Phnom Penh, Cambodia’s capital, was once home to 26 lakes that provided fishing, fresh water and protection from flooding, and a livelihood for thousands of people. Since the 1990s, however, 16 of the lakes have been filled in for boreys (gated communities) and residential housing, as Cambodia’s prime minister, Hun Sen, has pursued a development boom. The remaining 10 have been at least partly filled.

Over the past year, Boeng Tamok, the Cambodian capital’s largest remaining freshwater lake, has been parcelled off to government agencies, developers and investors, ranging from a Cambodian pop star to the military to the land minister’s daughter.  The 3,200-hectare (8,000-acre) lake is disappearing: every day, dozens of trucks dump big piles of sand into the water.

Hundreds of families who lived on the shore have already been evicted, leaving about 250 families – roughly 1,200 people – facing eviction, according to Phnom Penh urban land rights organisation Sahmakum Teang Tnaut (STT).

Boeng Tamok was among the last holdouts until the government claimed the area as “state public land” in 2016, paving the way for parts of it to become “state private land” – and ultimately tagged for private development.

 But the reclassification process is opaque, and 2,152 hectares, or about two-thirds of the lake, have been privatised without input from the public. Environmentalists, land rights groups and researchers have pointed to the negative consequences of lake-filling, including loss of livelihoods, animal habitats and increased risk of flooding.

“How can they define if the land is no longer used for the public interest, classify it as private state land and then give it to other groups or developers?” says Soeung Saran, director of STT, an NGO, “The public also wishes to know why specific groups of people can get this much or this many hectares of land while other groups are not able to, even though they have been living there for generations,” he says.

“I have to fight for this house, this land, this shelter for my children,” says Prak Sophea, 43, looking out at the water from her back veranda. “It’s unjust … why do we have no rights to live here?” 

She is is the de facto leader of about 100 residents – mostly women – fighting to keep their homes for as long as possible. The group delivers petitions to city hall, stages protests in public parks, marches along the lake’s shrinking shoreline and even faces off against bulldozers nearing their stretch of roadway, documenting their activities on Facebook Live. In 2020, she led a 50-strong group in a march towards the prime minister’s house. She and other protesters have relegated men to the back of the group, believing that police are less likely to treat women violently.

 Kong Toeur was accused of “obstruction and incitement” for allegedly blocking a road while protesting in May. It hasn’t stopped her: in a separate incident in mid-October, she discovered that authorities were about to fill in the patch of the lake where she and 10 others fished for daily food. She refused to budge from her fishing boat, stopping the trucks from dumping sand for three days. But she had to go home to sleep. When she returned, the fishing plot was gone.

 “You live in air conditioning and have a car,” she says of the officials and developers taking over Boeng Tamok, waving both hands in disgust. “I don’t even have an old bicycle. Why can the rich live here and the poor can’t?”

Officials have repeatedly defended the decision to carve up the lake, with Hun Sen calling critics “jealous” and a land ministry spokesperson arguing at a recent meeting that the lake’s development outweighs its preservation.

‘Why do we have no rights?’: Phnom Penh lake community make a last stand against developers | Global development | The Guardian

 Africa contributes less than 4% of the world’s emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) from fossil fuels and industry. However, it suffers disproportionately from the effects of climate change. Cyclones, floods, high temperatures, and droughts are killing and displacing millions of Africa.  Climate change is not letting up. Floods in Nigeria and South Africa, droughts in Kenya and Somalia, and food crises in the Horn of Africa have led to massive deaths and huge damage to homes and infrastructure that cannot be recovered. Who will pay for the climate damage?

Finance is at the heart of the COP27 negotiations. Africa is anxious for a solution to the issue of loss and damage and is pushing for finance to address loss and damage as a result of global warming. The special needs and special circumstances of Africa are a priority for the African Group of Negotiators (AGN) at COP27. The argument is that developed countries largely responsible for climate change should pay for the loss of life and damage to property and infrastructure, not to mention economic and cultural losses endured by developing countries that do not have the means to deal with the impacts of climate change.

Selam Kidane Abebe, Legal Advisor to the AGN, explained, that African countries were investing up to 9% of the GDP on adaptation, money that should be invested in their equally pressing and urgent development sectors.

In 2009, developed countries committed to giving $100 billion annually until 2020 to help developing countries reduce emissions and cope with climate change. The money never came, and this target has been moved to 2023. 

Will it ever arrive?

