Written by Theo LeQuesne, Warwick People & Planet member on exchange at US University of California Santa Barbara.

It is five o’clock in the afternoon and we are carpooling home to University of California Santa Barbara from Sacramento. Behind us is a car full of students from California Poly San Luis Obisbo; comrades from other Californian Universities are already home. But we are here, crammed into the backseat, sticky in the heat of the late afternoon sun, and contentedly exhausted from the day’s exertions. We are listen quietly as our driver talks of his days in the South African divestment movement of the 1980s. Hazily, as the heat of the day begins to take its toll, my mind meanders through the history being written about own divestment movement, the movement to free our generation from the bonds of the fossil fuel industry. If my experience yesterday reflects even a little of what’s happening everywhere, I believe that we will win.Yesterday marked yet another remarkable milestone in the Fossil Free Movement’s short but vibrant history. In Sacramento, on Thursday May 16 2013, dozens of students from colleges throughout California converged upon the University of California’s quarterly Regents’ meeting, the board of governers. Our purpose: to show the Regents our power and to insist that fossil fuel divestment be placed on the Regents’ agenda for their meeting in September. We garnered more success than we were prepared for.It started at 5:30am when students, some who had only met the night before, began to gather our props, hammers, chains, locks, and letters to the regents. As we sipped coffee in the park and put the final touches on our 12 foot oil derrick, we wondered if we’d actually run into any Regents. By 8am a bevy of Fossil Free UC students and supporters from other Californian Universities were staging an impassioned demonstration right in front of the entrance to the Regents quarterly meeting in Sacremento – a far cry from where we’d come from.

We chained ourselves around makeshift wooden props, symbolising our enslavement to an economy and society dependent on the fossil fuel industry. We then called upon the Regents to symbolically unlock us from the chains that bind our futures to destructive fossil fuels. However, this is where symbolism ends and reality begins. The reality is that continued bondage to fossil fuels will condemn my generation to misery, scarcity and even death. The reality is also that my generation cannot and will not allow the fossil fuel industry to steal from our future for profit in the present.

We chanted, we danced, we marched in our chains as our peers asked each Regent that entered if they would unlock us. Many of the board members stopped listened and took our letter, but found it difficult to commit to putting the key into the lock.

Among the heartily chorused chants of “UC, FOSSIL FREE!” and “when I say fossil, you say free!” emerged one cry far more poignant: “We are unstoppable, another world is possible!”. It started out quietly, barely more than a whisper, but was repeated again and again, and as it was repeated it grew louder and louder, gaining in strength and confidence, the finale erupting in crescendo of passion and conviction. This conviction is the reality the Regents and our opposition must now face. We believe in ourselves; we believe in our cause; and we believe that another world truly is possible if we fight for it. As that tentative whisper grew to a deafening roar, we too grew.

Inside, the testimony delivered to the Regnts from students echoed the vigour of our message outside. We had written one long speech divided into 13 students with 1 minute time slots for public comment. We practiced outside as the police prepared for the crowd to enter the building. We filed into the Regents’ meeting, and, one after another, went up to the microphone and eloquently but firmly stated the case for fossil fuel divestment. The testimony was organised, respectful, and fiercely passionate. Each of us brought a new point to the table, strengthening and redoubling that strength with a clear, persuasive, and vigorous argument. Divestment is scientifically, financially and morally right.

We experienced an unprecedented response and applause from the Regents; Chancellor Birgenau stepped outside to describe our testimony as “incredible” and the Vice President of Student Affairs, Judy Sadaki, offered us her card and her promise: to help leverage her power to aide us to get a meeting with the Regents.

At 11am it was all over. We all knew we had done something quite incredible, and we had done it together. Our case had been stated, our anger had been heard, we had been taken seriously, but most importantly, we had proved ourselves a credible, organised, and dynamic force.

