Campaign blog

Insight, debate and campaigning news from ActionAid

Pages

Standing Up for Women in Afghanistan

Rowan Harvey's picture Posted by Rowan HarveyWomen's Rights Advocacy Adviser
 

It’s quite difficult to sit down and write a blog when someone else has already said in theirs almost everything you wanted to. That said, it’s a pretty good problem to have, particularly when the other author is Malcolm Bruce MP, Chair of the International Development Select Committee.

The Committee has been busy for the last few months collecting evidence for their new report on the UK’s development efforts in Afghanistan and the conclusions they’ve drawn make for slightly uncomfortable, but absolutely vital, reading for anyone with an interest in the region. Needless to say, ActionAid UK and ActionAid Afghanistan worked together to make sure that the Committee had plenty of evidence around the situation of women and girls in the country and it certainly seems that they heard us loud and clear.

The report calls progress on realising the rights of women and girls in Afghanistan the true ‘litmus test’ of the UK’s efforts. In a country where 87% of women face domestic violence, true peace and development can only be secured when women are safe in their own homes and able to participate in public life without fear of reprisals. In his blog, Bruce concludes:

“These brave women and girls deserve our full and unflagging support. But it is unclear how DfID delivers this. We could only find two projects funded by UK taxpayers – out of nearly 100 – that have a direct and explicit focus on women and girls. More must be spent in ways that work to secure their future, such as projects focused on education and economic opportunities as well as domestic violence shelters and support for female police and lawyers to help victims of violence.”

Well said, Mr Bruce.

Make the campaign for tax justice too big to be ignored at the G20

Aggy Hall's picture Posted by Aggy HallDigital Campaigner
 

Since we launched our expose that 98 of the FTSE 100 are using tax havens, over 16,000 of you have signed the petition to close tax loopholes or emailed your MP, the treasury has acknowledged the impact of tax dodging on developing countries and MPs have started two parliamentary petitions, putting pressure on the government to act now. So what happens now?

In just two weeks time, world leaders are meeting at the G20 summit. With mass support behind this campaign, and the spotlight on tax justice as a key issue for development, we have a real chance to make world leaders listen.

Help us get up to 20,000 petition signatures and emails to MPs sent before the G20 summit in 2 weeks time

Then we can take this show of support to the government for George Osborne to take with him to the G20 summit. The way to get more people behind the campaign is simple: spread the word to your friends and networks and get them to spread the word, too.

Tax dodging by multinationals is wrong both for ordinary people in the UK and people like Ophelia in developing countries and we have to make it stop, now.

>> Tweet about the campaign:

>> 'Like' the campaign on Facebook:

>> Click here to email your friends(with your default program) and ask them to sign our petition - or copy and paste the message below:

Around the world, big businesses are dodging their taxes. This costs developing countries much more money than they receive in aid - money urgently needed to pay for education and healthcare.

Please sign ActionAid's petition to demand tax justice and close tax loopholes

>> http://bit.ly/ftse100

Brussels agrees biofuels compete with food

Lucy Hurn's picture Posted by Lucy HurnBiofuels campaign manager
 

On Wednesday 17th October the European Commission released its new proposal to overhaul European policy on biofuels including new measures to limit the proportion of food based crops being used to meet biofuels targets. That same day we handed in a petition, signed by 44,000 ActionAid supporters from across Europe, in to the Commission. Our petition added to pressure from thousands of other individuals and organisations from across Europe, including Friends of Earth and Avaaz calling action to end biofuels.

The proposal clearly shows that our campaigning is working. When we launched our campaign just a few years ago the social impacts of biofuels were rarely talked about or acknowledged by politicians. But by showing how they drive up food prices and force people off the land, and campaigning together to make politicians listen, we’ve made sure the voices of the people most affected are heard.

Sadly the proposal doesn’t go far enough. Without a total ban on food based biofuels, millions will still go hungry because food will continue to be used to feed cars rather than hungry mouths, and the rush for biofuels will continue fuelling land grabs, forcing poor families off their land.

