster, says housing chief

Cost-cutting policy will push up benefit bill, cause social disruption and create widespread misery, say critics.

Key paragraphs:

“Research by the NHF says that while there are currently 180,000 households that are “underoccupying two-bedroom homes”, there are far fewer smaller properties in the social housing sector available to move into. Last year only 85,000 one-bedroom homes became available. The federation has calculated that if all those available places were taken up by people moving as a result of the “bedroom tax”, the remaining 95,000 households would be faced with the choice of staying put and taking a cut in income, or renting a home in the private sector.”

“If all 95,000 moved into the private sector, it says the cost of housing benefit would increase by £143m, and by millions more if others among the remaining 480,000 affected chose to rent privately.”


EU warns Cameron over ‘knee-jerk xenophobia’

Employment commissioner condemns prime minister’s speech

Key paragraphs:

“Responding to Cameron’s speech last week in which he pledged to restrict access to housing benefits and the NHS for those coming to the UK under EU free-movement rules, the European commissioner for employment, social affairs and inclusion, László Andor, told the Observer that his claims were misleading and very unfortunate.”

“”There is a serious risk of pandering to knee-jerk xenophobia,” he said. “Blaming poor people or migrants for hardships at the time of economic crisis is not entirely unknown, but it is not intelligent politics in my view.”

“”I think it would be more responsible to confront mistaken perceptions about immigration from other EU countries and so-called ‘benefit tourism’, and instead to explain the facts.”

“”The reality is that migrants from other EU countries are very beneficial to the UK’s economy, notably because they help to address skills shortages and pay more tax and social security contributions per head, and get fewer benefits, than UK workers; that free movement of workers is a key part of the EU’s single market; that hundreds of thousands of UK nationals work in other EU countries.””

The Independent:

Farewell to the NHS, 1948-2013: a dear and trusted friend finally murdered by Tory ideologues

This week’s ‘reforms’ of a treasured institution – by people who came to power promising not to mess with it – is yet another sickening assault on the poor by the rich

“Nothing is more gut-wrenching than watching a close friend dying in front of you. And I mean beyond close: a friend who brought you into the world, helped raise you, and was there whenever you were most desperately in need. So, spare a moment for our National Health Service. Time of death: midnight, 1st April 2013. Cause of death: murder.”

“That this will strike many as hyperbole is because the assault on the NHS is one of the most scandalously under-reported issues in modern British history.”

“A charitable explanation would be the sheer complexity of the Tory assault. The Health and Social Care Act is more than three times longer than the legislation that established the NHS in the first place. When I asked journalists adamantly opposed to the Tory plans why they had failed to adequately cover this travesty, they sheepishly responded it was too complicated: it went over their heads.”

“Cynical though it may be, that so many of those running our glorious free media are covered by private health insurance should not be ignored either.”

“From today, strategic health authorities and primary care trusts are formally abolished. Some £60bn of the NHS budget is now in the hands of clinical commissioning groups, supposedly run by GPs. This is a sham, though one which turns local doctors into human shields for the privatisers. In reality, the vast majority of GPs will keep on doing what they do already looking after patients while commissioning will be managed by private companies.”

“Its worse than that. Under the Governments Section 75 regulations even after they were revised after huge political pressure all NHS services must be put out to competitive tender unless the commissioning groups are satisfied a single provider can deliver that service. But as the British Medical Journal has asked, how can they be sure there is only one possible provider except by undertaking an expensive tender?”

Caroline Lucas on the People’s Assembly

Published on 26 Mar 2013

Caroline Lucas joins a panel of activists and campaigners including Mark Steel to launch the People’s Assembly event in June this year.

The People’s Assembly – a new initiative backed by major trade unions including Unite, Unison, NUT, PCS, TSSA; the Green Party, Labour MPs, Coalition of Resistance, National Pensioners Convention and campaigning groups – hosted a press conference to launch the campaign today (26th March)

Thousands will converge at the People’s Assembly at WESTMINSTER CENTRAL HALL ON SATURDAY 22ND JUNE 2013, as well as at meetings and rallies across the country.

The People’s Assembly will be an alternative democratic forum to a Parliament that has failed the people it is supposed to represent. It will be the launch-pad for mass resistance to austerity.