Aside from our more obvious victories, the fact that the entire event was made possible by the collaboration and solidarity of students at different Universities around California, some of whom are rivals, and that we all traveled so far is what leaves me feeling truly a part of a growing movement. We proved that our power stretched far beyond the doors of the board room. The event was special because it exemplified all of the qualities that will make us unstoppable, and the possibility of another world a reality.

I am currently an exchange student from Warwick University in the United Kingdom. I have spent a year at the University of California Santa Barbara where I first got involved in the Fossil Free movement. I will be returning to Warwick in the autumn and am eager to help galvanise the movement in the UK. I have already made contact with People & Planet who are spearheading the Fossil Free UK campaign and cannot wait to start organising with them and universities across the UK. Joining Fossil Free has been one of the most rewarding experiences of my life. I encourage anyone and everyone concerned with climate change and its impact on our generation to join us in the fight for our future.

If you’d like to hear from student activists like Theo who have been involved in fossil free campaigning in the US, come to Summer Gathering!

Our understanding of corporations tends to be bounded though – when asked to imagine a decisive point where responsibility or control exists, we often we think of the CEO. Indeed, it’s often the CEO that gets toppled when big scandals hit companies, as if removing the CEO somehow tackled the problem.

The CEO though, is just the person hired by the company’s shareholders, who are the ones who actually own the company. For example, who owns Exxon Mobil? Well, if you go to Yahoo finance, you can find out: The page shows the top individual shareholders (individual people who hold shares), and it also shows the top institutional shareholders, the big funds that own shares. Exxon’s top investors includes groups like:
- Vanguard Group, which holds almost 5% of the company
- BlackRock, which holds around 3%
- The Spartan 500 Index Fund, controlled by Fidelity Investments
If you’re in London, and you want to see BlackRock, go to 12 Throgmorton – Avenue.

That’s where 3% of Exxon Mobil resides. And yes, those shareholders can include university endowments, or university pension funds. Take a look at the top mutual fund holders in Exxon. One of them is called ‘College Retirement Equities Fund’ – it’s a mutual fund run by TIAA CREF, a major financial institution that deals with the pensions of teachers and charities.

There is nothing particularly profound about noting who the shareholders are, but what is surprising is how few people ever attempt to actually target those investors. We might lambast a corporate executive for bad behaviour, but the individual fund managers who make the decision to support those executives seem to be given an extraordinary level of leeway. Financiers extract value from the actions undertaken by company management teams, and should be just as accountable.

This is why it’s heartening to see the growing fossil fuel divestment movement, of which People & Planet is part, adding fund managers of university endowments to the list of parties accountable for steering us towards a sustainable future. The future of environmental activism requires us to grapple ever more closely with the financial system that is deeply embedded in all corporate structures, and to use that system to target those corporate structures too.

If you want to check out some ideas about how you might do that to disrupt fossil fuel companies, please do take a look at my new book, The Heretic’s Guide to Global Finance: Hacking the Future of Money. It covers areas such as tar sands financing, carbon markets, shareholder activism and many others.

Brett Scott is a campaigner and writer who works in alternative finance and financial activism. His new book – The Heretic’s Guide to Global Finance: Hacking the Future of Money – is published by Pluto Press and is available now. He tweets as @Suitpossum.

The University of Chester has signed a deal with oil producer Shell. The Shell Technology Centre in Thornton will be acquired by the University in a deal it called “one of the biggest public/private sector collaborations seen in recent years” where a new engineering and technology campus will be established. It is estimated to boost the economy in the North West and the UK whilst establishing connections to potential future employers through the creation of 2,000 jobs and 500 additional student placements.

BUT has the university considered the wide-reaching effects of this agreement beyond our region or indeed our nation? As a Fairtrade University with a good reputation for environmental and ethical performance, we gained a 2:1 in last year’s Green League, this agreement seems somewhat controversial.

