The Wave In Pictures (including Simon Hughes’s Skisuit)

Yesterday I went, along with quite a few other Lib Dems from all over the place, on “The Wave“, the march to put pressure on the government in the run-up to Copenhagen. I took a few pictures of how the day looked from where I stood. Here are a few of the less crappily taken ones:

We all gather at the Lib Dem rallying point

Susan Kramer, Catherine Bearder, Steve Goddard and Nick Clegg speak to the gathered Lib Dems

We optimistically form ourselves into a march-y configuration, in the hope that this might cause the rest of the march to get moving. Alas, it is in vain.

Some excellently Lib Dem slogans to be found in the crowd: “Effective feed-in tarriffs”, “Tax Fossil Fuels at £100 per tonne of CO2″ and others. Well they amused me, anyway. Possibly because we’d got about 40 metres in an hour of “marching” by this point.

Aliens against climate change

Dogs against climate change

And, in case you wanted more of those brilliantly specific placards, here you go!

The march gets into full swing. One thing’s for sure: the Lib Dem section of the march had the best choons (until the battery died). Fact.

Pirates against climate change

Catherine Bearder MEP and Susan Kramer MP show off their moves, spurred on by aforementioned choons

And for an encore, Catherine and Susan bridge the divide between the two wings of the party.

A sea of Lib Dem .. er.. blue.

Simon Hughes sensibly resists calls for any unpleasant partisan shouting at the massed ranks of the Holborn & St. Pancras Labour Party (both of them) in front of us. Although a few chants of “Ed Fordham, Jo Shaw” slip in there somewhere…

Simon Hughes had dug out this ski-suit ensemble from the back of his wardrobe, apparently not seen since his student days. “Look out Simon, it’s the fashion police!”

Shrewsbury & Atcham PPC Charles West finds his way to the front of the mob.

At last, we march down Whitehall, waving to Gordon as we pass No. 10 (“bye bye Gordon!”), and the event culminates in a great band of blue surrounding parliament. Alas, my camera dies at this juncture.

I have to say, as serious an issue as climate change is, I also had a great time at the Wave. Without wanting to make overly party political points, I think it really is worth noting that not a single Tory was spotted by me or anyone I spoke to on this march. I suspect that has as much to do with protests just not being something Tories do as it does their non-existent commitment to the issue.

Anyway, our party was out in force, from an impressive Liberal Youth showing to many OAPs, from rank-and-file to MPs (spotted: David Howarth, Susan Kramer, Nick Clegg, Simon Hughes (hard to miss!), Baron Roberts, and I’m sure there were others who I’ve missed). I got the same feeling of “political family” I get from going to conference, but coupled with the sense that this was what our party does best: face outwards to the world, not inwards to ourselves.

Now lets hope that the Wave helped to put that little bit of extra pressure that makes the difference on the UK’s representatives in Copenhagen.

Are The Tories Finally Backing Up Their Green Talk?

The most interesting thing the Tories have said today is not, of course, George Osborne’s council tax “freeze”, but Theresa Villiers’s suggestion that they are now opposed to Heathrow’s third runway. I know I should be partisan about this, but I genuinely want to congratulate them on this announcement, not least because certain Tories seem to be in denial about it.

It’s been a long time coming, but on a subject as urgent as this, any conversion is welcome. One might think this means that the Tories have accepted that endless expansion in air travel capacity is not, as so many in the party have argued, simply “necessary” (on the contrary, it has to stop). But don’t be so sure about that. Instead, they are justifying the decision with a two pronged approach:

Firstly, to present a high-speed rail link as in some way an alternative to it. This is, as BAA have pointed out (amongst other squeals of pain from the usual “money must come before planet” brigade), a false choice:

“The total number of flights to Manchester and Leeds/Bradford is only 13,356 or less than 3% of Heathrow’s total flights. Even if every flight from Manchester and Leeds/Bradford were replaced by a new high-speed rail line then Heathrow would still be operating at 97% of capacity.”

Of course, I don’t agree with the conclusion that BAA draw from this (that we still need more air capacity). Rather, I would say that the point to take away from this is that green politicians are, sooner or later, going to have to get away from the soft lie that all our current travel can be replaced with a greener alternative that is in no way less convenient. Quite simply, eventually some brave soul is going to have to tell Britain’s (and the rest of the world’s) flyers that it’s no good, they just can’t feel entitled to go jetting off round the world as often as they like. Cameron sailed close to this with his suggestion last year of a “green air-miles allowance” of one short-haul flight a year per person before punitive taxes kicked in. That, like much of the environmental stuff Cameron’s early rebranding exercise floated, seems to have been dropped six months later.

Secondly, the chatter about a possible Boris Island continues, putting completely to rest the idea that this might actually be a good policy shift from a climate change point of view. On the contrary, if both of these prongs went ahead, they would probably see a greater expansion in greenhouse gas emissions than would be the case with a third runway at Heathrow and no high speed rail link. Of course, even the latter is not desriable.

So, once again, it is left to the Lib Dems to make the green case, since the Labour government have already leapt in on the side of the airport and airline operators, with this choice quote from Ruth Kelly (still here, Ruth?):

“These proposals are politically opportunistic, economically illiterate and hugely damaging to Britain’s national interests. The Tories are posing a false choice – we need both more capacity in Britain’s airports and on our main rail lines.”

Apparently, unchecked growth in greenhouse emissions from the aviation sector are “in Britain’s national interest”. Well it would explain a lot.