“We hope so because it is the responsibility of developed countries to come forward with it,” Ambassador Wael Aboulmagd, Special Advisor to the COP27 President, told a media briefing. “In all reality $100 billion is not going to solve the problem; it is not even close to addressing a fraction of the climate needs… the numbers are in trillions. The overall financial landscape needs to be revisited,” Aboulmagd noted, convinced that developed countries must be nudged to find a workable solution in climate finance.

Climate change is hitting Africa hard, and extreme weather could cost the continent $50 billion annually by 2050, according to the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO)

 Rising fuel prices as a result of the Ukraine war have flipped the script. Some developed countries are increasing subsidies for fossil fuels, while others have fired up coal plants and natural gas lines to fill the energy gap. Even China has recently approved new coal mines. It has led to an argument that why not allow African countries to raise their emissions levels and develop their economies as developed countries did in industrializing? Should Africa – yearning to boost industrialization – abandon fossil fuel dependence and join the race for renewables?

“The speed of this energy transition should not be the same for every country around the world, many African countries are languishing in extreme poverty, and they make the case that if we are being told to keep that resource underground for the global good then the international community has to come up with a package to allow us otherwise to eliminate poverty and pursue our sustainable development goals,” said Aboulmagd. While there is a global case for emissions reduction targets and transition to renewables, developing countries cannot just be told to quit fossil fuels without financial support to go green. A tailored approach for every country, depending on its circumstances, is called for. “It is essentially telling people to stop having energy; by the way, Sub-Saharan Africa has less than 20 percent access to energy in their entire population. We need to make sure that when we make a demand of a country it is a reasonable one that they can reasonably be expected to do without almost devastating their development objectives and poverty reduction elimination objective,” he urged.

 Inger Andersen, United Nations Environment Programme, Executive Director, says, “Even if all commitments are implemented immediately, the reality is that climate change is going to be with us decades into the future. And the poorest keep paying the price for our inaction. It is, therefore, imperative that we put time, effort, resources, and planning into adaptation action.”

Africa: Will COP27 Deliver or be a Climate Forum of Empty Promises? | Inter Press Service (ipsnews.net)

Oil producers have cashed in on a period of geopolitical turmoil due to the conflict in Ukraine that has shaken up the global energy market and sent prices skyrocketing.

Aggregate net income for publicly listed oil and gas companies operating in the U.S. exceeded $200 billion for the second and third quarters of the year.

The $200 billion figure, which included super-majors, mid-sized integrated groups and smaller independent shale operators, marks the sector’s “most profitable six months on record and puts it on course for an unprecedented year,” the Financial Times wrote. “Operating cash flow will likely be record-breaking – or at least very close to it – by year’s end.” 

The bumper profits have been underpinned by soaring free cash flow, a key industry metric which is defined as cash flow from operations minus capital spending, the report explained. It also pointed out that benchmark Brent crude has averaged more than $105 a barrel over the second and third quarters – well above an average of around $70 per barrel over the past five years. Brent hit a high of almost $140 a barrel in early March.

Wall Street has reportedly demanded that companies prioritize shareholder returns over expensive drilling campaigns in pursuit of ever-greater output growth.

Capital spending by the world’s 50 biggest producers will be around $300 billion this year, roughly half of what it was in 2013, the last time prices were at a comparable level.

“Over the past five years, the industry has shifted from ‘drill, baby drill’ to focusing on what shareholders actually want, which is return of capital,” said Pavel Molchanov, an analyst at Raymond James. “Dividends and share buybacks have never been as generous as they are now.” 

Russia and Iran have rapidly expanded their energy ties amid the Western sanctions imposed on both nations.

Iran expects to sign a $40 billion agreement with Russian energy major Gazprom in December, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Mahdi Safari said. The National Iranian Oil Company and Gazprom agreed in July to cooperate in the development of two gas deposits and six oilfields in Iran. The document also includes swaps in natural gas and oil products, the implementation of LNG projects, and the construction of gas pipelines.  Russian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandr Novak announced that Moscow and Tehran may agree to a swap of 5 million tons of oil and 10 billion cubic meters of gas, to be completed by the end of the year. Novak noted that “the amount of Russian investment in Iran’s oil fields will increase.”

Energy Around: U.S. Oil Producers Enjoy Most Profitable Six Months Ever| Countercurrents

 138,000 residential and commercial properties in England and Wales are owned by offshore companies, with holdings in London alone worth a combined £55bn.  42,543 are in London, and concentrated in the most expensive areas. In the City of Westminster, which includes the central London areas of Mayfair, Knightsbridge and Belgravia, there are 9,066 offshore-owned residential properties, and a further 5,453 in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea,

Rex McKenzie, the lead researcher and a lecturer at Kingston University, found, “The billionaires and millionaires who use offshore services to buy houses are part of a transnational wealth elite that includes the world’s oligarchs, super-rich, kleptocrats, tax dodgers and criminals.”