Shell has demonstrated an extreme lack of corporate social responsibility through an array of irresponsible projects, including its oil extraction in the Niger Delta in Nigeria, which is poisoning rivers and land, polluting the air and impacting the livelihoods of local communities by destroying resources that they depend on. Other ethically and environmentally degrading actions involve plans for drilling in the Arctic, fracking in South America and tar sands extraction in Canada that undermines Indigenous rights. Is this really the kind of legacy the University wants to leave?

About the new partnership, Professor Tim Wheeler, the University’s Vice-Chancellor, said: “The University of Chester has long been synonymous with ensuring that Cheshire West and Chester is ‘open for business,’ and our commitment at Thornton could bring up to 2,000 jobs to Ellesmere Port over the next five years, together with perpetuating Shell’s distinguished reputation.”

For me, it is clear that Shell are looking for more than just bringing jobs to Chester out of the goodness of their heart. Shell are trying to buy a good reputation for themselves by partnering up with distinguished universities to cover up all their human rights abuses.  It also looks like they want direct access to students to push their recruitment drives- “The site will be developed into a campus that integrates education and industry, allowing students direct access to potential future employers.” 

Shockingly, the government seems to be happy to endorse this dodgy deal too. David Willetts, Universities and Science Minister, commented: “Not only has the site got the potential to generate new jobs, it will also contribute to the UK’s growing technology sector, building links between the university and industry.” The Government appears to be comfortable that its cuts to research funding are pushing our best universities into partnerships with the world’s worst companies.

The fossil fuel industry is causing huge damage to the environment, which is resulting in mass scale human rights abuses. Withdrawing the University’s financial support for this industry is vital to combating climate change and preventing communities from suffering as a result.

UK students have decided to take on the fossil fuel industry by getting our universities to go Fossil Free, supported by People & Planet’s new Fossil Free campaign. It will launch officially this Autumn with a UK wide speaker tour by Bill McKibben, co-founder of 350.org who pioneered the Fossil Free student movement in the US.

Oxford Fossil-Free protest with current students and alumni

Will you join me in kicking fossil fuel companies out of our educational institutions?

• Come to Summer Gathering on 1-5 July to get trained up in running this campaign on your campus
• Join the Fossil-Free mailing list to find out more
• ‘Like’ Fossil-Free UK on Facebook for all the latest developments and news
• Sign the Fossil Free petition to Universities UK

The University of Chester, listen up! Kick Shell out, it’s time to go Fossil Free.

Today sees the celebration of a renewed and enforced partnership of an Oxford University research institute (Earth Science Department) with a private funding body (Royal Dutch Shell). This is just one of many comparable partnerships in the recent history of our University, which are undoubtedly beneficial for the short term pursuit of our University’s main goal – the conduct of high profile research.

So you might wonder why a growing coalition of Oxford students, academics, alumni and NGOs is opposing this partnership- see their letter in the Guardian today.

Current Oxford students, alumni and academics join together to call for a Fossil Free University

The answer lies in our understanding of the wider role and unique responsibility that Universities play in our society. As places of learning and research we are working to advance knowledge and welfare of society through our pursuit of science. In this framework scientists of Universities are not only seen as top specialists in their field, but their opinion and advice is valued and heard by many institutions, including governments. To ensure the integrity of universities and their scientists in this role of high moral responsibility, our Universities have traditionally been state funded.

Dwindling state funding caused by the global financial crisis is compromising the efficiency of Universities’ research and is driving them to source alternative funding, and much of this is coming from the fossil fuel industry. I can’t help but question what underlying agenda these multi-billion pound corporations have for sponsoring departments, research, studentships and more? If they were primarily concerned with ensuring the on-going excellence of the UK’s University research, why would they not anonymously donate funds to departments?

It seems to me that fossil fuel corporations such as Shell are interested in influencing the research agenda of some of our top UK Universities for their own gain and profit. Making these scrupulous ties with universities also seems to be a last-ditch effort by fossil fuel companies to polish their tarnished reputation. They are desperately trying to compensate for repeated human rights violations (in the Niger Delta and indigenous peoples in Canada for example) and for ruthlessly pursuing the most environmentally damaging methods of fossil fuel extraction. Are these corporations trying to silence Oxford’s own climate scientists, who are joining experts worldwide calling for us to leave the at least 80% of known fossil fuels untouched if we want to limit global warming to a manageable extent?

