Showing posts with label United Kingdom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United Kingdom. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 2, 2008

UK Labor Party Willing to Give-Away Country's Sovereignty to EU; Does the US Democratic Party Wish to Do the Same for America??

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3635734.ece


President Sarkozy embarrasses Gordon Brown over EU treaty


The Times


March 28, 2008












President Sarkozy of France embarrassed Gordon Brown yesterday, heaping praise on his “courage and loyalty” for ratifying the EU treaty without a referendum.


[SEE Will America Follow the UK Down the 'Slippery Slope' of Unaccountable EU-Driven Global Governance? UK 'I Want a Referendum' Campaign Instructive at: http://itssdeconomicfreedom.blogspot.com/2008/01/will-america-follow-uk-down-slippery.html ; 11/6/07 E-mail Correspondences Between Roger Helmer UK Member of European Parliament & Lawrence Kogan, ITSSD CEO, at: http://itssdeconomicfreedom.blogspot.com/2008/01/11607-e-mail-correspondences-between.html ; By Preventing Public Referendum on EU Constitution, Berlin Government Denied German People their Constitutional Right to Public Accountability, at: http://itssdeconomicfreedom.blogspot.com/2008/01/by-preventing-german-referendum-on-eu.html ; German Parliament Denied Citizens Right to Public Referendum on EU Constitution: Issue Deemed too Important for the People, at: http://itssdeconomicfreedom.blogspot.com/2008/01/german-parliament-denied-german.html ; UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown Pushes His Pen Through the Heart of Democracy & Economic Freedom, at: http://itssdeconomicfreedom.blogspot.com/2008/01/uk-prime-minister-gordon-brown-pushes.html ; UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown Fails to Honor Promises Made to British Citizens for Public Referendum on EU Constitutional Treaty, at: http://itssdeconomicfreedom.blogspot.com/2008/01/uk-prime-minister-gordon-brown-fails-to.html ; D'Estaing - French Father of Europe - Admits to Brussels Commission of Constitutional Fraud, at: http://itssdeconomicfreedom.blogspot.com/2008/01/destaing-french-father-of-europe-admits.html ].


The president [Sarkozy] said that every other European leader was grateful to Mr Brown for not blocking the replacement to the EU constitution.


In return the Prime Minister signed Britain up to moves to create common EU immigration standards and cooperate on defence and nuclear policy.


At the conclusion of yesterday’s France-UK summit, the French president vowed to continue his charm offensive designed to draw Britain into deeper engagement in the EU.


“It is not simply a matter of a one-night stand. I believe that we can go in to next-day breakfast as well,” Mr Sarkozy said at a joint press conference with Mr Brown.


He said that every EU leader had reason to be grateful for Mr Brown’s “courage and loyalty” in ensuring that the treaty, which replaced the failed EU constitution, would be ratified in the UK. Mr Sarkozy repeated his call for Britain to play a fuller role in the EU rather than “being on the sidelines”. “We need the British to get Europe moving,” he said, hinting that he had rebuked David Cameron for his pledge to put the Lisbon Treaty to a vote during his private meeting with the Opposition leader.


For his part Mr Brown upgraded to formidable the entente that Mr Sarkozy had previously improved from cordiale to amicale. He said: “We believe that, working together, France and Britain can be an even greater force for good so, if you like, this will be the entente formidable.”


A 36-page communiqu� agreed to deepen cooperation on issues including the reform of international financial regulations and institutions, defence and immigration. New arrangements were made to “combat nuclear terrorism” by screening cross-Channel traffic and the creation of a British civilian rapid reaction force to help to stabilise failing states. It was the leaders’ agreement to “take forward a new migration pact under the French presidency of the EU” that is likely to prove the most controversial, however. French ministers have said they want a “common definition of the right of asylum” and have backed European Commission proposals that could see asylum seekers shared between EU states.


Ministers sought to emphasise the measures that Britain and France were taking to deter illegal migrants, saying they had agreed to reinforce fences around the port at Calais, three weeks after a loophole was exposed. Illegal immigrants have been able to sneak aboard lorries in Calais because of inadequate fencing.


