Saturday, February 03, 2024

California introduces first-in-nation slavery reparations package
Lara Korte
Wed, January 31, 2024 



SACRAMENTO, California — California state lawmakers introduced a slate of reparations bills on Wednesday, including a proposal to restore property taken by “race-based” cases of eminent domain and a potentially unconstitutional measure to provide state funding for “specific groups.”

The package marks a first-in-the-nation effort to give restitution to Black Americans who have been harmed by centuries of racist policies and practices. California’s legislative push is the culmination of years of research and debate, including 111-pages of recommendations issued last year by a task force.

Other states like Colorado, New York, and Massachusetts have commissioned reparations studies or task forces, but California is the first to attempt to turn those ideas into law.


The 14 measures introduced by the Legislative Black Caucus touch on education, civil rights and criminal justice, including reviving a years-old effort to restrict solitary confinement that failed to make it out of the statehouse as recently as last year.

Not included is any type of financial compensation to descendants of Black slaves, a polarizing proposal that has received a cool response from many state Democrats, including Gov. Gavin Newsom.

“While many only associate direct cash payments with reparations, the true meaning of the word, to repair, involves much more,” Assemblymember Lori Wilson, chair of the caucus, said in a statement. “We need a comprehensive approach to dismantling the legacy of slavery and systemic racism.”

The package does have a provision that would give some monetary relief. The proposed bill, authored by State Sen. Steven Bradford, a Democrat from the Los Angeles area, deals with “property takings.” It would, “Restore property taken during raced-based uses of eminent domain to its original owners or provide another effective remedy where appropriate, such as restitution or compensation.”

Black lawmakers are already anticipating an uphill battle. They anticipate spending many hours to educate fellow legislators and convince them to pass the bills.

Some of the measures could also run into legal trouble.

Democratic Assemblymember Corey Jackson, who represents a district north of San Diego, is proposing asking voters to change California’s Constitution to allow the state to fund programs aimed at “increasing the life expectancy of, improving educational outcomes for, or lifting out of poverty specific groups based on race, color, ethnicity, national origin, or marginalized genders, sexes, or sexual orientations.”

That plan could face a similar constitutional challenge like the one that ultimately dismantled affirmative action.

Other proposals include protections for “natural and protective” hairstyles in all competitive sports, and a formal apology by the governor and Legislature for the state’s role in human rights violations and crimes against humanity on African slaves and their descendants.

The caucus will flesh out the package in the coming weeks.


The California Legislative Black Caucus introduced more than a dozen reparation-related bills 

Taiyler S. Mitchell
HUFF POST
Thu, February 1, 2024 

The California Legislative Black Caucus introduced more than a dozen reparation-related bills Wednesday, the day before the start of Black History Month.

The historic package of legislation follows the June 2023 release of a 500-page Reparations Task Force Report, which listed myriad recommendations to remedy generations of systemic harm against Black Californians, beginning during slavery.

None of the 14 bills includes cash payouts to Black residents across the board in the face of a projected state budget deficit of nearly $40 billion, the Los Angeles Times reported.

A 2023 poll by the Institute of Governmental Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, co-sponsored by the L.A. Times, found that the majority of California residents do not support reparations in the form of cash.

“We started realizing with the budget environment we were going to have to do more systemic policy change to address systemic racism versus big budget asks because there just wasn’t the budget for it,” state Assemblywoman Lori D. Wilson (D) said, according to the L.A. Times. “Our priorities centered around policy changes or creating opportunities.”

The bills, known collectively as the 2024 CLBC Reparation Priority Bill Package, focus on improvements in education, health, business, prisons and civil rights. According to The Associated Press, several of the bills call for California’s Constitution to be changed, which will be a tough sell to some lawmakers.

The package also has its critics, who say the bills don’t go far enough.

“Not one person who is a descendant who is unhoused will be off the street from that list of proposals. Not one single mom who is struggling who is a descendant will be helped,” Chris Lodgson, an organizer with the Coalition for a Just and Equitable California, said, according to The Associated Press. “Not one dime of the debt that’s owed is being repaid.”

According to a news release from the California Legislative Black Caucus, this set of bills starts off a “multi-year effort to implement the legislative recommendations in the report.”

“We will endeavor to right the wrongs committed against black communities through laws and policies designed to restrict and alienate African Americans. These atrocities are found in education, access to homeownership, and to capital for small business startups, all of which contributed to the denial of generational wealth over hundreds of years,” Assemblyman Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer Sr. said in Wednesday’s news release.

Related...

We Should All Be Paying Attention To The San Francisco Reparations Proposal


New York Considers Reparations For Descendants Of Enslaved People


California Details Racist Past In Slave Reparations Report


Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Seeking Reparations For The 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre


California set to become first state to introduce series of reparations bills

Sarah Fortinsky
Wed, January 31, 2024 




The California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC) announced 14 reparations bills Wednesday that it plans to introduce as the first step to implement policy proposals outlined in a report released last summer by the Reparations Task Force.

In a press release, the caucus described the “2024 Reparations Priority Bill Package” as a “multi-year effort to implement the legislative recommendations in the report.”

In introducing the 14 measures, California will become the first state to implement concrete legislative proposals to enact reparations, a movement that has been growing in recent years.

“While many only associate direct cash payments with reparations the true meaning of the word, to repair, involves much more! As laid out in the report, we need a comprehensive approach to dismantling the legacy of slavery and systemic racism,” CLBC Chair Lori Wilson said in the press release.

“This year’s legislative package tackles a wide range of issues; from criminal justice reforms to property rights to education, civil rights and food justice. The Caucus is looking to make strides in the second half of this legislative session as we build towards righting the wrongs of California’s past in future sessions,” Wilson added.

Among the proposals is an amendment to the California Constitution to “allow the State to fund programs for the purpose of increasing the life expectancy of, improving educational outcomes for, or lifting out of poverty specific groups.”

Another amendment would “prohibit involuntary servitude for incarcerated persons.”

One measure addresses “property takings,” and one would allow for the restoration of “property taken during race-based uses of eminent domain to its original owners or provide another effective remedy where appropriate, such as restitution or compensation.”

The first step in laying out the package will be “a resolution that recognizes that harm and a subsequent bill that requests a formal apology by the Governor and the Legislature for the role that the State played in the human rights violation and crimes against humanity on African Slaves and their descendants.”