The new alliance aims to _play a key role in ensuring that this uncaring government faces a movement of opposition broad enough and powerful enough to generate successful co-ordinated action, including strike action.

This new movement will be forcing anti-austerity politics onto the mainstream agenda, and fighting for all those people currently hit by Government policies: whether low-paid workers, disabled people, unemployed people, the young, women, BME people and others.

The People’s Assembly Against Austerity will meet at Central Hall, Westminster on 22 June 2013.

More here:

New Labour = Slave Labour

It is not just me that is banging on about Labour’s betrayal of their traditional core support:Peter Tatchell has recognised what has been going on longer than most (which is why he has switched, like many others with a primary focus on social justice, from Labour to the Green Party). Here is his 2009 Guardian article than was instrumental in getting me to join the Green Party:

Disillusioned Labour voters can vote Green with confidence now that social justice is front and centre of the party’s agenda

  • Peter Tatchell
  • Wednesday 3 June 2009 21.30 BST

What are Labour voters to do? Party loyalty is understandable, but the party they once supported is no more. During 12 years of Labour rule, social inequality has returned with a vengeance, with a widening gap between rich and poor, including more children and pensioners living in poverty. By the end of last year, income inequality under Labour was greater than during the reign of Margaret Thatcher.

Isn’t it time for Labour voters to revolt? Why keep voting for a party whose government has betrayed its roots and values?

There is an alternative. The Green party embraces the social justice agenda that Labour has long abandoned. We are more than a party of environmental protection. We are also a party of fairness and equality, with progressive policies on jobs, housing, education, health and pensions. Unlike the Liberal Democrats, we don’t support free market capitalism or use dirty tricks during election campaigns and we don’t talk green in national politics only to do something else entirely at the local level.

Under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, Labour lost its heart and soul. It has become the party of war, privatisation and attacks on civil liberties. The Labour government promoted the financial deregulation that led to the banking crisis, resulting in bankruptcies and mass unemployment. It refuses to take legal action against the corporate criminals who have pushed Britain to the precipice of a full-blown economic depression.

Labour’s policy rot was not caused by Brown alone. The whole Labour government including Alan Johnson backed the party’s rightward drift.

When a Labour government pursues anti-Labour policies it no longer deserves respect or loyalty from Labour members and voters. Arrogant, out of touch, complacent and authoritarian, Labour is not Labour any more. It’s time has passed.

For all these reasons, after 22 years’ membership I left Labour and joined the Green party. It isn’t perfect no party ever is. But compared to Labour and the other political alternatives, the Greens are now the most progressive force in British politics, with our visionary agenda for grassroots democracy, social justice, human rights, global equity, environmental protection, peace and internationalism.

The Greens now occupy the emancipationist political space that was once occupied by Labour. We offer the most credible progressive alternative to Labour.

To deal with the economic crisis, our agenda includes a Roosevelt-style Green New Deal to simultaneously tackle unemployment and climate destruction. The Greens would invest in new green industries to create a million green collar jobs. We would put money into energy conservation, which would lead to tens of thousands of jobs in double-glazing, loft insulation and the fitting of energy efficient boilers. This would also help cut fuel poverty and reduce household energy bills. We’d also invest in renewable energy, including wind, tidal, wave and solar. This would help revive Britain’s decimated engineering industry and establish new technologies that could be exported worldwide at great financial benefit to the UK.

Labour’s great, historic achievement was the creation of the NHS and the welfare state, but Blair and Brown sought to dismantle them. Their commercialisation and semi-privatisation of health and education is something that not even Margaret Thatcher attempted. They have out-Thatchered Thatcher.

While the Labour government has promoted a stealthy privatisation of public services, the Greens oppose privatisation and defend public services as essential components of a just society and a decent quality of life for all citizens. We reject Labour plans to close post offices and to privatise the Royal Mail.

In contrast to the anti-trade union policies of Labour, the Greens support the rights enshrined in the trade union freedom bill which gives new protection to employees.

Similarly, the Blair-Brown government sought an opt-out from key sections of the EU social chapter on workers’ rights. The Greens, however, have been steadfast in opposing the opt-out and insisting on the fair treatment of employees.

While Labour’s policies for senior citizens have been miserly, it is Green policy to end pensioner poverty by providing free social care to the elderly and raising the single person’s state pension to £165 per week and linking it to average earnings.