The two countries would also carry out a joint security audit and look at creating a fast-track system to introduce lighter controls on some goods vehicles, a statement from the Home Office said.


Ministers also agreed to cooperate to prevent any new Sangatte-type refugee centre developing at Calais or elsewhere on the Channel coast.


As expected Britain and France also agreed to harmonise the regulation of nuclear plants and work together to develop long-term waste facilities. The latter issue became more urgent yesterday with the publication of an official analysis giving warning that waste costs could prove prohibitively expensive for would-be investors.


Mr Brown said they had agreed a common approach to the problems in Afghanistan, Burma and Darfur, as well as the issue of nuclear proliferation. Mr Brown announced a joint British-Franco initiative to bring education to 16 million children in Africa.


Although both leaders called for restraint and dialogue in resolving the crisis in Tibet, Mr Sarkozy repeated his threat to boycott the opening ceremony of the Beijing Games.


“Depending on how the situation is looking at the time, I reserve the right to say whether I will attend the opening ceremony,” he said.


In contrast, Mr Brown said: “We will not be boycotting the Olympic Games. Britain will be attending the Olympic Games ceremonies. The Dalai Lama has not called for the boycott of the Olympics.”


Mr Sarkozy admitted that there were still tensions over the Common Agricultural Policy but said that for the first time a French president was prepared to debate its future.


Meanwhile Buckingham Palace accepted the blame for what it described as a “minor mix-up” that meant that Mr Brown failed to show up for a photograph before Wednesday’s state banquet. The Queen was heard to ask: “Has the Prime Minister got lost?” after Mr Brown failed to appear alongside the heads of state at the event.


As the monarch and the French President looked around for him, Mr Sarkozy reportedly smiled and remarked to his wife, Carla: “That’s Gordon.” Royal sources confirmed that Palace officials had “misdirected” Mr Brown to sit down.


While the French media broadly hailed the London trip a success, hackles were raised by Mr Sarkozy’s declaration that Britain’s record for the past 30 years was a model that France must follow.

[??? WHICH COUNTRY IS LIKELY TO BE DOING THE REAL 'FOLLOWING'???]


A Le Monde columnist called this “a shameless exercise in toadying intended to win, at whatever cost, the approval of his audience”.


Le Figaro talked of a “Franco- British honeymoon” but said that it was up to Gordon Brown now to accept France’s hand.


France was also bemused by the collective swoon of the British media at the arrival of the President’s new supermodel wife. “The English conquered by Carla,” said a headline in le Parisien, under its story on “L’op�ration s�duction du couple Sarkozy à Londres”.


When diplomacy can be a touchy subject


— Paul Keating, the former Australian Prime Minister, put his arm around the Queen during her 1992 tour to the country, earning himself the nickname “Lizard of Oz”


— Geri Halliwell, a member of the Spice Girls, was scolded for turning up 40 minutes late to meet the Queen at a Buckingham Palace reception in 2005. She also pinched the Prince of Wales’s bottom


— In 2004, when Jacques Chirac, was French President, he was admonished by Britain’s tabloids for almost touching the Queen. One headline read “Hands off!” and the accompanying story described how Mr Chirac “came within a whisker of manhandling The Queen”


— Last year President Bush mistakenly said that the Queen had helped to celebrate the US bicentennial in 1776, rather than 1976. He didn’t help the situation by winking at the monarch, earning him a disapproving look described by the President as one “only a mother could give a child”




*************************************************************************************



No EU referendum


Financial Times


March 7 2008


Parliamentary rejection of a referendum on the Lisbon treaty will be a great relief to Gordon Brown. The UK prime minister need fear no longer this vexatious but, to him, second order question. Europe’s capacity to convulse British politics has been neutralised. But not for ever.


True, the chances of a plebiscite on Lisbon are now close to nil. The issue could be reopened if Ireland – the only one of the European Union’s 27 member states that will put the treaty to a referendum – votes it down. Even then, while that would give the EU a bad headache, Britain’s Conservative opposition will still probably not be able to muster enough votes in parliament to force a referendum.