Oxford Student Union passed a Fossil Free motion just before the protest, pledging to write to the Vice Chancellor with their concerns about the Oxford-Shell partnership

Shell isn’t handing over this money to Oxford University out of the goodness of its heart. A look at the list of studentships offered as part of this partnership shows that whatever the scientific merits of this work, it will be of great assistance to Shell and will help the company to drill and frack for yet more fossil fuels at a time of climate emergency.

If a government representative, namely Ed Davey – our Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, is approving these questionable developments by endorsing the launch of the Shell-Oxford partnership, I feel that it is my responsibility as member of Oxford University to publicly oppose such hypocritical and dangerous ties. The Government appears to be comfortable that its cuts to research funding are pushing our best universities into partnerships with the world’s worst companies.

I hope that today’s protest will spur on a vivid UK wide discussion about our Universities’ links with the fossil-fuel industry, both in terms of research funding as well as investment of endowments, banking, sponsorships and recruitment drives. Let’s kick-start the UK fossil free movement and follow in the footsteps of American student activists who have successfully pushed for divestment from fossil fuels in 4 Universities as well as starting campaigns at over 300 educational institutions around the country. I call upon all members of UK Universities, departments and Colleges to reconsider their moral responsibility to serve the public good and to join the Fossil Free Universities movement sweeping across the nation.

Adidas had previously refused to offer the workers any of the money which they were owed. Instead offering ‘food vouchers’ a gesture which the workers rejected and called ‘an insult to all of us’. The resolve of the workers in fighting for what was owed to them was central to the success of the campaign.

The campaign for justice for the workers has been continuously escalating. Supported by People & Planet this campaign has involved two international days of action organised with the Claen Clothes Campaign, Labour Behind the Label, War on Want and United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) in the U.S with demonstrations at dozens of stores in both countries. In the U.S where many universities hold large licensing contracts with Adidas, 14 universities cut their contracts over the violation of workers’ rights, costing the brand millions of dollars.

At Newcastle University where Adidas have recently signed a sponsorship deal with the university, open day events have been used to highlight the University’s collaboration with Adidas, whilst the brand continued to refuse to pay the Indonesian workers.

In February Adidas workers from 8 countries united to form the ‘International Union League for Brand Responsibility’ a movement which united Adidas workers from around the world to struggle against worker rights violations. In addition they released a declaration which called for campaigning groups to back their campaign against labour violations.

It is clear that united workers, students and campaigning groups can wield significant power over the brands which seek to exploit cheap labour. Student campaigner Rachel Cavet said ‘this settlement demonstrates that when we act in solidarity with garment workers around the world we can win very real victories’. This news is further evidence that a determined and united campaign led by the workers can result in substantial results for those on the other end of our supply chains.

We congratulate the workers of PT Kizone for their victory; this has clearly demonstrated that when we are united we can win against even the biggest of brands.

By Matthew Franklin

Birmingham People & Planet Group

The reason they lost is that the worsening threat of climate change and energy shortages means that the future of aviation is to contract, not expand. This is obvious. But the aviation industry must not let this sort of logic get in its way. Directors of companies are tasked with maintaining share prices. This requires growth and the prospect of future growth. The moment this becomes undeniably impossible, shareholders will beat a path to the emergency exit with a nosedive in both the liquidity of the companies affected. So there is a life and death struggle between maintaining shareholder value and protecting the environment.

Far from siding with logic and protecting the environment as this government pretended to do when in opposition with protestations of virtue about climate change, it is now embracing the aviation industry’s continued pollution of the skies.