The 14 measures are categorized under primary topics: Education, Civil Rights, Criminal Justice Reform, Health, and Business.

Education proposals include creating grants to increase enrollment in STEM-related career and technical education programs at high school and college levels. One measure also proposes “career education financial aid for redlined communities.”

In addition to addressing property, the civil rights proposals would include, for example, extending the CROWN Act to prohibit discrimination based on certain hairstyles, explicitly in competitive sports.

Criminal justice reform proposals would eliminate the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) practice of banning books without proper oversight, restrict solitary confinement within CDCR detention facilities, and establish grants to fund community-driven solutions to decrease violence at the family, school and neighborhood levels.

Health measures would require advance notice to community stakeholders before grocery stores shut down in underserved or at-risk communities, and another would “make medically supportive food and nutrition interventions, when deemed medically necessary.”

The sole business proposal would eliminate barriers to those obtaining occupational licenses for people with criminal records.

The California secretary of state praised the announcement, writing: “I am optimistic and encouraged by the work, and look forward to amazing and ground breaking outcomes. The nation is waiting for us to lead. And as California always does, we will lead in addressing a delayed justice called Reparations.”

Assembly member and task force member Reggie Jones-Sawyer said in a statement: “We will endeavor to right the wrongs committed against black communities through laws and policies designed to restrict and alienate African Americans.”



News from the California Capitol: Reparations bill introduced

It’s official: California lawmakers will consider reparations this spring.

Andrew Sheeler
Thu, February 1, 2024 at 5:55 AM MST·3 min read




REPARATIONS PACKAGE COMES TO SACRAMENTO

The California Legislative Black Caucus on Wednesday unveiled a legislative package intended to implement reparations for Black Californians who were harmed by racist laws and policies in the state.

The package includes a resolution to formally recognize and accept responsibility “for all the harms and atrocities committed by representatives of the state who promoted,facilitated, enforced and permitted the institution of chattel slavery.”

It also includes bills to expand education opportunities and financial aid, restore property taken in race-based eminent domain cases, issue a formal apology for human rights violations and crimes against humanity on African slaves, bar the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation from banning books without oversight or review, restrict the use of solitary confinement and eliminate barriers to licensure by people with criminal records.

Also included in the package are proposed constitutional amendments to fund programs aimed at increasing the life expectancy and educational outcomes of Black Californians and other groups and ban prison inmate forced labor.

It’s an ambitious package, and one that is likely to run into some pushback from California Gov. Gavin Newsom for either policy, budget or political reasons. Newsom has previously has vetoed attempts to curb the use of solitary confinement.

But it follows the recommendations of the state’s reparations task force, and caucus Chair Lori Wilson, D-Suisun City, said in a statement that “while many only associate direct cash payments with reparations, the true meaning of the word, to repair, involves much more.”

“As laid out in the report, we need a comprehensive approach to dismantling the legacy of slavery and systemic racism,” Wilson said.

California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, who as an assemblywoman in 2020 authored the legislation that created the reparations task force, said she was pleased to see the caucus “pick up the baton.”

“The nation is waiting for us to lead,” Weber said in a statement. “And as California always does, we will lead in addressing a delayed justice called reparations.”

BLUE ENVELOPE BILL SEEKS TO REDUCE DANGER FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

People with special needs and developmental disabilities are at heightened risk during interactions with police officers. One Republican lawmaker, Assemblywoman Kate Sanchez of Rancho Santa Margarita, has introduced a bill, AB 2002, to reduce that risk.

The bill would create a state program where participants could inform police of their special needs by presenting a blue envelope containing their license and registration and discussing specific accommodations they require during an interaction.

“These blue envelopes have successfully been used in multiple counties and other states to improve accessibility and communication between law enforcement and individuals with disabilities,” Sanchez said in a statement.

According to 2022 data from the Racial and Identity Profiling Advisory Board, police were more than five times more likely to use force against people with mental health disabilities and more than three times more likely to do so with people who have other disabilities.

The bill is sponsored by Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and San Diego County Sheriff Kelly Martinez, whose own departments have already adopted a similar program.



Iowa bill would let lawmakers halt eminent domain use by carbon capture pipelines

Stephen Gruber-Miller, Des Moines Register
Wed, January 31, 2024 

Iowa House lawmakers are deliberating on a bill that would give the Legislature the power to intervene to halt eminent domain proceedings in the state — a response to ongoing disputes around the construction of carbon capture pipelines.

A three-member House subcommittee voted to advance House Study Bill 608 on Wednesday.

At any time during the eminent domain process, the bill would allow 21 members of the Iowa House or 11 Iowa senators to file a petition to halt the process, stopping all associated hearings, trials or other proceedings.

It would take a vote of at least 60% of the House and 60% of the Senate to resume the eminent domain proceeding. The eminent domain process could also continue if 60% of each chamber sign a letter attesting that they believe the use of eminent domain is constitutional in that case.

"I think it’s important that elected people, not appointed people, make this decision," said Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City. "Because if we get it wrong we answer to the voters and they can throw us out. Right now the decision making is being done by unelected people."

The bill would also allow a company seeking eminent domain or a landowner who would be subjected to eminent domain to ask a court to review whether eminent domain is proper.

Several landowners who would be affected by the pipeline proposed by Summit Carbon Solutions spoke Wednesday morning at the House subcommittee meeting, complaining about the process followed by the Iowa Utilities Board in holding a hearing last fall on the company's request for eminent domain.

Landowners hold signs during a press conference by opponents of the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline on Tuesday, August 22, 2023 in Fort Dodge.

"We need oversight," said Jess Mazour with the Iowa Sierra Club. "We need somebody to be able to step in and pause the proceeding. And that’s what this bill does."

Summit is proposing a $5.5 billion pipeline that would capture carbon dioxide emissions from ethanol plants in five states, liquefy it under pressure and transport it by a pipeline to North Dakota to be sequestered underground.

Iowa regulators are considering Summit’s request for a permit to build the hazardous liquid pipeline after holding a hearing in Fort Dodge for eight weeks. Along with a permit, Summit seeks eminent domain powers, which would force unwilling landowners to sell them access to their property for the pipeline.