Mr Brown and Labour may pay some price for ostensibly welching on a manifesto pledge to hold a popular vote on the defunct constitutional treaty. But even before they were repackaged into Lisbon, these reforms always amounted more to an amending treaty than a constitution. They are less far-reaching than the Maastricht treaty and – especially – the Single European Act signed by Margaret Thatcher, which produced literally thousands of laws on Britain’s statute book.


It is also manifestly in Britain’s as well as Europe’s interest to have a more coherent international voice, greater national scrutiny of EU law, and a fairer distribution of votes. You would not guess this from the way both Labour and the Tories so easily capitulate to tabloid jingoism.


In that comic-book narrative, the whole enterprise is about protecting the national veto, the Excalibur whose magic potency can scythe down the heathens of qualified majority voters. Whatever Europe proposes, Britain must oppose.


Mr Brown’s apparent pluck in resisting a referendum should not be mistaken for courage or principle; all the bluster about red lines and opt-outs could not conceal fear of defeat. At best, he took the right decision for the wrong reasons.


As for the Liberal Democrats, the UK’s most enthusiastic Europeans, their posture – abstention in order to highlight their demand for a plebiscite on Britain’s EU membership – left them looking foolish. Unless it was a ploy to exemplify the problem with referendums: that they tend to elicit answers to questions that are not being asked.


Europe remains a “wedge” issue between the parties and within all of them. Until that changes, Europe will always haunt British politics.


Tony Blair, the most pro-European leader for a generation, spurned the opportunity to enhance Britain’s influence in and through Europe. Mr Brown will be no different. Yet what better means is there for milking prosperity from globalisation while alleviating some of its side-effects? For effective multilateralism and multiplying power in facing challenges from climate change to terrorism? But Britain can only be a shaping force in Europe if it begins to see it as an opportunity.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Americans Targeted for Behavior Modification

By Paul Walter *


November 16, 2004


http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/nov2004/16/ameicans.htm


"Fifty years is ample time in which to change a world and its people almost beyond recognition. All that is required for the task are a sound knowledge of social engineering, a clear sight of the intended goal - and power." -- Arthur C. Clarke, Childhood's End.


A recent measure in Santa Cruz, California was a prime example of how the people are being manipulated at the local level through what's called 'sustainable development' being done incrementally. Measure J was defeated by the people, but it is imperative that Americans fully understand that 'sustainable development' is the blueprint for destroying liberty and private property rights. Americans should make no mistake about the seriousness of this issue and how it will affect your life. Like a giant octopus spreading its tentacles, this type of measure and similar legislation is spreading across this country like a cancer.


[See, e.g.: The Image of the UN 'LOST' Leviathan, at: http://itssdjournalunclos-lost.blogspot.com/2008/01/lost-leviathan.html ].


['Negative' Sustainable Development] can be defeated by an educated citizenry as was demonstrated by the voters in Santa Cruz on November 2, 2004.


Measure J in Santa Cruz exemplified the underpinnings of 'sustainable development' by using local laws deceptively presented, but which were in fact, mini steps in behavior modification. This statement is validated by Linda Wilshusen, who was Executive Director of the Transportation Commission from the seventies until a short time ago expressed her opinion in 1988 when she said, "This concept of 'traffic management' has very little to do with science and engineering and a lot to do with sociology, marketing and behavior modification, as well as land use, parking and fuel availability, demographics and the like."


Wilshusen wasn't the only person to let the cat out of the bag. On September 16, 2004 during a presentation on Measure J to their local Chamber of Commerce, Supervisor Ellen Pirie insisted that the HOV lane proposed was needed: “If we add this lane, then we have more possibilities, because then we have a way of getting people out of their cars.” This is behavior modification through the back door.


Sustainable development should be the subject of discussion all across America, but most people don't know what it means, how it's being implemented and that the federal government is a willing participant in destroying our Republic. While some may automatically knee-jerk over such a statement, America's continued participation in the UN and programs like UNESCO spell even further destruction of our sovereignty and standard of living. Whether it's a 'traffic control' measure or one pertaining to the environment, non-governmental organizations, the worker ants of the globalists, push ahead each day in pursuit of world wide communism disguised by various labels. All of this is being kissed and blessed by local city fathers and state governments.