Shortly after coming into power, they instigated a “public consultation on sustainable aviation” with the hope of allowing aviation’s continued expansion. What sort of fools do they think they rule over when only the slightest bit of thought can tell anyone that aviation can never be sustainable? Despite this elementary logic, they commissioned civil servants and consultants at taxpayers expense to produce a discussion document echoing aviation’s palliatives that they could continue growing through a combination of new technology, biofuels, and carbon trading.

Every one of these ideas is rubbish. Development costs for new aviation technology is so huge it can only be offset with equally huge sales of planes thus massively increasing emissions. Biofuel requires wholesale destruction of rainforests and destruction of the planets most important carbon sinks. Carbon trading prices the poorest in society out of their rights to basics such as heat, food and essential transport.

Despite the large number of well-funded submissions to the government’s discussion document from aviation’s marketing executives and consultants vastly out numbering the few that came from concerned members of the public, it was cancelled.

It was cancelled because it was clear it could never whitewash big aviation’s greenwash to the extent of allowing the government to justify expanding aviation with not a single miraculous idea forthcoming to square the circle. Good riddance to that.

But then a new process arose, phoenix like from its ashes. This time called the “Independent Aviation Commission” and supported by the democratic deficit typical of all responses to climate change where Labour, Lib-Dems and the Conservatives all agree to abide by its findings. What has happened to parliamentary accountability? It is for elected representatives, irrespective of how distasteful the political process is, to make vitally important decisions such as this. When Plane Stupid mounted a roof top protest on the House of Commons against BAA in the fight to stop the third runway, Gordon Brown at least pretended that parliament had a say when he retorted, “Decisions will be made on the floor of the house, not its roof.” Of course, the reality is that all three main political parties are united in putting the interests of the aviation industry over protection of the environment. They have all demonstrated a track record in stooping to any level to do this, and now are unashamedly conspiring together in support of it

So what does this Independent aviation commission look like? Sir Howard Davies who is one of the highest paid failures in the country heads it. Before this, he headed deregulation of the banks and set in place the process that led to the financial crash. After this debacle, he found gainful employment with the London School of Economics until he had to resign after taking millions from Colonel Gadaffi in return for awarding his son a doctorate.

So Sir Howard is not too lonesome, he had surrounded himself with yes men and women from the aviation and construction industries. The commission’s climate change “expert” is Professor Dame Julia King, previously a Rolls Royce research director. Quite unlike every other climate change expert such as Jim Hansen of NASA who warn that business as usual will leave us like toast, she believes “climate change is a problem that we can solve” with new technology. Then there is Sir John Armitt, previously of Costain International, Network Rail, and the Olympics and who once held the position of the highest paid public fat cat. Desperate for big chunks of work to keep his friends in the civil engineering world afloat, he has called for “vision and guts” in pushing ahead with new aviation infrastructure projects.

Can this really be an independent commission? It cannot even pretend to be.

And what is the first thing this collective of failures do? They start the most extensive public consultation yet based on a series of discussion documents prepared using evidence from the aviation industry to see how they can continue ignoring overwhelming the evidence on impending climate catastrophe, just like the sustainable aviation consultation before it that it now replaces.

This is one of the most critical and difficult debates of our time. It will impact every single person in the country. It requires campaigners to work together across borders in their appeal for common sense in the same way that the aviation industry operates across borders in their appeal to delusional self-interest. Meanwhile government does all it can to stack the odds in big aviation’s favour. It changes planning regulation so the scope for objecting to airports on doorsteps is eliminated. It grants the aviation industry billions of pounds of funding to research efficiency improvements despite public spending cuts elsewhere. It allows misleading adverts extolling the industries false promises about climate change action. It allows high-risk deep sea drilling off the West Coast of Scotland to ensure plentiful supplies oil and it subverts climate change agreements to ensure no significant carbon caps are placed on aviation. Most of all it institutionalises climate change ignorance across the whole of society.

Read our submission (written in conjunction with Plane Stupid) to their discussion document on demand forecasting.