More: With Navigator out, POET proposes to connect 12 Iowa ethanol plants to Summit pipeline

Summit has pushed back its timeline for the pipeline, citing regulatory difficulties in several states, saying it doesn't expect it to become operational until 2026, two years later than initially projected.

Thomson said he believes the pipelines' proponents have manipulated the current process of seeking eminent domain through the Iowa Utilities Board in their favor.

"This is not about eliminating eminent domain," Thomson said. "This is about putting some due process safeguards on it and making sure that the due process that is in place is responsive to the people."

Sabrina Zenor, a spokesperson for Summit, said three-quarters of the landowners along the pipeline's route have reached agreements with the company.

"Summit Carbon Solutions will ensure the long-term viability of the ethanol industry, and boost land values and commodity prices," Zenor said in a statement.

The issue of carbon capture pipelines have split Republicans, who control the Iowa House and Senate. Ethanol producers and the pipelines' supporters have said capturing and sequestering carbon emissions is a way for the industry to remain viable amid efforts to limit global warming. Opponents have criticized the use of eminent domain for the projects and raised concerns about the pipelines' safety.

House lawmakers passed a bill last year that would have required companies seeking to build carbon capture pipelines to reach voluntary agreements to buy 90% of the land on their proposed route before they could ask the state for the ability to use eminent domain. The Senate did not give the bill a hearing.

Rep. Steve Holt holds a copy of the U.S. Constitution as he speaks about the improper use of eminent domain and carbon capture pipelines Wednesday, Jan. 10, 2024, at the Iowa State Capitol.

Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, who led the passage of that bill in the House, said he was "extremely disappointed" the bill did not move forward in the Senate.

"I have no objection to this pipeline," Holt said. "I have objection to the use of eminent domain for this pipeline. I have objection to these companies using the heavy hand of government to try to seize the private property of landowners in my district for what is clearly a private economic development project that does not meet the constitutional bar requirement for public use."

Holt, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, said he doesn't know how this year's bill will fare in the Iowa Senate.

"I have no idea if anything’s changed over there," he said. "I can only control what I can control so we’re going to do our best to do the right thing over here and let the chips fall where they may."

Another company, Navigator CO2 Ventures, announced in October that it was dropping its own plans to build a carbon pipeline.

Stephen Gruber-Miller covers the Iowa Statehouse and politics for the Register. He can be reached by email at sgrubermil@registermedia.com or by phone at 515-284-8169. Follow him on Twitter at @sgrubermiller.

This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Iowa House bill would let lawmakers object to eminent domain use
Greta Thunberg outside court: We must remember who real enemy is

BBC
Fri, February 2, 2024 



Climate campaigner Greta Thunberg has defended climate activists facing prosecution in court, saying "we must remember who the real enemy is".

The 21-year-old was arrested during a demonstration near the InterContinental Hotel in Mayfair on 17 October.

Oil executives had been meeting inside for the Energy Intelligence Forum.

Ms Thunberg appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court after previously denying breaching the Public Order Act 1986.

She is accused of breaching section 14 of the act by blocking the entrance to the hotel.

Ms Thunberg appeared at court along with two Fossil Free London protesters and two Greenpeace activists, who also pleaded not guilty to the same offence.
'Who real enemy is'

Outside court, Thunberg made a statement alongside some of her co-defendants in which she said: "Even though we are the ones standing here, climate, environmental and human rights activists all over the world are being prosecuted, sometimes convicted, and given... penalties for acting in line with science.

"We must remember who the real enemy is, what are we defending, who our laws are meant to protect."

She added: "History's judgement against those who deliberately destroy and sacrifice... resources at the expense of humanity, at the expense of all those who are suffering the consequences of the environmental and climate crisis... and at the expense of future generations, your own children and grandchildren will not be gentle."

Earlier, the court had heard that Greta Thunberg was given a "final warning" by police before she was arrested.

The court was told by Supt Andrew Cox, the most senior Metropolitan Police officer on the ground that day, that the protesters had refused to move despite repeated requests by police.

Demonstrators started to gather near the hotel at about 07:30 BST and police engaged with them about improving access for members of the public, which had been made "impossible", magistrates were told.

The court heard that as the protest continued the "majority" of people inside the hotel could not leave and people could not get inside.

Supt Cox told the court he had no choice but to impose a section 14 condition at about 12:30 BST, which directed that the protest could continue on the pavement to the south of the hotel.

Officers engaged with individual protesters and informed them of the section 14 condition, magistrates were told, including Ms Thunberg, who was standing outside the hotel entrance.


'She said she was staying'

Prosecutor Luke Staton said she was warned by one officer that her failure to comply would result in her arrest and, while that officer was engaged elsewhere, another officer spoke with Ms Thunberg and "gave her a final warning".

"She said that she was staying where she was, and so she was arrested," Mr Staton said.

The Swede continually made notes in a small notebook as proceedings went on.

Arriving at court earlier Ms Thunberg, the founder of the school strike for climate movement, walked past environmental protesters who were demonstrating "in solidarity" with the defendants.

They held up large yellow banners that read, "climate protest is not a crime" and cardboard signs saying, "who are the real criminals?", as well as placards.

Amnesty International UK's chief executive, Sacha Deshmukh, said Thunberg should be "applauded for her peaceful climate protests."

"The charges against Thunberg and all the activists highlight everything that's wrong with the policing of protests in the UK today," he said.

"Police are increasingly using their expanded powers to silence legitimate protests."


Greta Thunberg cleared of public order charge during London oil conference protest

Euronews Green
Thu, February 1, 2024 

Greta Thunberg cleared of public order charge during London oil conference protest

Greta Thunberg has been cleared of a public order offence at a protest outside an oil and gas conference last year after a judge said she had no case to answer.

Judge John Law dismissed the public order charge against her and four others, ruling that the condition placed on the protest was "unlawful" because police could have imposed lesser restrictions and because the conditions were not clear.

The action in October was part of Oily Money Out - a series of disruptions against the carbon emissions, political influence and lobbying of the fossil fuel companies and banks attending the Energy Intelligence Forum by the group Fossil Free London.

The annual meeting of energy companies hosted executives of the biggest fossil fuel firms as well as politicians.


Environmental activists including Greta Thunberg, center left, march with other demonstrators during the Oily Money Out protest at Canary Wharf, in London.
 