In his excellent piece titled 'Social Engineering for Global Change,' Carl Teichrib further educates on the 'International Baccalaureate Organization:


"Originally, the IBO was established to provide a common educational basis for international students that would be acceptable to universities around the world. With this in mind, IBO curriculum has, for over 35 years, emphasized that its students broaden their understanding of various cultures, languages, and points of view.


"Understanding other's points of view, cultures and languages is, in itself, a noble task - it's something that I work at pursuing and instilling within my own children and in myself. But underlining IBO's philosophy is something deeper; according to George Walker, the Director General at IBO, "International education offers people a state of mind: international-mindedness. You've got to change people's thinking." Hence, "students develop an awareness of moral and ethical issues and a sense of social responsibility...fostered by examining local and global issues."


"This is not simply ambiguous language. In advancing the international-mindedness of IBO, the organization has endorsed the Earth Charter - an earth-centered declaration which venerates global political-ethical-moral and spiritual unification. Some, such as Mikhail Gorbachev, have gone so far as to compare the Earth Charter with "those 10 or 15 Commandments which we all know about...those famous testaments."


"Providing the Earth Charter initiative with advanced support, the International Baccalaureate Organization has agreed to become an Earth Charter partnership entity, along with such groups as the Association of World Citizens, Friends of the Earth, Global People's Assembly, Rain Forest Action Network, the U.S. branch of the United Nations Association, and the World Parliament of Religion.


"Furthermore, IBO Deputy Director General, Ian Hill, sits on the Earth Charter Initiative Education Advisory Committee. Going further, IBO is currently looking at ways to incorporate the Earth Charter into the following curriculum areas; Theory of Knowledge, Environmental Systems, Environmental Science, Technology and Social Change, Peace and Conflict Studies, Experimental Science, Philosophy, Geography, History, Math, and the Arts.


"None of this would be very remarkable if the IBO were a small entity stuffed somewhere in a forgotten corner of the world - but it's not. Presently, almost 1,300 schools around the globe are authorized to offer IBO programs. And in the U.S. and Canada, just under 650 schools are tied in to the IBO, with 473 in the U.S. Adding to this, the IBO is linked into a number of United Nations' functions beyond the U.N. inspired Earth Charter and UNESCO - where it holds a special consultative status. The IBO has been involved in prep work for the U.N.'s World Summit on Sustainable Development, it's involved in a number of U.N. International Schools, and the organization works with a variety of United Nations Model programs. In other words, it's an organization with considerable "social change" inroads at the international level.


"Funding for the body also reflects this global-local-global approach. During the month of October, 2003, in a monetary show of support, the U.S. Department of Education awarded the IBO a grant of $1.17 million. According to the IBO press release, these U.S. taxpayer funds were to be specifically channeled into setting up IBO programs "in six middle and high school partnerships in disadvantaged areas in Massachusetts, New York and Arizona."


Fighting back means fighting smart. I urge you to educate yourself , your family, friends, neighbors and work colleagues on this issue. As time is precious for Americans working hard each day to bring home the bacon and familial obligations, NWVs has a fine six-hour video presentation on sustainable development that will help you and everyone you know understand this issue from the inside out. This excellent series should be shown at meetings for all groups and organizations. This is an American issue that affects you, your family, our liberty and freedoms.


Order: Liberty or Sustainable Development© 2004 Paul Walter - All Rights Reserved

Paul Walter was born in socialist Yugoslavia in 1945. He and his family emigrated to America in 1959. He served 3 years in the U.S. Armed Forces and became a U.S. citizen in 1963.

Monday, January 21, 2008

UK Government Guides Policymakers in ‘Art’ of Public Behavior Control: Recommends Restricted Economic Freedom & Strategic Use of ‘Fear’

Behaviour Change: A Series of Practical Guides for Policy-Makers and Practitioners


Number 5Understanding ChoiceSummer 2006


http://www.defra.gov.uk/science/project_data/DocumentLibrary/SD14008/SD14008_3805_INF.pdf


Defra’s 5 year strategy – (Delivering the Essentials of Life1) coupled with the UK Government sustainable development strategy (Securing the Future2) set out an ambitious agenda for environmental leadership and sustainable development. Embedding these core principles relies on influencing change and making it easier for producers and consumers to behave more sustainably. This is a sizeable task, since changing behaviours is a complex matter and innovative solutions are required.