More than 138,000 properties in England and Wales owned by offshore companies | UK news | The Guardian

 27% of  Europeans describe their financial position as “precarious”, defined as “one unexpected expenditure could change everything

 More than half see a serious risk it will become so over the coming months. They said they felt they faced a very or somewhat significant risk of falling into precariousness over the coming months – with one in five (17%) assessing the possibility as very high. Italians and Greeks were the most worried, with 70% and 68% respectively very or somewhat concerned. About 47% of respondents in Britain said they felt the risk of precariousness was significant, and 42% of those in France.

 80% of respondents said they had already been forced to make significant compromises, including cutting down on travel (62%) or heating (47%), borrowing from friends or family (42%), finding a second job (40%) and skipping a meal (29%).

More than half (54%) of more than 6,000 people across France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland and the UK told the pollster Ipsos their purchasing power had fallen over the past three years – mostly due to higher food, fuel, heating and rent bills.

In Greece, 68% of respondents said their spending power had fallen “a lot” or “somewhat” since 2019, followed by 63% in France, 57% in Italy, 54% in Germany, 48% in Britain and 38% in Poland.

Across the six countries, 64% said they were now “often” or “sometimes” unable to decide what to cut next as they had already cut what they could, 28% said they were overdrawn by mid-month, and 27% often or sometimes feared losing their home.

72% of parents across the six countries said they had cut back on their own leisure activities (76%), hair and beauty treatments (72%) and clothes budget (72%) in order to preserve their children’s quality of life. Almost half of parents across the six countries also said they regularly cut back on their own food to feed their children, while 66% said they had been forced to rein in their children’s activities, including outings and holidays.

 49% – including 50% in the UK – of parents said they were worried about not being able to meet their children’s needs in future, while 33% said they were already unable to ensure their children’s diet was as varied as they would like.

One in four Europeans say their financial position is ‘precarious’ | Cost of living crisis | The Guardian

 Despite living on the Italian peninsula since the 14th century, Romani people have historically been seen as outsiders in Italian society. That is why they, alongside Jews, were targeted by the fascist state from the 1920s to the 1940s. In 1926, just four years after coming to power, Benito Mussolini’s fascist government issued an order to expel all “foreign Gypsies” and “cleanse the country of all Gypsy caravans”. Those who remained were regularly harassed and arrested. In 1940, the internment of Roma and Sinti in Italian concentration camps began where many were either murdered, deported to Nazi death camps, or died of hunger or poor conditions.

Romani people continue to be viewed with suspicion and hatred. When Roma from the Balkans began arriving in Italy in the 1960s, the local authorities started putting them in so-called “nomad camps” based on the racist assumption that Romani people were vagrants. But the Yugoslav Roma were coming from a sedentary lifestyle, never having been nomadic in their lives. These policies persisted. Negative perceptions that Roma are criminals and illegal immigrants grew.

 In the 2000s, this allowed populist politicians like Berlusconi to politicise the issue and use it for electoral gain. Berlusconi subjected the Roma to police intimidation, illegal detentions and deportations. He justified the fingerprinting of Romani children, ethnic censuses of Romani people, and deployment of troops to crack down on so-called “Gypsy criminality”.  Segregated “nomad camps” became the de facto policy of choice for provincial authorities to accommodate Roma who could not be deported under a 2007 law, allowing expulsions of people deemed to “threaten” public safety. In later years, after the camps were neglected and left without access to basic services, the authorities started forcefully evicting Romani families from them. The Italian government started demolishing homes and turning families out onto the street without providing them with alternative accommodation. Berlusconi’s policies became a template for state violence against the Roma. Police raids and intimidation, the systematic use of punitive forced evictions and surveillance tactics against the Roma have continued under successive governments. Berlusconi’s anti-Roma campaign also paved the way for the far-right in mainstream Italian politics.

Salvini became deputy prime minister and interior minister and within a month of taking office, he called for a census of the Roma to facilitate their deportation, noting that “unfortunately” those holding Italian citizenship could not be deported. He also threatened to remove Romani children from their families if they were not sent to school. Salvini incited anti-Roma actions throughout Italy. Far-right groups such as Forza Nuova and Casa Pound organised anti-Roma marches and engaged in violent hate crimes against Romani communities.

