LUCAS BACKS CLIMATE BOYCOTT PROPOSAL

[Tim Root]

The International Energy Agency has warned that if we fail to cut
fossil fuels significantly within five years, so much carbon will have
been emitted that the chance of avoiding dangerous climate change will
be “lost for ever”. Durban has shown us again that governments are
most unlikely to tackle climate change WITH THE URGENCY REQUIRED. Our
campaigns are not making the rapid progress we need. Instead we need a
comprehensive and global campaign, so potential supporters believe it
could be strong enough to make the breakthrough required. Please
consider ways YOU COULD HELP GAIN SUPPORT for the following proposal
for a global climate change boycott campaign. Boycotts have a long
record of success, and business leaders consider them more effective
than other campaign tactics. Caroline Lucas recently told me she would
be likely to back a boycott campaign. The Tck Tck Tck petition gained
17 million supporters, many of whom would help win support for a
boycott of selected companies most responsible for climate change.
Campaign experts like Chris Rose and Jim Shultz emphasise that we need
to target those who have the ability to make the decisions we want. At
present this is business more than governments, which do not consider
public opinion strong enough for them to prioritise climate change.
The more time passes with no climate campaign able to attract LARGE-
SCALE support, the more that many citizens who are concerned about
climate change will divert their attention, due to discouragement.

A global boycott campaign could harness the widespread suspicion/
hostility towards big business and the banks. The campaign could make
investments in particularly high emissions activities, e.g. tar sands,
or agriculture on deforested land, appear likely to a) become
unprofitable, and b) severely harm a company’s reputation. Renewables
would then become a more attractive investment. Banks are already wary
of financing polluting activities, and a boycott campaign could make
the vital difference. A recent survey found that 45% of consumers said
they would avoid brands that failed to cut their carbon footprint.
Every year about three per cent of bank customers switch accounts, and
millions of young people open their first account. This constitutes
substantial consumer power we could influence. The campaign should
CAREFULLY choose targets which not only arouse widespread indignation,
but are also perceived as SUSCEPTIBLE to activist pressure. They COULD
include high-carbon products from a) Canada, whose government is
facilitating exploitation of the Alberta tar sands; b) the USA, which
is permitting tar sands crude to be refined in the US; and c)
Australia, the world’s major coal exporter. Such targets could include
exports of cars, beef, and lamb from, and tourism to, these three
nations.

Please pass this proposal on to others, PARTICULARLY NGO LEADERS. For
sources and more details, see a full explanation of the proposal below
and at How Can We Achieve Emissions Cuts in Time? December 2011
http://www.timroot.net/?q=articles. I am a local group co-ordinator
for Friends of the Earth in London.
t...@timroot.net
in...@familymediation.org.uk