We were also disappointed that the proposal had been seriously watered down since it was leaked back in September. Whilst the original plans included measures to rule out biofuels with the highest climate change emissions, Brussels bowed to lobbying from businesses that would lose out through this change, and took this out of the proposal. Whilst biofuels were introduced because they were originally thought of as a solution to climate change, it is now widely accepted that most biofuels release more greenhouse gases than the fossil fuels they were introduced to replace. Failing to address this means biofuels will continue to drive climate change, which again has the worst impacts on the world’s poorest.

However, there’s still time to make a difference. The European proposal marks the beginning of months of negotiation between European countries and MEPs, and we will continue to keep up the pressure on those with the power to right the wrongs of the current proposal and to prioritise food over fuel. Watch this space!

For a more detailed analysis of the European proposal click here.

Guest blog: closing tax loopholes in Norwich

James Blair's picture Posted by James BlairActivism Officer
 

A guest blog today from Nick Jackson, one of our Community Campaigners from Norwich. Last week, he and fellow Community Campaigner Mark Lewin had some interesting conversations with festival-goers as they took the 'close tax loopholes' message to the Magdalen Street festival. They even managed to snag a new and important local supporter in MP Simon Wright.

"After shivering in the shade of the Magdalen Street flyover for an hour and getting no signatures, we were starting to think we’d made a poor choice of pitch. The tombola for the local community centre was doing great guns next to us and our stall looked a little dull by comparison. Then we thought we’d try a slightly more proactive approach.

"Simply asking passers-by if they’d heard of the ‘Tax Justice Campaign’ seemed to get people asking questions. Soon we had our first few names on the petition. It seems tax dodging is in everyone’s mind at the moment. People are acutely aware that, as their own pockets are squeezed, the bankers and multinationals are getting bigger bonuses and fatter profits.

Mark Lewin, Simon Wright

"Using the case study of Zambia was helpful too. Mark was great at explaining how, in Zambia, more money is lost to tax dodging than they recieve in international aid each year. Everyone could identify with the story of Katherine Mwapa who stands at her fruit and veg stall in front of the Glencore Mining company factory complex. The caption tells how she pays more income tax annually than Glencore does!

"We also managed to get local MP Simon Wright to lend his support to the cause. He took the time to chat with us and we even managed to get a shot of him with the 'Close Tax Loopholes' board.

"In the end we had a busy day, getting 71 names for the petition and speaking to scores of ordinary people, young and old. One man was anxious to let us know that we shouldn’t try and close all the tax loopholes. He then took pleasure in telling us how he’d built his business up by exploiting tax loopholes opened up by Margaret Thatcher’s government. Funnily enough we couldn’t persuade him to put his name on the petition.

 

European Commission signals change in biofuels policy, but still falls seriously short

Clare Coffey's picture Posted by Clare CoffeyPolicy Advisor
 

The big biofuels story of this week or month or even year is that the European Commission (EC) has now finally come forward with a proposal to amend its biofuels policies, reflecting a groundswell of opinion and scientific evidence that biofuels are bad for the environment and for poor people.

EU biofuels policies have attracted a huge amount of criticism from NGOs, academics, scientists and international organisations because they contain a specific 10% renewable energy in transport target that is being filled primarily by food based biofuels. And this in turn is impacting on millions of poor people as food crop prices are inflated and land taken in the global South to produce additional crops. It is also thought – overall - to generate far more greenhouse gas emissions as a consequence. And yet the policy was designed to reduce the EU’s climate emissions.

The Commission had been expected – indeed requested under the EU’s Renewable Energy Directive – to come forward with proposals already in 2010, to address biofuels’ climate emissions, and specifically emissions resulting indirectly from the clearing of forests and peatlands to make way for biofuel crops. When taken into account, these ‘Indirect Land Use Change’ emissions or ILUC emissions mean that most biodiesel feedstocks in the EU are as bad if not worse than the fossil fuels they replace.