Located near Chichester in West Sussex, Lidsey is a site which has been filling its land in a long process since the 1980s. Much of it now has been covered over and re-planted with grass in anticipation of being returned to agricultural use. When I arrive, everything seems peaceful and quiet, but that’s because the point at which lorries are coming to dump whole tanks of waste is at the other end of this 50 hectare site.

Landfills are filled systematically in cells which have been lined to prevent any kind of substance leaking into the environment, and rather than HDPE plastic (made from petroleum) which lines most, Lidsey actually uses bentonite to line their cells. Bentonite is a type of clay and the earth Lidsey sits on just happens to be an abundant source of it. ‘We use the somewhat more natural substance of clay already in the ground to prevent any leakage,’ says site co-ordinator Hazel, ‘and the earth we dig out of one area we use to cover over the previous in a controlled cycle.’

After a quick chat with her and Ian, the site manager, we head out over a huge mound of mud in a very well splattered 4×4. When I open the door at the other end, the first thing to hit is the noise. Huge tractor-like machines and lorries roaring about, interspersed with the distant screeches of hundreds of seagulls. The birds almost blot out the sky as they hover over a gigantic roller, waiting for their chance to scavenge.

Next invasion of the senses is the smell: your average rotten egg pong. ‘We’ve been having problems recently with locals complaining of bad odours coming from the site,’ says Ian, ‘but it’s a situation which is hard to combat. There’s sulphide in rubbish, and when there’s a lack of oxygen underground it gets turned into hydrogen sulphide, which is what makes the eggy smell.’

It doesn’t seem too pungent to me, but as well as being a broad-spectrum poison, hydrogen sulphide can deaden the sense of smell. I can still smell that fresh flower scent when my flatmates bring home a bunch, but this highlights the general health risks of human-produced waste and moreover the extent to which they threaten all those who work on landfill sites.

On top of hydrogen sulphide, landfill gas includes methane. In fact, it makes up a large portion of gas produced by decaying waste, again due to an absence of oxygen. It’s not all bad though: once covered for a year, landfill sites collect the methane and utilise the gas in the production of electricity. In doing so, Lidsey itself produces enough energy to power 1,500 homes. So in some way, a small amount of our rubbish is recycled.

But the scale of it is astounding. I watch at least thirty lorries come through to distribute their waste in one hour, highlighting all the trash produced by humans. There is everything from plastic bags, garden chairs and sweet wrappers to planks of wood, whole shredded cars and nappies – all of it covered in dirt and juices.

And then there’s the question of what happens to rubbish other than being sent to landfill sites. Surprisingly, a large amount of consumers’ waste gets chopped up and shipped to Europe to be incinerated, which, again, produces electricity. Otherwise, a lot of our rubbish gets put on ships to places like China, to be used or disposed of as they see fit. ‘But what people don’t know,’ Ian says, ‘is that those ships will often reach China empty.’ What happens to all that waste you may wonder? A very good question.

And the final crunch of the matter – recycling. This has boomed in recent years, with all of us now being able to recycle glass, cardboard, paper, tins, cans and plastics. Lorries come and collect our recycling just the same as lorries for general waste. Then it gets sorted all ready to be recycled… and then what?

‘The thing is,’ murmurs Ian, ‘recyclables rely on the open market, and so the situation changes when the price goes up or down. Essentially, we have too much recycling, loads of it just sitting in warehouses. So when there’s an excess what are you going to do with it all? Send some of it to China and India, and if not take it somewhere you can dispose of it safely: landfill. We had two great loads of recyclables from Portsmouth and Southampton this morning.’

For us all, the single thing to take away from landfill is to think somehow of reducing our waste. Here are a few pointers: buy a cotton or strong plastic shopping bag which will last; go to your local greengrocer where the fruit and veg is less likely to be wrapped in plastic packaging; buy recycled paper or where paper can be substituted for something long-lasting, like cloths instead of kitchen towel, make the switch; and just generally re-use anything and everything you can. Easy right?