In July 2005, Defra initiated a programme of research that aimed to broaden understanding of how Government (and others) can most effectively promote pro-environmental behaviour amongst producers and consumers.


... Producers choose to use resources in a way which may or may not be sustainable. Consumers choose to buy products which may or may not be sustainable in their use of resources. Such choices are important throughout the life span of a product, service, or utility from production, to purchase, to consumption and disposal. It is these choices which must take into account environmental pressures and sustainability issues over and above aesthetic appearance, must-have branding and basic functionality. The question therefore is how to make sustainability an automatic and primary part of producer and consumer choice, rather than a self-satisfying added extra.


... Restricting choice, constraining freedom


It is generally assumed that more choice is a good thing. However, there are many examples, within and beyond the environmental context, where behaviour change has been enforced (i.e. choice is restricted) and has subsequently led to changes in attitudes (e.g. banning smoking in public places for public health improvements).


Although behaviour change, driven by regulation, legislation and penalties can be very effective in producing results, it is often avoided as it is assumed that people want choice not legislation, and freedom not a “nanny state”.


Evidence suggests that there is a strong argument for the need to ‘kick start’ change through regulation.


...[P]eople are willing to change, but feel unable to do so. It takes a complex problem (obesity management) and shows it is not enough just to tell people what to do and how to do it. In this quote from Jane Ogden, the words ‘obesity epidemic’ could be replaced with the words climate change. It illustrates the urgency to do something:


“It would be dreadful if the obesity epidemic continued because we did too little. It would be disastrous if it continued because we feared doing too much.” (Ogden, 2005. pp.226)


... Case Study 1: The Paradox of Control in Managing Obesity Management, (Ogden, 2005).


... Non-psychological solutions to obesity management are often conceptualised as ‘letting people off’, ‘controlling’ or, horror of horrors, ‘the nanny state’. Obesity surgery is often thought of as not getting to the root of the problem and so inappropriate: choice is taken away from patients and decisions are made on their behalf. However, results of recent studies suggest that surgery not only results in dramatic weight loss, but alters the way in which people think about food: there is less preoccupation with food; people feel more in control of what and how they eat. Hence, the paradox of control. By taking choice and responsibility away from the individual through surgery, people regain the control that they had lost and achieve behaviour goals.


... A social network approach to influencing behaviour was explored in this research context to realise further the role of social networks as anchors of identity and behaviour which in turn affect decisions impacting on consumption and production.


... Provoking Emotions


The role of emotions and state of mind has been largely overlooked in research even though preliminary work suggests that ‘affect’ both positive and negative, has a powerful impact on behaviour (Kals and Maes, 2003).


Evidence suggests that sustainable behaviour can be substantially explained by moral emotions. Previous research has often focused on the role of negative emotions (such as fear) which plays part in the encouraging more positive environmental behaviour. However, recent transport research has shown that positive emotions play an important role in travel behaviour: the emotions evoked by travelling relate to people’s preference for a particular transport mode.


Case study 3 describes an experiment which evoked the emotion of fear as a basis for attitude change. It clearly shows that emotions have a part to play in encouraging sustainable consumption and production.


... Fear was confirmed as an important construct in influencing responses to information and it was concluded that negative emotion increases the extent to which information is systematically processed. The induction of fear was also influential over time. In generating fear appeal messages it should be remembered that risks associated with the environment are generally more likely to elicit low fear levels compared for example with public health issues. It is difficult to visualise a threat that is not immediately threatening in terms of personal proximity or time.


... This research has cross-cutting relevance to both the Sustainable Development Strategy (2005), and Defra’s Framework for Sustainable Consumption and Production (DEFRA 2003) as well as the work of many other Government departments, such as DTI, DfT and DCLG.