- AP Photo/Kin Cheung, File

The Swedish climate activist was detained while demonstrating with hundreds of other protesters outside the Energy Intelligence Forum, at the InterContinental London Park Lane Hotel in Mayfair. They attempted to block the entrance of the hotel before they were escorted away by police.

Five activists including Thunberg were accused of failing to comply with a condition imposed under section 14 of the Public Order Act after not moving to a designated area when told to by police.

The two activists from Greenpeace, two from Fossil Free London and Thunberg all pleaded not guilty at an initial hearing in November last year. Today all five were cleared of a public order offence at a court in London.

"The prosecution evidence is insufficient for any reasonable court to properly convict and I exercise my discretion to acquit all five defendants," Judge Law said.

Farnborough: Why did Greta Thunberg join hundreds of activists protesting an English airport?

Direct confrontation and larger gatherings: How German climate activism is set to evolve

"Even though we are the ones standing here ... climate, environmental and human rights activists all over the world are being prosecuted, sometimes convicted, and given legal penalties for acting in line with science," Thunberg told reporters outside the court before the first day of the trial on Thursday.

"We must remember who the real enemy is. What are we defending? Who are our laws meant to protect?”
UK 'crackdown' on climate protests

The arrests came amid a UK government crackdown on “disruptive” protests which saw the UN Special Rapporteur on environmental defenders criticise the country's “regressive new laws”.

Then-Home Secretary Suella Braverman made controversial changes to public order and policing legislation that expanded police powers to deal with the kind of protests favoured by climate activists.

Climate change kills millions: An expert explains why most deaths aren't attributed to the crisis


‘Be an actionist’: An environmental trailblazer’s inspiring message to climate activists from Davos

Greta Thunberg has been arrested several times over the last year during climate protests across Europe.

In October she was fined by a Swedish court for disobeying police at a demonstration at an oil terminal in Malmo. It was the second time she had been fined in Sweden for a similar offence.

The Swedish climate activist admitted to the facts but denied guilt adding that the fight against the fossil fuel industry was a form of self-defence due to the existential and global threat of the climate crisis.

After the verdict, she said she would continue to protest even if it “leads to more sentences”.


Judge dismisses charge against Greta Thunberg over climate protest

Ehren Wynder
Fri, February 2, 2024 

Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg was cleared of a public order offense Friday after the judge declared the condition police placed on her was "so unclear that it is unlawful." The campaigner was arrested in October 2023 while protesting outside the Energy Intelligence Forum. 
File Photo by Andy Rain/EPA-EFE


Feb. 2 (UPI) -- A British judge on Friday threw out a public order charge against environmental activist Greta Thunberg citing "no evidence" she engaged in an unlawful protest in October.

District Judge John Law dismissed the case Friday, saying the condition police imposed on protesters was "so unclear that it is unlawful," and "anyone failing to comply were actually committing no offense."

Thunberg, 21, and fellow activists Christofer Kebbon, Joshua James Unwin, Jeff Rice and Peter Barker were arrested in October for allegedly violating section 14 of Britain's Public Order Act for refusing to leave the area when they were told to.


The protest took place outside of the InterContinental hotel in London, the venue for the Energy Intelligence Forum attended by fossil fuel executives and government officials.

Arresting officers argued the protesters engaged in "a deliberate attempt to stop people coming into and coming out of the hotel."

Superintendent Matt Cox, who was in charge of policing that day, told the court that delegates could not get into the hotel because of the demonstration.

But Law said he found "the main entrance was accessible (meaning) that the condition ... was unnecessary when the defendants were arrested."

The judge also said the protest was "throughout peaceful, civilized and nonviolent," and he found "no evidence of any vehicles being impeded, no evidence of any interference with emergency services, or any risk to life."

"It is quite striking to me that there were no witness statements taken from anyone in the hotel, approximately 1,000 people, or from anyone trying to get in," he said.

Thunberg's lawyer, Raj Chada, said the charges were "rightly dismissed" and the conditions imposed on the protesters were unlawful "because they disproportionately interfered with our client's right to free speech."

Constable David Lawrence said he had been called to the protest to enforce the section 14 order made by the senior officer on the scene.

He said he approached Thunberg and told her to relocate or else be arrested, but he admitted under cross-examination that he did not know the precise location of where protesters were told to relocate.

Chada argued each arresting officer failed to properly communicate the condition placed on the protest.

"We say for good measure that the condition that was in the charge is not the condition that was communicated to the officers' supervisors," he told the judge.

Another 21 people who participated in the demonstration, including supporters of Extinction Rebellion, are due to appear at later court dates.


UK judge dismisses Greta Thunberg protest case

AFP
Fri, February 2, 2024 

A London court threw out a public order case on Friday against climate activist Greta Thunberg and four other protesters, with the judge criticising "unlawful" conditions imposed by police when they were arrested.

District judge John Law dismissed the cases against the 21-year-old Swedish campaigner and the four other activists on the second day of their trial at Westminster Magistrates' Court.

He ruled that police deployed in the British capital in October at an environmental protest had attempted to impose "unlawful" conditions before officers arrested dozens of demonstrators.

Thunberg, a global figure in the fight against climate change, was among dozens held for disrupting access to the Energy Intelligence Forum,a major oil and gas conference attended by companies at a luxury hotel.

She had pleaded not guilty in November to breaching a public order law, alongside two protesters from the Fossil Free London (FFL) campaign group and two Greenpeace activists.

In his ruling, Law said the conditions imposed on the demonstrators were "so unclear that it is unlawful", which meant "anyone failing to comply were actually committing no offence".

Thunberg and the other defendants had faced a maximum fine of £2,500 ($3,177) if convicted.

Her lawyer, Raj Chada, said the case against them had been "rightly dismissed", arguing that the police stipulations "disproportionately interfered with our client's rights to free speech".

He added: "The government should stop prosecuting peaceful protesters and instead find ways to tackle the climate crisis."

- 'Ridiculous' -

Christofer Kebbon, one of the other defendants from FFL, told reporters that the five "shouldn't be here in court".

He condemned "the climate criminals who are continuing their business as usual and destroying this planet".

Thunberg, who came to worldwide attention as a 15-year-old by staging school strikes in her native Sweden, regularly takes part in climate change-related demonstrations.

She was fined in October for blocking the port of Malmo in Sweden, a few months after police forcibly removed her during a demonstration against the use of coal in Germany.