Here’s what Ben thought of the day:

“Stepping carefully over broken glass, stalking through dark corridors and erecting barricades in a mask borrowed from a stranger, a comrade, to a backing track of fire alarms and angry chanting. If this is the future of student protest, it is because it is the only avenue left for us to express our dissent.” –An anonymous student

The occupation at Sussex University was formed in response to the plans by the university administration to outsource non-teaching jobs to private companies. Last month, students and trade unionists from far and wide flocked to the university for a day of action against the increasing privatization of the education sector. I was at the day of action, and for the most part it was a good day. It felt good when our numbers and our anger drove the small group of armored police off campus, and when we poured in through the open doors to Sussex house. The space devoted to management was reclaimed within minutes, as the occupiers secured toilets and water before barricading the ground floor entrances. For a short time, it felt like we were actually winning, that hoods and masks might for once prevail against helmets and truncheons, and that the foot soldiers of a soulless and divisive ideology might break against a wall of defiant solidarity. Of course, it was a short lived elation. The realities of the situation rolled up in a fleet of police vans and the occupiers, some more reluctantly than others, took the decision to leave on their own terms.

It was Bramber House, the site of the original occupation, where the splintered groups of the demonstration reconvened, and it was Bramber House where the revolutionary zeal which had infused the demonstration became mired in the bureaucratic swamps of the general assembly and died. A general assembly is a meeting of people, where input from all people is of equal worth. In an age where representative democracy is defined less and less by either of its constituent terms, the general assembly has been seen by some activists as a perfect alternative, an ideal of grassroots democracy. The reality, of course, sometimes unfolds differently. I heard an estimate that over 600 people attended the demo. Say that slightly under half were at the general assembly (which packed a large room), that’s still over 200 people in a meeting with no defined objective, making proposals and counter proposals and, very fairly and democratically, not progressing anywhere.

An experienced activist once told me of a counseling service for activists he’d once been a part of; “It was meant for people who’d been beaten up by the police” he’d reflected, laughing, “but it was mostly just people who’d been to too many bloody awful meetings.” After my day at Sussex, I see the perverse logic behind this sentiment: it isn’t that voices of dissension aren’t silence by the private security of the corporate elite, but rather that where clashes with an obvious enemy harden our resolve, internal stagnation only serves to drain it. If the life of the student movement lies in the spontaneous rage which drove dozens of people to occupy Sussex House, then the death of it lies in the general assembly.

This being said, these kinds of problem have plagued counter culture movements since people first united in opposition; “divided we fall” is as true for the student movement as it was for the musketeers of 17^th century France, so with that in mind I’ll end this on a positive note. Divisiveness can spring from anywhere, be it the patriarchal oppression of an authoritarian state or the mind-numbing dullness of a bureaucratized assembly, and the only way to overcome it is solidarity.

Celery seedlings

Since its beginnings in the 1980s, Bellfield has prided itself on being 100% organic. And they mean just that – 100%, not your 92% means 100% sort of thing. In Jamesfield Farm, their jingle is ‘Chemical Free for almost 25 years’. Bellfield covers 24 acres, with a variety of fields and poly tunnels where they grow all sorts of veg from pak choi, radishes and cucumber to pumpkins, leeks and potatoes. And all of it is cared for by human hands. ‘We get checked every year by the Soil Association to make sure we’re rotating our crops,’ says farm co-ordinator Derek. ‘And of course to ensure we’re pesticide and herbicide free.’

Last year they planted 180,000 leeks in their fields, but leeks take a lot of nitrogen out of the soil, so they’ve now planted clover to replenish the soil and return nitrogen to it. Good ol’ crop rotation, pure and simple. Of course it’s better for biodiversity to rotate crops even if you’re not organic, but lots of big scale farms prefer the lazier option of herbicides and pesticides. The result of this is eventually monoculture soil, and the craziest part of it all is that wildlife – insects, fungi and flowers which attract pollinating insects – can do the job we spend excessive amounts of money doing artificially. And, of course, humans can ‘weed’ plants and keep them fertile without spraying chemicals on them too. Derek enthusiastically takes me over to a huge, slightly rusty machine to show off their bed weeder. ‘Four people lie in here face down and weed the beds by hand,’ he says, pointing into the semi-darkness of the equipment. ‘And we use a wee hoe to dig out weeds as it moves along the rows.’