We are also pushing for a major house-building programme and the refurbishment of older and disused properties, in order to give low-income families the chance to have a good quality home at a rent they can afford.

These measures could be paid for by cancelling Labour’s wasteful and reactionary expenditure of more than £100bn on new Trident nuclear missiles, ID cards, two super aircraft carriers, the botched computerisation of the NHS and further motorway expansion.

This is crunch time for progressive politics. Labour has turned its back on its traditional values, torn up previously cherished socialist ideals, sidelined the trade union movement, waged an illegal war, tried to impose 42 days’ detention without charge, and made unsavoury pacts with big business and George W Bush.

The Labour leadership has pandered to prejudice and irrationality on issues including asylum, drugs, terrorism, Europe and crime. Principles have been abandoned for the sake of a few more sympathetic headlines in the Daily Mail and for another cup of tea with Rupert Murdoch.

Labour voters don’t have to put up with this rightwing nonsense. They can vote Green in the knowledge that they are voting for a party that offers a powerful challenge to neo-liberal economics and globalisation.

Greens put the common good before corporate greed, and the public interest before private profit. Our synthesis of the best of the red and the green integrates policies for social justice and human rights with policies for tackling the life-threatening dangers posed by global warming, environmental pollution, resource depletion and species extinction. The future is bright bright Green.

Heading For A Different Planet


…… email_logoDoesn’t look right? View it online here
26 March 2013

Heading For A Different Planet


Global Warming, Propaganda-Journalism And The Definition Of Insanity

By David Cromwell

The systematic propaganda of the corporate media – its deep-rooted antipathy towards upholding proper journalistic standards in the public interest – extends to its coverage of human-induced climate change. The Independent recently delivered a masterpiece of headline obfuscation with: ‘World cools on global warming as green fatigue sets in.’

The news report said:

‘Only 49 per cent of people now consider climate change a very serious issue – far fewer than at the beginning of the worldwide financial crisis in 2009.’

As usual, there was no mention of the role of the corporate media as a leading cause of why ‘green fatigue’ has supposedly set in. No mention of the media’s shameful failure to explore root causes of the climate crisis, not least the elite-serving corporate globalisation that has taken humanity to the brink of disaster. Chris Shaw, a social sciences researcher at the University of Sussex, noted on Twitter that nor was there ‘any mention of the work of the merchants of doubt, paid for and acting on the behalf of corporate interests’.

Ironically, science writer Joe Romm of the indispensable Climate Progress blog had exposed the myth of ‘green fatigue’ in a piece a few days earlier:

‘The two greatest myths about global warming communications are 1) constant repetition of doomsday messages has been a major, ongoing strategy and 2) that strategy doesn’t work and indeed is actually counterproductive!’

Romm’s powerful rebuttal noted that ‘blunt, science-based messaging that also makes clear the problem is solvable’ has a demonstrable effect in stimulating public concern about climate. His piece listed 8 key points about the mostly poor standard of climate coverage in the media, as well as the incessant pro-business propaganda to which the US public is subjected (likewise in the UK and other ‘developed’ countries). Some of Romm’s key points are:

• ‘There is not one single TV show on any network devoted to this subject [climate change], which is, arguably, more consequential than any other preventable issue we face.’
• ‘The public is exposed to constant messages promoting business as usual and indeed idolizing conspicuous consumption…’
• ‘The major energy companies bombard the airwaves with millions and millions of dollars of repetitious pro-fossil-fuel ads. The environmentalists spend far, far less money.’

Not only is the so-called ‘mainstream’ media uninterested in addressing the climate catastrophe looming right in front of us, it is simply not equipped to do so. This is obvious when one recalls that the media isn’t actually ‘mainstream’, if by that word we mean representing majority public interests. It’s corporate media: owned and operated by elite interests – government, financial, business – that are structurally driven by the ‘need’ for control, profit and accumulation.

Civilisation On The Cusp Of Disaster

A study published earlier this month in the prestigious journal Science showed that, on current trends, the world will be warmer by 2100 than at any time since the end of the last ice age, over 11,000 years ago. This time period, known as the Holocene, encompasses the origins of agriculture, writing, cities, science, the Industrial Revolution and the exploration of space (see this excellent video of a climate talk by David Roberts of Grist).