She also joined a march last weekend in southern England to protest against the expansion of Farnborough airport, which is mainly used by private jets.

Demonstrators had greeted the October forum participants with cries of "shame on you!".

Some carried placards reading "Stop Rosebank", a reference to a controversial new North Sea oil field the British government authorised in September.

Police said officers had arrested Thunberg for failing to adhere to an order not to block the street where the rally was taking place.

Greenpeace UK campaigner Maja Darlington hailed Friday's verdict as "a victory for the right to protest".

She added: "It is ridiculous that more and more climate activists are finding themselves in court for peacefully exercising their right to protest, while fossil fuel giants like Shell are allowed to reap billions in profits from selling climate-wrecking fossil fuels."


Greta Thunberg cleared after unlawful protest arrest

BBC
Fri, February 2, 2024 


Greta Thunberg and four co-defendants have been found not guilty of breaking the law when they refused to follow police instructions to move on during a climate protest.

District Judge John Law threw out a public order charge due to "no evidence" of any offence being committed adding police attempted to impose "unlawful" conditions.

The 21-year-old was arrested at a climate change demonstration near the InterContinental Hotel in Mayfair on 17 October.

The judge said that the conditions imposed on protesters were "so unclear that it is unlawful".

He added that it meant that "anyone failing to comply were actually committing no offence".
'Civilised'

"It is quite striking to me that there were no witness statements taken from anyone in the hotel, approximately 1,000 people, or from anyone trying to get in," he said.

"There was no evidence of any vehicles being impeded, no evidence of any interference with emergency services, or any risk to life."

He said that the protest was "throughout peaceful, civilised and non-violent" and criticised evidence provided by the prosecution about the location of where the demonstrators should be moved to, saying the only helpful footage he received was "made by an abseiling protester".
'Law unclear'

The court heard that protesters started to gather near the hotel in October last year at around 07:30 and police engaged with them about improving access for members of the public, which the prosecution alleged had been made "impossible".

The judge rejected the submission as "the main entrance was accessible (meaning) that the condition... was unnecessary when the defendants were arrested".
Analysis

By Sean Dilley at Westminster Magistrates Court

The judge was scathing about the police's decision to impose unlawful restrictions on Greta Thunberg and other climate protesters.

Put simply, he didn't see any need to interfere with the legitimate right of demonstrators to assemble to the extent they did.

The judge noted that the protest was peaceful and civilised. He said officers had ample opportunity to put less restrictive measures in place, such as using barriers to maintain access to the hotel.

He felt the tactics used breached the lawful rights of protesters on 17 October and he said that conditions were so restrictive as to be unlawful.

He was highly critical of communications between Supt Matt Cox and less senior officers.

Ultimately, Judge Law said that as the Section 14 restrictions were unlawful, none of the defendants were guilty of a crime.

Speaking after the hearing, Ms Thunberg's lawyer, Raj Chada, told reporters: "The charges against them were rightly dismissed.

"The conditions imposed on the protest were unclear, uncertain and unlawful.

"They were unlawful because they disproportionately interfered with our client's right to free speech."

He said the government should "stop prosecuting peaceful protestors".

He added "we will look into all options" when asked whether civil action would be taken against those who prosecuted the case.

Who is Greta Thunberg and what has she achieved?

Ms Thunberg appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court after previously denying breaching the Public Order Act 1986.

She was accused of breaching section 14 of the act by blocking the entrance to the hotel.

Ms Thunberg appeared at court along with two Fossil Free London protesters and two Greenpeace activists, who also pleaded not guilty to the same offence.

Oil executives had been meeting inside for the Energy Intelligence Forum.



A London judge acquits climate activist Greta Thunberg of refusing to leave oil industry conference

BRIAN MELLEY
Updated Fri, February 2, 2024 at 11:22 AM MST·4 min read







Environmental activist Greta Thunberg leaves Westminster Magistrates Court in London, Friday, Feb. 2, 2024. A judge has acquitted climate activist Greta Thunberg of a charge that she had refused to leave a protest that blocked the entrance to a major oil and gas industry conference in London last year. Thunberg was acquitted along with four other defendants.
(AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth)

LONDON (AP) — Climate activist Greta Thunberg was acquitted Friday of a charge of refusing to follow a police order to leave a protest blocking the entrance to a major oil and gas industry conference in London last year.

The courtroom gallery erupted with applause as Judge John Law told Thunberg and her four co-defendants to stand and told them they were cleared of the criminal charge of breaching the Public Order Act. The judge cited “significant deficiencies in the evidence” presented by the prosecutor.

Law said the police could have applied less restrictive measures and didn’t properly define where protesters should move, while their order to disperse was “so unclear that it was unlawful.” Individuals who did not comply therefore committed no offense, according to the judge..

Law also granted defense lawyer Raj Chada's request for the government to pay legal fees and Thunberg's travel costs once the bills are submitted. She had faced a fine of up to 2,500 pounds ($3,190) if convicted in Westminster Magistrates’ Court of violating the act that allows police to impose limits on public assemblies.

“The conditions imposed on the protest were unclear, uncertain and unlawful,” Chada said outside court. “The government should stop prosecuting peaceful protesters, and instead find ways to tackle the climate crisis."

The Oct. 17 protest was one of many in the U.K. against fossil fuel producers that have led to criminal charges. Some demonstrations have disrupted sporting events, caused massive traffic jams or created shocking spectacles to draw attention to the climate crisis.

But the judge noted that the demonstration attended by Thunberg, 21, was “peaceful, civilized and nonviolent.”

The Swedish environmentalist, who inspired a global youth movement demanding stronger efforts to fight climate change, was among more than two dozen protesters arrested for preventing access to a hotel during the Energy Intelligence Forum, attended by some of the industry’s top executives.

“It is quite striking to me that there were no witness statements taken from anyone in the hotel, approximately 1,000 people, or from anyone trying to get in,” Law said while reading a ruling that had Thunberg and her co-defendants laughing at times. “There was no evidence of any vehicles being impeded, no evidence of any interference with emergency services or any risk to life.”

Thunberg and other climate protesters have accused fossil fuel companies of deliberately slowing the global energy transition to renewables in order to make more profit. They also oppose the U.K. government’s recent approval of drilling for oil in the North Sea, off the coast of Scotland.