... The Choice Matters Final Report outlines an exemplar project using the example of influencing shoppers to buy locally produced food. The project is based on the approach of provoking emotions and would directly address sustainable consumption (e.g. through the reduction of air miles and supporting local food producers) and indirectly address sustainable production (e.g. through improvements to markets for British food suppliers). This project would aim to influence the general public and British food producers.


The example project suggests one application of this approach to address sustainable consumption and production. It could equally well apply to many other areas which link directly to the development of a sustainable economy, such as the purchase of other goods, the consumption of electricity and travel behaviour.


[BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION HAS ANOTHER GOAL: DISGUISED TRADE PROTECTIONISM]


... Aims


The ultimate aim of the example project would be to increase the consumption of locally produced food. Underlying aims reflect the smaller goals that must be achieved in order to reach this objective. These include understanding:


• the role of positive and negative feelings and emotions in the purchase and consumption of locally produced food;

• how to make the purchase and consumption of locally produced food an instantly attractive option;

• how feelings towards the purchase and consumption of locally produced food can be evoked;

• the extent to which the purchase and consumption of locally produced food is driven by emotion rather than cognition;

• the role of emotion in automatising the purchase and consumption of locally produced food; and

• whether producers consider the role of mood and emotion during production.


Expected Outcomes


1. Increased purchase and consumption of locally produced food.

2. Wider use of farmers’ markets.

3. Pressure on mass purchasing supermarkets to offer a wider and improved range of locally produced food.

4. Improved recognition of existing and/or new identifying symbols indicating food is produced in Britain (e.g. the Little Red Tractor).

5. Recommendations on the development of policies to encourage the purchase and consumption of locally produced food.

Forner UK Prime Minister Tony Blair Was Determined to Modify Public Behavior Through Claude Helvetius’ ‘Education Thru Legislation' Program

BRITISH GOVERNMENT REPORT:


Changing behaviour through policy making


http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/what/priority/pdf/change-behaviour-model.pdf


“...Achieving sustainable development will depend largely on long-term changes in behaviours of individuals, communities, firms and the public sector.


Government can play a pivotal role in changing these behaviours over time. But it has to find a way of engaging with both individuals and the public, in supporting the development of new social norms and fostering facilitating conditions in a strategic and long-term approach to behaviour change.


This paper provides a detailed discussion of the changing behaviour model which is introduced in the sustainable development strategy “Securing the future”1 [Available via http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/index.htm ].


... Research that was commissioned by Defra shows the scale of the challenge we face in helping people to make better choices that deliver moving towards sustainable development and a “one planet economy”.


“Information does not necessarily lead to increased awareness, and increased awareness does not necessarily lead to action. Information provision, whether through advertisements, leaflets or labelling, must be backed up by other approaches.”


Demos & Green Alliance, 2003


...There is no point asking people to change if they don’t know how – or if they know what do, but what they need to do it is not available. We need to help people make responsible choices by providing them with the education, skills and information, and by making those choices easy with easily accessible alternatives and suitable infrastructure.


...Government will look at the most effective techniques to encourage and, where necessary, enforce, behaviour change. These might include taxes or other ways of giving price signals, peer pressure, league tables, funding, or regulation. We should also consider scope for positive incentives to reward good behaviour rather than penalties.


... “Sustainable development will not just be a subject in the classroom: it will be in its bricks and mortar and the way the school uses and even generates its own power. Our students won't just be told about sustainable development, they will see and work within it: a living, learning, place in which to explore what a sustainable lifestyle means.”


Prime Minister, September 2004


Behaviour change is a process that may unfold over months, years or, in the case of the most radical behaviour shifts, decades.

UK Government Provides Guidance On Behavior Modification Techniques Used to Shape Personal Lives of UK Citizens

UK BEHAVIOUR CHANGE FORUM – PROVIDING GUIDANCE ON HOW TO PURSUE A MORE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE


http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/government/task-forces/behaviour-change.htm


“We all - government, businesses, families and communities, the public sector, voluntary and community organisations - need to make different choices.


In order to evaluate and share what works best in practice, a Forum has been established across Government departments to promote and support better policymaking to deliver sustained behaviour change.