The current phase of global warming, from around the start of the 20th century, is much more rapid than at any other time in the Holocene. According to Jeremy Shakun of Harvard University, a co-author of the Science study:

‘We are heading for somewhere that is far off from anything we have seen in the past 10,000 years – it’s through the roof. In my mind, we are heading for a different planet to the one that we have been used to.’

Meanwhile, the Guardian noted yet another ‘climate change alarm’, in a decades-long series of unheeded ‘alarms’ or ‘wake-up calls’, the familiar recycled trope of jaded journalism. This was the news that US scientists had measured the second-greatest annual rise in CO2 emissions last year at the famous Mauna Loa observatory on Hawaii. Guardian environment editor John Vidal, a safe pair of hands at the paper who has managed to skip over numerous troubling questions for over two decades, noted:

‘The chances of the world holding temperature rises to 2C – the level of global warming considered “safe” by scientists – appear to be fading fast.’

Here, Vidal uncritically relayed the dangerous and discredited notion of a 2ºC ‘safe limit’ for global temperature rise. Climate change has been hereby reduced to a phenomenon defined by a single global dangerous number. This is a simplistic and damaging view of climate which, in reality, varies widely in time and space with multiple, overlapping impacts and feedbacks including ice melt, sea level rise, increasing storms and devastating droughts. Social scientist Chris Shaw, whom we mentioned above, has studied how this skewed ‘safe limit’ framing of the climate change debate arose, and how it has become a stranglehood on climate policy and even on progressive voices who should know better. Shaw warns that ‘falsely ascribing a scientifically derived dangerous limit to climate change diverts attention away from questions about the political and social order that have given rise to the crisis.’ He notes:

‘The oft quoted quip attributed to Einstein, that the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing, even after it has failed, seems particularly apposite for the “dangerous limits” framing of climate policy.’

Rapid and dangerous climate change is already underway, with little chance now of keeping global temperature rise to under 2ºC. Indeed, another recent climate study warns that a global temperature rise of just 1.5ºC may ‘trigger the thawing of permanently frozen ground over a large part of Siberia’ with ‘vast quantities of carbon dioxide and methane’ being released into the atmosphere, adding to the greenhouse effect. We are, said a report in New Scientist, ‘on the cusp of a tipping point in the climate’. And a new scientific study has linked recent examples of extreme weather to human-induced climate change. There are deeply difficult times ahead. Yet the political response has been pitiful.

Consider that in pre-industrial times the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere was around 280 parts per million. Largely due to human activities since then, notably fossil fuel use, the level of CO2 has been rising inexorably and has now reached 391 ppm. Science writer Peter Gleick predicts that in 2014 we will see the ‘inevitable’ headline, ‘Planet’s CO2 level reaches 400 ppm for first time in human existence.’ He warns that:

never in the history of the planet have humans altered the atmosphere as radically as we are doing so now. And the climatic consequences for us are likely to be radical as well, on a time-scale far faster than humans have ever experienced.’

And yet, switch on the television or the radio, or open up a newspaper, and – bar a few items in passing – it’s as if none of this is happening. Instead, the public is being force-fed a diet of celebrity gossip, huge advertising campaigns to consume more and more, and tedious ‘news’ and ‘debates’ that elucidate almost nothing about the real world.

Journalists and editors at all levels of the major news organisations must be aware, to some extent, that the glorious vision of the media ‘holding power to account’ is more myth than reality. But very few media professionals have the honesty, bravery and decency to speak out. We understand that it is not easy; one’s hopes of a stellar media career or even the prospect of continued employment might be on the line. In the early days of Media Lens, we used to entertain the very slim possibility that – if anyone – the environment editors of the major newspapers might do so. But signs of media sanity from even these quarters are scarce.

Locked Inside A Box

BBC News is no exception to the corporate media’s abysmal performance on climate. This crucial issue – the fate of humanity, no less – is confined to a small, tightly-shut box that is rarely opened for public display, even when it’s kicking and screaming to be heard. There are all too many examples we could cite. Take one report on the BBC News at Ten last month (February 19, 2013), for instance, by John Moylan, the BBC’s employment and industry correspondent. On the flagship television news programme, watched by millions around the country, Boylan spoke of the rising demand for energy and the cost of fuel. He stood in front of impressive high-tech graphics and he eloquently made his points. And he referred, briefly, to EU environmental targets on closing ‘dirty polluting power plants’.