Thunberg left court Friday without speaking to journalists, walking past more than a dozen cameras and then sprinting down the sidewalk with her friends.

“We must remember who the real enemy is," she said in a short statement after the first day of trial Thursday. "What are we defending? Who are our laws meant to protect?”

Metropolitan Police Superintendent Matthew Cox said that he had worked with protesters for about five hours before he issued an order for demonstrators to move to an adjacent street, because he was concerned about the safety of those in the hotel.

“It seemed like a very deliberate attempt ... to prevent access to the hotel for most delegates and the guests,” Cox testified. “People were really restricted from having access to the hotel.”

Cox said protesters lit colorful flares and drummers created a deafening din outside the hotel as some demonstrators sat on the ground and others rappelled from the roof of the hotel. When officers began arresting people, other protesters quickly took their places, leading to a “perpetual cycle” that found police running out of officers to make arrests.

Thunberg was outside the front entrance of the hotel when she was given a final warning that she would be arrested if she didn’t comply, prosecutor Luke Staton said. She said she intended to stay where she was.

Thunberg rose to prominence after staging weekly protests outside the Swedish Parliament starting in 2018.

Last summer, she was fined by a Swedish court for disobeying police and blocking traffic during an environmental protest at an oil facility. She had already been fined for the same offense previously in Sweden.

Greta Thunberg cleared of London protest charges

Jenna Moon
Fri, February 2, 2024 


Semafor Signals

Insights from Semafor, The Guardian, and The Conversation
The News

Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg was acquitted of a public order charge in a U.K. court Friday, with a judge deciding the evidence was “insufficient” in relation to a protest she staged at an oil and gas conference last year.

Thunberg has become the face of climate protests in recent years following the success of the weekly school walkouts she started, dubbed Fridays for Future. Recently, other organizations, including Just Stop Oil, have protested at art galleries and other institutions in hopes of ending new oil and gas contracts. This week, protesters with French organization Riposte Alimentaire threw soup on the glass covering the Mona Lisa at the Louvre, marking the second time the artwork has been targeted by climate protests.
SIGNALSSemafor Signals: Global insights on today's biggest stories.
‘Greta effect’ motivates more people to get into climate activismSources: The Conversation, The Guardian

People familiar with Thunberg and her politics are also more likely to engage in climate activism themselves, a 2019 study found. “Americans who report being more familiar with Greta Thunberg also feel more confident that they can help mitigate climate change as part of a collective effort,” the report’s authors noted in The Conversation. The phenomenon, dubbed “the Greta effect,” has sparked everything from copy-cat protests to a boom in children’s books about saving the planet from climate change, The Guardian reported in 2019. While just knowing who Thunberg is didn’t drive young people to be climate activists, knowing about her at least “appears to have a unique influence on the extent to which they feel empowered to make a difference,” according to the survey.
Soup-throwing protests get headlines, but no major policy changesSources: Semafor, The Guardian

When it comes to impacting climate legislation, throwing soup doesn’t seem to be as effective as blocking highways, Semafor’s Tim McDonnell argued. The art museum protests have prompted headlines over the years, but no significant policy changes. However, farmers in France and elsewhere in the European Union were able to convince the EU to delay a new green rule by clogging city streets in recent days to protest legislation that would require them to set aside part of their farmland for conservation. “Some activists argue that the soup attacks are part of a longer-term strategy to make milder forms of climate protest more palatable and effective,” McDonnell wrote. “Personally, I remain unconvinced, and tend to think the most important form of climate messages at this stage are those that demonstrate the job-creation and cost-saving benefits of clean energy.”

Climate activist Greta Thunberg was acquitted Friday of refusing to follow a police order to leave a protest blocking the entrance to a major oil and gas industry conference in London last year.


­­Climate activist Greta Thunberg acquitted after London protest trial

Reuters
Updated Fri, February 2, 2024 







LONDON (Reuters) - Climate activist Greta Thunberg was on Friday cleared of a public order offence as a judge ruled police had no power to arrest her and others at a protest in London last year.

Thunberg stood trial with four other defendants who were arrested on Oct. 17 outside a London hotel, where the Energy Intelligence Forum was hosting oil and gas industry leaders.

All five were accused of failing to comply with an order made under the Public Order Act by police to move their protest to a designated area near the conference.

They were all acquitted at Westminster Magistrates' Court, in a ruling which throws into doubt other prosecutions of those facing the same charge from the Oct. 17 demonstration.

Judge John Law ruled that London's Metropolitan Police acted unlawfully in imposing conditions on the protest and that therefore Thunberg had no case to answer.

He said that police could have imposed lesser restrictions on the protest and the conditions that were imposed were not clear.

Law also said Thunberg was not "given anything like a reasonable time to comply" after police told her to move.

Raj Chada, a lawyer who represented Thunberg and two other defendants, said outside court: "The government should stop prosecuting peaceful protesters and instead find ways to tackle the climate crisis."

Thunberg, who became a prominent campaigner worldwide after staging weekly protests in front of the Swedish parliament in 2018, made no comment to reporters as she left court.

A spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police said in a statement: "While we absolutely respect the right to protest, we often hear from Londoners who are fed up with repeated serious disruption at the hands of campaigners who block roads and prevent people going about their normal business.

"Officers have to balance these considerations in real time." They added: "We will review the decision carefully."

Prosecutors, who are likely to seek an adjournment of a similar trial starting next week, can bring an appeal at the High Court against Friday's decision.

Britain's Crown Prosecution Service did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

(Reporting by Sam Tobin; editing by William James, David Gregorio and Louise Heavens)


Climate activist Greta Thunberg cleared of public order offense during London oil protest

Sam Meredith, CNBC
Fri, February 2, 2024 at


LONDON — Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg on Friday was cleared of a public order offense over a protest at an oil and gas conference in October.

Thunberg was arrested Oct. 17 outside the InterContinental London Park Lane hotel after joining hundreds of protesters at an “Oily Money Out” demonstration organized by Fossil Free London and Greenpeace.

Oil executives had been meeting inside the hotel on the first day of the Energy Intelligence Forum, formerly known as the Oil and Money conference.

Thunberg appeared at London’s Westminster Magistrates’ Court this week alongside two Fossil Free London protesters and two Greenpeace protesters. All five defendants pleaded not guilty after being accused of breaching Section 14 of the Public Order Act 1986 by failing to move their protest to a designated area.