But extensive internal wrangling had delayed Commission proposals for two years until a delicate compromise was finally achieved last month. That compromise was not ideal but would at least have ensured that the worst climate offending biofuels with the biggest indirect emissions would no longer have counted towards EU climate and energy targets.

However, in a last minute twist, and under particularly heavy industry lobbying, the Commission buckled and essentially gutted the proposal. What was finally proposed yesterday is essentially an ILUC proposal with no measures to address ILUC.

But all is not lost. On the up side, the Commission has held on to the idea of capping at 5% the amount of food based biofuels that can be counted towards the 10% target. This is an important signal that food to fuel biofuels are not worth investing in, and instead Member States will be able – if the proposal goes through – to provide considerable incentives for non-food and non-land biofuels such as those made from waste or straw. That, so we hope, should redirect investment towards sustainable biofuels and away from food based biofuels.

The 5% cap again is not perfect, since it doesn’t actually stop Member States from turning food into fuel in order to fill other EU obligations, but it is a big start. And even if it was a real limit, the amount of food needed to achieve 5% could feed 190 million people!

So what, in sum, is our conclusion to all this? Well, at today’s official press event, Climate Change Commissioner Hedegaard admitted that the proposal ‘isn’t perfect’. For ActionAid and the millions who suffer as a consequence of EU biofuel policies’ impacts on food and climate, that is a bit of an understatement.

That said, the proposal – while not going far enough – does vindicate ActionAid and other NGOs who have for several years been campaigning against food to fuel biofuels.

But clearly this is not yet the end of the battle! The proposal now goes to the European Parliament and the EU Council of Ministers; so there are still good campaigning opportunities to improve the proposal before it comes into law. Watch this space!

If you haven’t already joined us, sign the petition!

Avoid tax-dodging companies - or change the rules?

Chris Jordan's picture Posted by Chris Jordan Tax Justice Campaigner
 

Since the news broke yesterday that Starbucks have not paid any tax in the UK for three years, the public outrage has been steadily growing.

As Rachel explained yesterday, it’s a particularly interesting case for us, because Starbucks are using many of the same tricks that we found Grolsch and Peroni owner SABMiller using to dodge their bills in Africa.

Starbuck’s are also trying to explain away the revelations using the same arguments SABMiller made - but the comments underneath their blog post shows that nobody is fooled.

The bigger question is what we can do about this corporate tax avoidance on this sort of scale.

I think that putting pressure directly onto companies is vital, which is where quick fire twitter campaigns like @TryAnotherCup really come into their own.

Companies need to know that people really do care about how much tax they’re contributing to society – and that we won’t stand for such flagrant avoidance of their responsibility.

There are constructive steps that any company can take, such as becoming more transparent and ruling out abusive, artificial payments into tax havens and integrating tax justice into corporate responsibility approaches. There are loads of ideas in our Tax Responsibility briefing.

But ultimately, voluntary measures from individual companies won’t cut it. 98 of the FTSE100 use tax havens (and lots of them) and we can’t boycott everyone.

Both the Starbucks and SABMiller cases show the massive loopholes in international tax rules that enable big companies to legally siphon their profits offshore. It’s these rules that urgently need to change.

That might sound like a huge task – but there are things individual governments like the UK can do. We could make it harder, rather than easier, for companies to use tax havens. We could make companies operate more transparently, which would discourage profit shifting offshore. We could work together with other countries to tackle tax dodging by individual companies.

Done right, both the UK and developing countries stand to benefit. And that wouldn’t just raise more money that could be invested in the fight against poverty. It would mean that local business like Marta's market stall in Ghana, or your local independent coffee shop could compete on a level playing field with the multinationals next door.

We need to both pressure companies directly to stop tax dodging and changes to international rules that make it possible in the first place. A change is brewing...

Pages