But Moylan did not once mention climate change. In an era when leading scientists are warning of the catastrophic dangers of climate instability under global warming, how could the BBC correspondent possibly justify this omission from his report? We asked him, twice, but did not receive an answer.

Obviously this single example is not an exhaustive investigation of BBC News; although the cumulative impact can be gauged from our numerous media alerts and several books over many years. But it is indicative of how poorly BBC News journalists and editors take their commitment to (a) reporting the significant risk of rapid and dangerous climate change; (b) responding to public concerns about it. As ever, the biased and debased standards of BBC News adhere to the norms of corporate journalism.

But what about the Guardian? It has long been considered by many greens as a sort of ‘flagship’ newspaper for the environment movement. This has never been an accurate picture. But even more so in recent years when, notes Haaretz columnist Zafrir Rinat, the paper has been avidly:

‘developing business ties with corporations leading to the creation of the websites such as Global Development Professionals, which received financing from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and a host of corporations. The Guardian is also involved in several environmental ventures that are expected to yield profits.’

Rinat spoke with Joe Confino, an executive editor of the Guardian, and the chairman and editorial director of Guardian Sustainable Business. This is a Guardian-corporate partnership which promotes the notion of ‘corporate social responsibility’, a public relations oxymoron that should be exposed repeatedly.

Confino said:

‘We are partners in ventures with businesses that we are convinced are going in the right direction on sustainability. The condition for all cooperation is preserving complete editorial independence.’

But high-ranking newspaper professionals always assert that there is a ‘firewall’ between advertising and editorial content, a claim that does not withstand scrutiny. Moreover, as Haaretz‘s Rinat rightly points out:

‘Behind this [Guardian and corporate business] cooperation lies a pretentious worldview that it is possible to convince corporations to operate differently along the entire production chain, from the raw materials stage up through handling the refuse from the final products that are sold.’

Rinat added that ‘the media is still part of the problem because it continues to promote in its reports the culture of consumerism that depletes the planet’s resources.’ He noted that Confino ‘doesn’t deny’ this crucial point but, disappointingly, the Haaretz columnist did not press the Guardian executive about it.

Consider that a major imperative for corporate newspapers like the Guardian, struggling with dwindling advertising revenue, is to boost the numbers of people exposed to online ads by visiting their websites. Chris Elliott, the Guardian readers’ editor, was upfront about this in a recent column when he said that this was ‘essential’ to ‘secure the future’ of the paper.

But there are flickerings of internal dissent:

‘in the last six months three colleagues have written or spoken to me to express concern that the entirely reasonable desire to attract people to the site may be skewing news and features agendas.’

One ‘conflicted colleague’, as Elliott put it somewhat pejoratively, said:

‘There have been occasions recently where stories have been commissioned by editors who have talked about how they hope it will “play well” online – this appears to have been at the very forefront of their mind when commissioning. Certainly this is the prime driver of many online picture galleries. Obviously … we want to be well-read and popular, but it is a slippery slope, and it now appears that in a few cases we are creating stories purely to attract clicks.’

Given that Elliott’s piece was likely a sanitised, for-public-consumption version of the reality, one wonders what Guardian staff are really thinking, and how widespread is the concern, perhaps even direct opposition, inside their plush corporate offices. ‘Conflicted’ Guardian journalists may well be wondering how – if at all – a corporate newspaper is able to uphold the nine cardinal principles of journalism set out by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism, amongst which:

• Journalism’s first obligation is to the truth
• Its first loyalty is to citizens
• It must serve as an independent monitor of power
• It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise

Covering dangerous climate change in accordance with such basic essentials means not just reporting the science of climate change responsibly – a task too far for the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday. But it also means investigating the systemic reasons for global warming. That must include a critical appraisal of corporate-driven capitalism and unrestrained consumerism. And, finally, it must also mean full and open public debate about alternative ways of organising society to benefit human well-being and the climate stability of the planet.