The judge in the London court ruled she had no case to answer, and also acquitted the other defendants. “The prosecution evidence is insufficient for any reasonable court to properly convict and I exercise my discretion to acquit all five defendants,” Judge John Law said to applause in the gallery, according to Reuters.

The Met Police said in a statement at the time that it had imposed conditions on those protesting under Section 14 of the Public Order Act “to prevent serious disruption to the community, hotel and guests.”

The act allows the police to impose conditions on a public group in an effort to prevent issues such as “significant impact on persons or serious disruption to the activities of an organisation by noise; serious disorder [and] serious damage to property.”

Thunberg was catapulted to fame in 2018 when her “skolstrejk för klimatet” (school strike for climate) movement gained traction around the world.

A prominent campaigner, the 21-year-old has been arrested several times during climate protests across Europe over the past 12 months.

Speaking in October last year after a Swedish court fined her for disobeying police at a protest, Thunberg reportedly said she was prepared to continue taking part in demonstrations even if it "leads to more sentences."

This article was originally published on NBCNews.com


Opinion: How throwing soup at the Mona Lisa can help fight climate change


Shannon Gibson
Thu, February 1, 2024 


Two environmental activists hurl soup at Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa at the Louvre museum in Paris on Sunday. (David Cantiniaux / AFPTV/AFP / Getty Images)

Protesters threw soup at the Mona Lisa on Sunday in the latest instance of deliberately shocking climate activism. While some consider disruptive antics such as this alienating to the public, research into social movements shows there is strategy behind it.

By combining radical forms of civil disobedience with  more mainstream actions, such as lobbying and state-sanctioned demonstrations, activists not only grab the public’s attention, they make less aggressive tactics more acceptable and possibly more successful.

I study the role of disruptive politics and social movements in global climate policy and have chronicled the ebb, flow and dynamism of climate activism. With today’s political institutions largely focused on short-term desires over long-term planetary health, and global climate negotiations moving too slowly to meet the challenge, climate activists have been radically rethinking their tactics.

In meetings with global activists in recent weeks, my colleagues and I have noticed their emphasis shifting away from government policy fights to battles in the streets, political arenas and courtrooms. The lines between reformists and radicals, and between global and grassroots mobilizers, are blurring, and a new sense of engagement is taking root.

Activist groups have long relied on a strategy known as the boomerang effect — using international networks and global institutions such as the United Nations’ climate talks to influence national governments’ actions. Although this approach initially was well suited to climate change, results show the talks have been too slow and insufficient. The growing influence of the fossil fuel industry has left some activists seriously questioning whether the U.N. climate process is still useful.

Last year’s U.N. climate conference solidified these concerns when the host country, the United Arab Emirates, put its state oil company CEO in charge of the talks. The conference was overrun by a record number of oil and gas lobbyists, and the final agreement of COP28 left room for the continuing expansion of fossil fuels. The announcement in January that Azerbaijan, host of COP29, would place another oil industry veteran in charge of the conference further diminished any faith activists still had in the system.

In response to the weakness of global climate negotiations and policy, my colleagues and I are seeing a ramp-up in sophisticated legal battles over climate change. More than 2,000 climate-change cases have been filed in the past five years, the majority of which are in the United States. More than half of such cases decided between June 2022 and May 2023 have had a favorable outcome for the climate, though most still face appeals. And while court decisions rarely produce radical societal change, they are frequently followed by legislative changes that meet more moderate demands.

Read more: Opinion: COP28 has become a shameless exercise in the fight against climate change. But can we afford to walk out?

When in-your-face activism takes place at the same time as formal institutional challenges, studies show the combination can help increase awareness of the problem and support for moderate action. Researchers call this the “radical flank effect.” It was effective for both the civil rights and feminist movements, and it is evident in other political movements in the U.S. today.

We’ve seen this in the United Kingdom. After initially disapproving of shocking climate protests, in 2019 London Mayor Sadiq Khan met with Extinction Rebellion, a group known for dramatic actions such as spraying fake blood on the steps of the U.K. treasury. Britain's environment secretary also met with the group, and days later Parliament declared a climate emergency, making the United Kingdom the first nation to do so.

Climate protesters are shifting course in the U.S. as well. President Biden made climate change a focus of his first presidential campaign, but activists aren’t getting anywhere close to what they want and have made him a recent target of protests and hecklers.

Criticism of extreme activism often misses a crucial point: Public reaction isn’t necessarily the activists’ end goal. Often, their aim is to influence government and business decision-makers.

Objections to acts of climate activism such as the latest food fight at the Louvre are understandable but might miss the point. Protesters’ perceived madness is indeed method.

Shannon Gibson is an associate professor of environmental studies at USC. This article was produced in partnership with the Conversation.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.



"Striking back hard": Climate change protesters on how fossil fuel companies try to squash dissent

Matthew Rozsa
SALON
Thu, February 1, 2024 

Climate activist getting arrested 
Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images


What does Dr. Kush Naker, a 33-year-old doctor of infectious diseases from London, share in common with 61 protesters currently facing racketeering charges in Georgia for protesting a planned 85-acre police training facility through an Atlanta forest?

Both were upheld by climate activists as an example of "egregious" ways in which the law has come down especially hard on those protesting humanity's self-destructive over-reliance on fossil fuels. In May 2023, Naker was arrested at the coronation of King Charles III for simply wearing a shirt for Just Stop Oil, a British environmental activist group that wants the United Kingdom to eliminate new fossil fuel licensing and production.

On the other side of the Atlantic, a group known as "Stop Cop City" is being targeted by prosecutors who describe the activists as "militant anarchists." The protestors goal is to halt the Atlanta Public Safety Training Center, nicknamed Cop City, which is a proposed police and firefighter training facility to be constructed in an Atlanta urban forest. Its opponents cite both social justice and environmental reasons for why this construction should be halted.

These are not isolated examples. Whether it's climate activist Greta Thunberg being prosecuted in the United Kingdom for allegedly breaching the Public Order Act or opponents of the Mountain Valley Pipeline being sued by the company in ways seemingly geared toward silencing their protests, those who speak out against the fossil fuel status quo tend to face massive legal consequences.