Derek on a tool for weeding crops

The farm is efficient too – they can plant 180,000 seedlings in 6 days in good weather. Grinning away, Derek tells me he works every day of the week (and that includes Sunday) and often will work from 5am until 10pm. That’s a whopping 17 hour day, which trumps even financial hotshots in the city. In terms of sustainability then, Bellfield farm seems pretty efficient. Much of the work in the tunnels is done by hand – and if not with fairly old fashioned machinery – which saves on energy consumption, and they promote biodiversity through crop rotation and no use of herbicides. It’s true they have to heat their poly tunnels and use a tractor to plough the fields, but this is negated by the short distance over which the veg has to travel from farm to consumer.

Bellfield supplies only a box scheme to households, local markets and us, which means their food miles are limited to the Fife area. Years ago they grew little gem lettuce and tomatoes to sell to supermarkets but it ended up not having any benefit. In the summertime supermarkets wanted 200,000 lettuces and tomatoes a day, but by August often they would get mildew which means the lettuces didn’t ‘look’ good enough for consumers. The supermarkets would then suddenly stop buying their veg if the weather went bad because apparently less people would be buying salad as a result.

‘The tomatoes have to be the size of a 10p coin and just off-red in colour,’ Derek says. ‘And cucumbers and courgettes for supermarkets have to be dead straight and six inches long so they can be packed together. If you go in that field and pick, say, 1,000 courgettes, you’re lucky if you get 300 that are straight.’ So in supermarkets’ view, the other 7,000 are just waste. ‘Bonkers,’ Derek murmurs, shaking his head.

All in all, Bellfield farm provides fresh, yummy, locally grown and chemical-free vegetables, so can there really be any argument against buying them?

Newcastle University are currently engaged in discussions with Adidas regarding a massive sponsorship deal. In what Adidas officials describe as a “first of its kind” the deal is likely to include an on campus Adidas store, Adidas scholarships, and an Adidas run “career development modules”. Ominously this deal is being conducted almost entirely behind closed doors, a secret deal the details of which remain undisclosed. Employees have been asked to sign confidentiality agreements and student representatives are being told to “keep it quiet until the deal had been reached”.

On Wednesday the 20th we as members of People & Planet attended the university open day to help break this veil of secrecy. At the end of an open day lecture for applicants we spoke to the audience about the ongoing negotiations between Newcastle University and Adidas. We spoke of the numerous violations of workers’ rights by Adidas, and made clear that this was not going to be accepted by students. The spokesperson for the university was visibly agitated by our description of these negotiations and immediately called security to remove us. After the talk we were approached by many of the students and parents present who were concerned with the lack of transparency shown by the university as well as the association of Newcastle with this deeply unethical corporation.

Where next for the campaign?

On December 1st last year campaigners including People & Planet and USAS members opposing the massive and unjustifiable exploitation of Adidas workers co-ordinated an international day of action, holding demonstrations outside many stores and even forcing the closure of some. April 22nd marks a return of this internationalist approach, this time with a focus on Adidas’ association with Foot Locker. This is something such a brand conscious corporation cannot ignore.

On the Newcastle University campus the campaign is just beginning.  Due to the secret nature of this deal we began on the back foot, but we will not allow Adidas to promote their brand within our universities unopposed. We will have a presence at further university events to expose the attempts to bring exploitative corporations into our education.

To quote the declaration of the Adidas workers “We must change the rules of this industry… Now!”  As students our power lies in the university and we must do our utmost to fight the encroachment of corporate exploiters into our education system.