Hope: The Spirit of ’45

If you need hope and inspiration in the face of such a huge task, then watch Ken Loach’s new film, The Spirit of ’45. It is partly a tribute to those who lived through the Second World War and then battled to fight poverty, illness and unemployment at home in Britain. It was public pressure, through the election of a post-war Labour government, that led to the nationalisation of assets such as railways, the coal mines and the steel industry; building a proper welfare system; and the founding of the National Health Service. This was not, in fact, real socialism. For example, private ownership of the mines transferred to state ownership with many of the same elitist bureaucracies and establishment figures in charge. But many gains were achieved for the benefit of millions of working-class people; not least the NHS which is now being carved open for private profit under the noses of a compliant news media, including the BBC.

Loach’s film, then, is much more than a nostalgic nod to a bygone era. It is highly relevant to today’s ‘age of austerity’ (in other words, austerity for the many, and riches for the few). It is a skillful, engaging and powerfully humane response to the neoliberal propaganda that ‘there is no alternative’ to capitalism; and that all the current system might need is a ‘kinder and gentler’ face. But as one participant in the film wryly notes: ‘Caring capitalism is like the Arabian Phoenix: everyone’s heard about it but nobody’s seen one!’

The Spirit of ’45 is a timely reminder of what people can achieve when they work together for the good of everyone. That same spirit is needed today and can bring about radical change. After all, ‘ordinary people’ hold enormous latent power in our hands. Governments and private interests are forever fearful of us rediscovering, and acting upon, that powerful truth.


The goal of Media Lens is to promote rationality, compassion and respect for others. If you do write to journalists, we strongly urge you to maintain a polite, non-aggressive and non-abusive tone.

Chris Elliott, Guardian readers’ editor
Email: reader

John Moylan, BBC News employment and industry correspondent
Email: john.moylan
Twitter: @JohnMoylanBiz

This Alert is Archived here:

Heading For A Different Planet

Share this media alert:

Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn

Follow us on Twitter, on Youtube and on Facebook

The second Media Lens book, ‘NEWSPEAK in the 21st Century’ by David Edwards and David Cromwell, was published in 2009 by Pluto Press. John Pilger writes of the book:

“Not since Orwell and Chomsky has perceived reality been so skilfully revealed in the cause of truth.” Find it in the Media Lens Bookshop

In September 2012, Zero Books published ‘Why Are We The Good Guys?’ by David Cromwell. Mark Curtis, author of ‘Web of Deceit’ and ‘Unpeople’, says:

‘This book is truly essential reading, focusing on one of the key issues, if not THE issue, of our age: how to recognise the deep, everyday brainwashing to which we are subjected, and how to escape from it. This book brilliantly exposes the extent of media disinformation, and does so in a compelling and engaging way.’


In July 2012, we reached our 11th anniversary. We would like to thank all those who have supported and encouraged us along the way. Media Lens relies on donations for its funding. If you currently support the corporate media by paying for their newspapers, why not support Media Lens instead?


Welcome to the Green Gathering! Chepstow 1st-4th August

Permaculture workshopRunning from 1st – 4th August 2013, the Green Gathering returns to its lovely site near Chepstow for another year in the landscaped grounds of Piercefield Park bordered by the mighty river Wye. With the imposing ruin of Piercefield House as a backdrop and stunning views of the Severn bridges and estuary, some have said it is the most beautiful festival site in the country.

At the Green Gathering, you can rediscover ancient skills in our Crafts area and explore pathways to future sustainability with Permaculture and Transition. Talk with key speakers from the Green movement and engage in lively debate at the Green Forum venue; inform yourselves about current issues and causes with groups in the Campaigns area.

And of course, there is a lot of fun to be had! Follow this link to enjoy Seize the Day playing ‘Big Love’ at the 2011 Gathering, come and join us for happy summer days under an open sky.

The Green Gathering has always provided a excellent Kids’ area and we are one of the very few events to offer free entry to the under 11’s. Many families get their first taste of a greener lifestyle with us – one of the joys of organising the Green Gathering is seeing children running around with new friends in open fields!

Renewable Energy

As pioneers of solar powered stages, their entertainment is run entirely on renewable energy. They provide many small venues rather than loud, dominating arena stages. Ambient festival cafés host many acclaimed bands and musicians, and if you’re in the right place at the right time…… The occasional unscheduled performance by one of the mystery guests!

Four days of festival can be tiring, so they provide plenty of tranquil relaxation space as well. Visit the Healing area for a massage or for expertise in alternative therapies; discover faerie grottos, ancient wisdoms and divinations with the Earth Energies area and Avalon Rising. Or even drive out with ease from the hard-standing car park to explore the local area, famous for its natural beauty.