Burning fossil fuels is the primary catalyst of climate change, a development that currently risks plunging the planet into a future of apocalyptic weather conditions. So it might seem unreasonable to punish the people aiming to bring attention to problem as existential as nuclear war or a deadly pandemic. Yet as some activists explained to Salon, this is not a bug in our current legal system — it's a feature.

"If any of us are to survive the climate crisis, things need to change," Alex De Koning, a 25-year-old Just Stop Oil spokesperson and climate scientist told Salon in an email. "However, fossil fuel companies and those in power who thrived out of the broken system that has got us into this mess refuse to [change.] They are fighting to keep themselves on top and using their considerable wealth and influence to repress any who take them on."

De Koning cited recent reports that a think tank funded by ExxonMobil, one of the world's largest fossil fuel companies, helped write laws that made it more difficult to protest climate change in the United Kingdom. "Why would the government and the fossil fuel industry go to such lengths if they did not fear the power of ordinary people finally fighting back?"

Folabi Olagbaju, the democracy campaign director at Greenpeace USA, pointed out that special interest groups who want to discredit climate science are working in a politically friendly environment. "Climate activism is a threat to the fossil fuel status quo, so it makes sense that corporate polluters and their allies in government are striking back hard," he said.

Ever since the 2000s, it has become increasingly mainstream for Republican politicians and their conservative followers to manufacture doubt about the scientific consensus on global heating. During the most recent Republican administration, President Trump slashed environmental regulations, and right-wing media outlets regularly parrot fossil fuel industry talking points as ideological articles of faith.

"Casting protesters as terrorists — and entire movements as criminal organizations — is both inaccurate and ruinous to our democracy," Olagbaju observed, adding that governments and corporations have been able to do these things with impunity "for a very long time. Now, with the global trend toward right-wing authoritarianism, it can even score them political points."

It is in this context that the gas and oil lobbies have pushed for anti-protest laws and aggressive policing all over the world. "All of these factors create the conditions to criminalize protest, a trend that will continue until we the people collectively stop it," Olagbaju said. "Protest and free speech are two of the best tools we have to fight for climate action – we need to protect these rights if we’re going to successfully champion a green and just future."

While Olagbaju noted that Greenpeace USA has avoided some of the more harrowing experiences endured by frontline protesters, they have faced a different kind of silencing tactic — "baseless" litigation.

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes.

"Energy Transfer – the company that built the Dakota Access Pipeline at Standing Rock – is suing us for $300 million for allegedly orchestrating the entire Indigenous resistance movement at Standing Rock," Olagbaju said. "They are trying to destroy a 50-year old environmental organization and to scare the entire movement into sitting down and shutting up. But we will not be silenced — we will continue to fight for everyone’s right to speak truth to power."

Michael Greenberg, founder of the environmental protest group Climate Defiance, argued that the climate change reform movement is "facing steep charges because the industry sees that fossil fuels are losing. The industry is pulling out progressively more desperate measures to try to stop the movement."

Other climate change activists elaborated on exactly what "the movement" means to them. One of them was Stevie O'Hanlon, communications director of a climate change activist group called Sunrise Movement that recently made headlines for protesting a Republican presidential campaign rally for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Although O'Hanlon praised President Biden for his recent policy to delay decision on approving a controversial liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal, the Sunrise Movement leader also argued that this is not enough — that, indeed, young people have a right to demand more from their political leaders.

"Young people deserve leaders that treat clean air, drinkable water, and a livable future as non-negotiable," O'Hanlon said. "Young people need to continue pressuring candidates to deliver for all of us. Biden isn’t doing enough. Delaying LNG build out is the right move, but it alone won’t win him the election. He must declare a climate emergency, end the fossil fuel era, and stop funding genocide."

As for Just Stop Oil's De Koning, the activist asserted that the only way to end their movement "is if there is no new oil and gas in the U.K. Even the main opposition party — Labour — will not commit to revoking the oil and gas licenses that our Prime Minister is shamelessly trying to push through while he is still in power. The time for playing politics is over. Almost every major radical policy shift throughout history has instead come from mass civil resistance, so why would we wait for an election?"

Olagbaju brought up the upcoming 2024 American presidential election, which experts predict will pit Biden — who, for all of his perceived shortcomings among environmentalists, is at least not a climate change denier — against Trump, who actively denies climate change science.

"This election may be the most critical in history for our ability to avoid climate catastrophe," Olagbaju argued to Salon. "Climate justice activists are letting candidates know that the people who protest are also an organized voting block united with progressive pro-democracy movements. It’s not just climate justice activists, according to the Yale Climate Maps 2023, 66% of adults in the US think that 'developing a clean energy plan should be a priority for the president and Congress.'"

Olagbaju added, "It is critical in this election to call out Big Oil for attacking the fundamentals of our Democracy, and to engage our grassroots allies across issues to recognize how they are fueling fascism."






TotalEnergies explores US, Europe renewable portfolio stake sale- sources

Fri, February 2, 2024

 Logo of French oil and gas company TotalEnergies in La Defense

By Andres Gonzalez and Isla Binnie

LONDON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - France's TotalEnergies is exploring a sale of a 50% stake of a portfolio of renewable projects in Europe and the U.S., according to two people familiar with the matter.

The French energy group is sounding out advisers for a sale of a stake in wind and solar power assets across the U.S., Spain, Portugal, France and Greece, the sources said.


One of the sources said that the portfolio is worth about $2.5 billion in total. The plan is expected to lead to a series of transactions, potentially with several buyers, one of the people said.

TotalEnergies declined to comment.

Globally, the renewable energy sector has been roiled by rising raw material costs and higher costs of capital. Similarly other utilities and oil companies like Enel, Repsol or Iberdrola, have sold stakes in wind and solar farms to help finance new projects.


In December, TotalEnergies sold a 22.5% stake in an offshore wind farm to Thailand's PTT Exploration and Production (PTTEP) for 522 million pounds ($660.54 million).

The French company has a significantly higher low-carbon energy generation capacity than its rivals.

Last year, TotalEnergies took full control of renewable energy company Eren for 3.8 billion euros ($4.10 billion) including debt.

($1 = 0.7903 pounds)

($1 = 0.9260 euros)

(Reporting by Andres Gonzalez and Isla Binnie, additional reporting by Benjamin Malet, Editing by Anousha Sakoui and Louise Heavens)