Italy’s Roma fear what comes next with the election of Meloni who has a history of racist anti-Roma rhetoric.

Under Meloni, the plight of Italy’s Roma will only get worse | Opinions | Al Jazeera

The super-rich emits greenhouse gases at a level equivalent to the whole of France from their investments in carbon-intensive businesses.

Examining the carbon impact of the investments of 125 billionaires, the  report by Oxfam found they had a collective $2.4tn stake in 183 companies. 

On average each billionaire’s investment emissions produced 3m tonnes of CO2 a year; a million times more than the average emissions of 2.76 tonnes of CO2 for those living in the bottom 90% of earners. 

In total, the 125 members of the super-rich emitted 393m tonnes of CO2 a year – equivalent to the emissions of France, which has a population of 67 million.

The investments were held in the consumer industry, energy and materials, with an average of 14% of their investments in polluting industries, such as fossil fuels and cement. There was only one renewable energy company in the sample. Studies show that 50-70% of emissions from the super rich come from their investments.

 The report said that almost four million people would have to go vegan to offset the emissions of each of the billionaires.

Danny Sriskandarajah, Oxfam GB’s chief executive, said: “We need Cop27 to expose and change the role that big corporates and their rich investors are playing in profiting from the pollution that is driving the global climate crisis. It is people in low income countries who’ve done the least to cause it who are suffering the most – as we are seeing with the devastating drought in east Africa and catastrophic floods in Pakistan.” He explained,“The role of the super-rich in super-charging climate change is rarely discussed. This has to change. These billionaire investors at the top of the corporate pyramid have huge responsibility for driving climate breakdown. They have escaped accountability for too long.”

Super-rich’s carbon investment emissions ‘equivalent to whole of France’ | Greenhouse gas emissions | The Guardian

 Mohamed Nasheed, the former president of the Maldives, said: “Basic justice demands that those most responsible for causing the climate crisis should financially support those who are suffering most on the frontline of climate change.”

 The rich countries accept vulnerable countries face a “life or death situation”. Wealthy nations were supposed to provide US$100bn a year by 2020, a target has been missed. 

The US share of this, based on its past emissions, would be $40bn yet it provided only $7.6bn in 2020, the latest year for which data is available. Australia and Canada gave only about a third of the funding indicated by the analysis, while the UK fell $1.4bn short. The funding from Japan and France was largely in loans which often already carry high levels of debt.

Nasheed explained, “Currently we face a debt crisis because so many of the assets that we took loans to pay for are being destroyed by climate change. Ease the debt burden and we can all play our part.” Countries such as his have already collectively suffered $500bn in losses because of climate impact.

Nafkote Dabi, the climate change policy lead at Oxfam International, said: “This new analysis shows rich countries continue to fail to deliver their long-standing pledge of $100bn a year. The failure is all the more stark when you consider that the $100bn is minuscule compared to what is required to address the climate crisis…”

 The Cop26 president, Alok Sharma said trillions of dollars would be needed overall.

Revealed: US and UK fall billions short of ‘fair share’ of climate funding | Climate finance | The Guardian

 FTSE 100 chief executives’ pay soared by an average of 23% this year at a time when workers are seeing real terms pay cuts (and now seeing falling house prices too).

The jump in average pay, to close to £4m, was driven by record bonus payouts – as CEO’s achieved the lower pessimistic targets set during the pandemic.

The Financial Times has the story, and explains:

Many companies bounced back strongly as Covid-19 lockdowns ended, leading to an average CEO bonus of 86 per cent of the maximum available, up from 58 per cent last year and against a long-term average of 70 to 75 per cent, according to PwC.

The higher bonuses took overall average pay up from pre-pandemic levels of £3.6mn in 2018-19 and £3.7mn for 2017-18.

Clearsprings Ready Homes manages asylum seeker accommodation.

Profits for the year ending 31 January 2022 was £28 million, an increase of £24 million on the previous year.

The three directors share of dividends rose from £7m to £27,987,262.

Its annual report states ‘Demand for accommodation for asylum seekers has remained high throughout the year. This has been driven by an ever-increasing influx of asylum applicants to the UK due to high levels of political and economic turmoil in many countries.’

As Arthur Daly would say, ‘nice little earner’.

Asylum seekers in hotels receive £8.24 a week.

Folkestone and Hythe Councillor, Connor McConville, said, ‘Clearsprings are a company purely focused on maximising profit. They have no regard for providing humanitarian service.’

bit.ly/3DBQmwj