The long history of the event its roots go back to the early nineteen eighties, gives the Green Gathering a key role in networking among groups involved with sustainability. Representatives from many diverse projects come here to reconnect, exchange news and meet new people. Need some specific advice from experts? Or just a general introduction to off grid living in between having fun? Here’s where you should come!

A touch of old school magic, just the way a festival should be… was one of the many positive comments from attendees at the 2012 event. No corporate sponsorship logos obscuring the sunsets, no pressure to consume, lots of welcoming covered spaces to relax and chat to friends old and new….why not arrange to meet up with your Facebook contacts?

The Green Gathering as a whole has always been deeply committed to education for a sustainable and resilient lifestyle, and they are now proud to announce the forming of a charity to carry this work forward all year round. Any profits from this event will go to support this project. Join up as a member to follow its progress!

Advance ticket sales help them to plan ahead – so look out for special offers, especially if you are coming with a group. The price for a single adult ticket will rise as we get closer to the event, so buy now.


Bridgend Green Party Meeting Agenda – Thursday 28th March 2013

7.00pm Thursday 28th March 2013 at the

The Railway PH at the bottom of Station Hill.

ALL WELCOME (Especially new members!)


  1. Welcome and Introductions
  2. Apologies for Absence
  3. Minutes and matters arising
  4. Officers’ reports
  5. Councillor feedback – Kathy
  6. Campaigns update – Fracking / 20’s Plenty – Andy / Gareth
  7. People’s Assembly Against Austerity – June 22nd – Andy
  8. New website proposals – Adam
  9. Membership issues – John
  10. AOB
  11. DoNM

NOTE – Venue is 1 minute’s walk from both the Bus and Train stations in Bridgend.

REMINDER – If anyone needs a lift to any of our meetings, let Andy know and we will organise it for you.

Workfare: Why did so many Labour MPs accept this brutal, unforgivable attack on vulnerable people? And when will the few remaining socialists in their ranks finally say enough is enough and join us?


“What a disgraceful, grubby chapter in the history of the Parliamentary Labour Party. Usually when a Tory Government is in power, giving working people and the poorest in society a kicking, any critical voices of the Labour leadership are savaged for aiding and abetting the enemy. It’s the Tories we should be opposing, or so the line goes. But what happens when the Labour leadership actively rides to the rescue of the Tories, blatantly and overtly helping them as they attack some of the poorest in society while riding roughshod over British law?”

“Not that all Labour MPs disposed of their backbones at their parliamentary selection meetings. 40 Labour MPs took the revolutionary course of voting against a Tory government. Among them were the diminished group of working-class Labour MPs: Ian Lavery, a former miners’ leader; Ian Mearns, a former British Gas worker; Graham Morris, the son of a miner; Steve Rotherham, an ex-bricklayer; John McDonnell, the son of a bus driver; David Crausby, a former turner; ex-miners like David Anderson and Dennis Skinner. Here are MPs who remember what the Labour Party was founded to do: to give working people a voice, not least when they come under attack from a Tory government.”

This second paragraph sums up the dilemma that many decent, honourable socialists find themselves in here in South Wales,

They have been born and bred into the Labour Party and refuse to accept that, since Tory [sic] Blair’s New labour project, the Party has changed irrevocably.

As an ecosocialist, I have regular friendly discussions with like minded friends in the Labour Party who acknowledge that the Party is not the one they joined in their youth. They argue, not entirely unreasonably, that they would rather use the Labour Party ticket to get into positions of influence – councillors, AMs, MPs – than join a party that better reflected their true beliefs – the Green Party – but which, they perceive, cannot deliver them these positions of power and influence.

I understand this line of argument, but wonder how they manage to sleep at night as the ever growing list of betrayals to their core beliefs and their constituents builds and builds on a daily basis.

I can only see two long term outcomes.

Either the socialist rump in the Labour Party continue to use the blind loyalty of the South Wales electorate as their meal ticket, until the day the public of South Wales have their epiphany and realise who really is determined to look after their interests; or these marooned socialists take the initiative and declare what they know – that the Labour Party can no longer be trusted to fight for the social justice that they once stood for. In doing so they ought to recognise that the home of modern, progressive socialism – ecosocialism – is no longer beneath a red flag, but a green one.