...The past 20 years have seen a growing realisation that the current model of development is unsustainable. In other words, we are living beyond our means. From the loss of biodiversity with the felling of rainforests or over fishing to the negative effect our consumption patterns are having on the environment and the climate. Our way of life is placing an increasing burden on the planet.


... Unless we start to make real progress toward reconciling these contradictions we face a future that is less certain and less secure. We need to make a decisive move toward more sustainable development. Not just because it is the right thing to do, but also because it is in our own long-term best interests. It offers the best hope for the future. Whether at school, in the home or at work, we all have a part to play. Our small everyday actions add up to make a big difference.


... The UK Government, Scottish Executive, Welsh Assembly Government and the Northern Ireland Administration have agreed upon a set of principles that provide a basis for sustainable development policy in the UK. For a policy to be sustainable, it must respect all five principles.


UK priorities


In terms of focusing our efforts, the UK has identified four priority areas for immediate action, shared across the UK, these are:


Sustainable Consumption and Production


Climate Change and Energy


Natural Resource Protection and Environmental Enhancement


Sustainable Communities


The UK Government also recognises that changing behaviour is a cross cutting theme closely linked to all of these priorities. In addition, Securing the Future identifies wellbeing as being at the heart of sustainable development.

UK Government Recommends Mandatory Behavior Modification Techniques to ‘Reeducate’ Consumers, Consistent With ‘Negative' Sustainable Development

A Study into the Tools for Influencing Consumer Behaviour in TransportChoices: A Report Produced for UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs


http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/consumerprod/accpe/research/pdf/accpe_finrep.pdf


... The Advisory Committee on Consumer Products and the Environment (ACCPE) provides advice on policies to reduce the environmental impacts of products and services.


...The aim of this two month [2003] research was to identify the key sustainable development issues affecting car purchase choices and what tools could be used to address them. A key to this was to examine the scope for the end consumer to contribute to the Government’s climate change objectives....


This web-based research was undertaken to identify tools affecting consumer behaviour and transport choices. This highlighted a number of schemes and incentives that are used within the UK and throughout the world to encourage the purchase of alternatively fuelled vehicles (AFVs) and other energy efficient vehicles and also the tools that would impact on the use of vehicles....


Throughout the course of this study it became apparent that the greatest reductions in carbon dioxide levels could be achieved though behavioural change rather than technology change. By focussing on influencing individual behaviour patterns the UK Government can reduce CO2 levels quicker and to a higher degree, rather than waiting for technology changes to penetrate the market place.


A secondary impact of this behaviour change is that when technology change occurs the general population will be in a position to assimilate these changes with limited government intervention....


The following tools were identified from the research and the stakeholder workshop, and theirpotential impacts were modelled....


STANDARDS/TAXES/LABELLING...


Fuel efficiency standards...


Sliding scale tax on vehicles...


Carbon/fuel tax...


Vehicle labelling...


DEMAND REDUCTION...


Congestion pricing and toll rings...


Workplace parking charge...


Carpooling...


Teleworking...


Fuel price increase (10%)...


Videoconferencing...


Workplace travel plans...


Individual marketing...


TRAINING & AWARENESS...


[ECO-] Driver training...


Promotion of on-board technologies...


ALTERNATIVE FUEL TECHNOLOGY...


Alternative fuels...


FLEET MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS...


Motorvate...


Compulsory fleet auditing.


Sustainable Transport Organisations and NGOs:


• Transport 2000: Stephen Joseph, Denise Carlo, Carey Newson

• Friends of the Earth: Roger Higman• Environmental Transport Association: Andrew Davis

• Shell Foundation: Lee Schipper

• European Environmental Bureau: John Hontelez

• National Society for Clean Air: Tim Brown

• EPOMM UK: Kevin Scobell


UK Government Policy Makers:

• Commission for Integrated Transport: David Begg, Trevor Chinn

• Department for Transport: Mark Gaynor, Matthew Hammond, Caroline Wood

• Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution: Peter Hinchcliffe

• Energy Saving Trust: Jonathan Murray, David Lemon

• Carbon Trust: David Vincent

• Department of Trade and Industry: Ashley Roberts

• Consumer & Competition Policy Directorate: Johnathan Rees

• The Motorists Forum: David Prescott