Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

World set back 10 years by Bush's new world order, says Blair aide
The Guardian ^ | 4/14/04 | Paul Brown

Posted on 04/15/2004 1:58:21 PM PDT by LibWhacker

George Bush has had a "devastating impact" on global sustainable development and set the world back more than ten years, says Jonathon Porritt, the prime minister's senior adviser on the subject, today. Writing in Guardian Society Mr Porritt, who is the chairman of the Sustainable Development Commission, says it is hard to exaggerate the damage done to the planet by Mr Bush's drive for a "new world order".

On a whole series of issues including climate change, international aid, family planning, nuclear proliferation, trade and corporate responsibility, "staying true to a discredited model of extreme economic liberalism has set the world back a decade or more", says Mr Porritt.

He says it is not surprising that the rest of the world has done so badly because Mr Bush has given them the perfect "out" from their responsibilities.

"Developing countries are increasingly disenchanted with what they see as a narrow, unfair and protectionist agenda," he says, "Japan is mired in its own economic and political failure, Russia plays the field for whatever it can get out of it, and even the EU has started to lose the plot, with a least five countries seeking to renege on their climate commitments. ..."

Against this backdrop the British government looks like a world leader but even here the title of his report on progress is Shows Promise: But Must Try Harder.

The five-year review says that a lack of political will and a failure to understand that quality of life is not just about economic growth has led to slow progress towards the government's sustainable development goals. But Mr Porritt singles out Tony Blair's leadership on climate change and Gordon Brown's efforts on global debt as bright spots.

He says that in some of the 15 areas he judges the government on, for example waste management and traffic, the performance has been "dreadful". Four areas "show promise" and two - air quality and river water - manage a "good". He accepts that the government intends to do more but it is not a brilliant picture.

"Far more effort needs to be made to differentiate between smart growth (that generates wealth and social benefits without damaging the environment) and today's wholly unsustainable growth that inevitably ends up damaging people's real quality of life."

On this criterion he gives Britain's economic growth a "poor" rating and says eco-taxation policy has become bogged down.

The government gets a "disappointing" rating in four areas: employment, because of longer working hours and gender wage gaps; health, because life expectancy in poor communities is not rising; housing, because energy efficiency is low; and greenhouse gas emissions because of increased traffic and air travel. The four areas "showing promise" are poverty reduction, education, wildlife and land use.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aide; blair; environment; kyoto; newnwo; porritt; radicalleftist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last
To: John Lenin
Lol . . . I LOVE that picture!
41 posted on 04/15/2004 2:27:15 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Yeah, I wondered about that, too . . . Positively Orwellian.
42 posted on 04/15/2004 2:29:08 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
me too ... I just dont want people to underestimate how bad Hillary would be (10X worse than her hubby iMHO).

43 posted on 04/15/2004 2:29:37 PM PDT by WOSG (http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com - I salute our brave fallen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: E=MC<sup>2</sup>
And this is a bad thing how???

And I thought 10 years is that it? I was thinking it should be at least a 20 year setback.

44 posted on 04/15/2004 2:29:57 PM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: CROSSHIGHWAYMAN
Beautiful analogy!
45 posted on 04/15/2004 2:30:40 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Pukehead Brit bureaucrat:

We were thisclose to getting America to give it all away before this dang Bush came along.
46 posted on 04/15/2004 2:31:58 PM PDT by Spotsy (Bush-Cheney '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
It'd be nightmarish! Our poor great-grandkids would be dealing with President-For-Life Chelsea Ceaucescu Clinton.
47 posted on 04/15/2004 2:33:15 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
World set back 10 years; read 'left-wing agenda'

GOOD.
48 posted on 04/15/2004 2:34:37 PM PDT by onyx (Kerry' s a Veteran, but so were Lee Harvey Oswald, Timothy McVeigh and Benedict Arnold)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
What would the 'environmental impact' from a nuke set off by some crazed jihadi be?

This twit couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions on the heel.
49 posted on 04/15/2004 2:39:28 PM PDT by reagan_fanatic (So you're a feminist - isn't that cute!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend
ping
50 posted on 04/15/2004 2:41:52 PM PDT by Libertarianize the GOP (Ideas have consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: telebob
Yes because poverty living naked in the woods is sustainable.
51 posted on 04/15/2004 2:48:48 PM PDT by Sender (Support Free Republic...become a monthly donor!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
Thw world set back ten years could be a compliment because we had no bombings in the USA ten years ago.
52 posted on 04/15/2004 4:00:09 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
This is similar to hillary whining about 'Bush undoing clinton's legacy'.
53 posted on 04/15/2004 4:04:47 PM PDT by monkeywrench
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
"the death of socialism"

I hope we'll see it. But sometimes I think we're already socialist, and it's only the last of the momentum of our tradition of freedoms that makes us think we're still very free.

54 posted on 04/15/2004 5:44:06 PM PDT by Sam Cree (Democrats are herd animals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
This is good. 1994 was a good year for me. Now if only Bush could take me back to 1983, I'd be really happy. Now where's did I put my Men At Work album?
55 posted on 04/15/2004 5:45:53 PM PDT by SamAdams76 (I'm voting for John Kerry until I vote against him in November)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
World of Socialism set back 10 years by Bush's new world order, says Blair aide

Hip, hip hooray!

56 posted on 04/15/2004 5:46:01 PM PDT by jwalsh07 (REMEMBER FABRIZIO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
I only wish it had been pushed back 50 years...moms stay home with kids...father earns the "bacon"...Queers stayed in closet...etc...etc...
57 posted on 04/15/2004 5:50:13 PM PDT by Hotdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson