This article is brought to you by The Ferret.
THE launch of the Scottish Government’s public consultation on how to combat the global climate emergency has been condemned as “fiddling while the world burns”.
The inaugural meeting of ministers’ much-vaunted “big climate conversation” in Glasgow on July 16 faced a tirade of public criticism from participants frustrated by its “closed questions and narrow focus”.
When organisers, Keep Scotland Beautiful (KSB), asked at the meeting whether the questions were too narrowly framed, almost all of the 65 people present put up their hands to agree. In response, KSB said it would review the format.
The big climate conversation was announced by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon on June 19 to discuss action “to tackle the global climate emergency”.
READ MORE: Public sector accused of paying 'lip service' to climate emergency
After the event in Glasgow there are due to be meetings in Stirling, Aberdeen, Skye, Fort William and Orkney in July and August.
Highlighting a string of complaints about the Glasgow meeting on social media, Green MSP Ross Greer argued that it was “structured to prevent anything useful coming out of it”. It was “fiddling while the world burns,” he said.
Friends of the Earth Scotland’s climate campaigner, Caroline Rance, described the meeting as “very frustrating”. She said: “Governments don’t seem to realise the extent to which public concern and understanding about the climate crisis has grown in the last year.”
Frustrated: Friends of the Earth Scotland's Caroline Rance
The children’s book illustrator, Alison Murray, was shocked at how “lightweight” the conversation was. “Going away really concerned about the lack of information given and really closed leading questions asked,” she tweeted.
Shocked at how lightweight the #bigclimateconversation was -going away really concerned about the lack of information given and really closed leading questions asked by Keep Scotland Beautiful. Hopefully they will take on board the frustration Glasgow expressed @KSBScotland
— Alison Murray (@alisonmurray360) July 16, 2019
Another participant, Heather Urquhart, was disappointed that corporate responsibility, infrastructural change and reducing inequalities were not on the agenda. Only technology and behavioural change were put up for discussion, she said.
At the outset of the meeting people were asked to choose one word to describe their feelings about climate change. The words most chosen loomed large on an overhead projector: overwhelmed, worried, frustrated, scared, angry.
“Broad engagement on the climate emergency is essential, but we need to see big, systemic changes presented as part of the solution,” said Scott Leatham, policy specialist at Scottish Wildlife Trust.
“It was clear that people were engaged but they wanted less focus on individual action and more emphasis on the big picture. We need a process that can respond to the level of climate anxiety and frustration that participants said they felt.”
READ MORE: Climate change: Nicola Sturgeon calls for 'national endeavour'
The Scottish Government argued that responding to the climate emergency will require significant changes across all sectors of society. “The big climate conversation aims to build a collaborative approach to that,” said a spokesperson.
“Through a series of workshops, conferences, meetings, consultation and digital engagement, we want everyone to have their say on how we, as a nation, deliver the transformative changes required.”
The Government pointed out that the event in Glasgow was attended by a diverse mix of ages and backgrounds. “The event was reassuringly lively, demonstrating the importance of this issue to the Scottish public,” added the spokesperson.
“In response to some of the feedback, the format will be revised to include more chance for open discussion and encourage attendees to put forward more of their own suggestions while maintaining a means to capture and compare input across all conversations.”
The Ferret is an editorially independent, not-for-profit co-operative run
by its journalists and subscribers. You can find it at https://theferret.scot/ and can subscribe for £3 a month here: https://theferret.scot/subscribe/
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel