Fields of filth: factory farms committing thousands of environmental breaches


The more than 3,000 violations affected water, air and land

Published April 29 2024
By Andrew Wasley , Lucie Heath
This story was published in partnership with:

The iFind out how to use the Bureau’s work


Intensive livestock farms in England have breached environmental regulations thousands of times in recent years, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism can reveal.

Among the more than 3,000 incidents were the “routine” discharge of slurry and dirty water, maggot-infested carcass bins and the illegal incineration of pigs.

Records obtained by TBIJ and the i of Environment Agency inspections at intensive poultry and pig units detailed violations affecting water, air and land. They included poorly maintained farm buildings and equipment, as well as other breaches of rules designed to minimise the environmental impact of the country’s largest livestock farms. They also included hundreds of cases involving substandard farm waste management.

Some farms were found to hold no records of poultry litter and dirty water transfers, including the dates, destinations and quantities of exported slurry and manure.

Many of the thousands of violations recorded over five years were relatively minor, resulting in farms being given “advice and guidance” by agency officials, records show. They issued formal cautions and warnings in more than 500 cases and recommended 48 prosecutions.

Farm waste is often used as fertiliser at third-party sites

Wayne Hutchinson/Farm Images/Universal Images Group/Getty

The revelations came as new evidence reported by the Guardian found that dairy farms in the UK broke environmental regulations more than a thousand times between 2020 and 2021, including by spilling waste into rivers.

An Environment Agency spokesperson said: “We are clear that the agricultural sector must deliver improvements to our environment.” They added: “In 2023, around 80% of pig and poultry farm inspections resulted in advice and guidance, 16% resulted in a warning and around 2% resulted in a formal caution or prosecution.”

1,700 double-decker busload

the volume of animal waste produced daily by nine major UK meat and poultry firms

They said the pig and poultry sector accounted for a small number of serious pollution incidents compared to other agricultural sites.
Thousands of tonnes of waste a day

A report published today by the campaign groups Sustain and Friends of the Earth shows that nine major meat and poultry firms are producing more than 30,000 tonnes of livestock waste a day – some 1,700 double-decker busloads. The companies supply major supermarkets with poultry and pork and rear more than 100m farm animals at any one time. Among them are the UK subsidiaries of controversial meat giants Cargill and JBS, according to Sustain. The figures exclude waste from intensive beef farms, which are not regulated in the same way.

There is no suggestion that these companies were among those found to have committed the largest number or most egregious cases of environmental rule-breaking uncovered by TBIJ and the i.

Farm waste, including slurry, manure and poultry litter, is frequently spread on farmland as fertiliser but can wash into rivers and cause nutrient pollution. This affects water quality and can kill fish, plants and animals living in the waterways.

It also emits ammonia, an airborne pollutant that can harm human health and ecosystems. The government has pledged to reduce ammonia emissions across the UK by 16% by 2030.

‘The government [needs to] treat Big Ag businesses with the same level of scrutiny as sewage companies’


Sustain said only a few of the companies have effective policies for managing waste. It added that the issue is poorly regulated.
Filthy findings

Intensive poultry and pig farms above a certain size – 40,000 birds, 2,000 fattening pigs or 750 breeding pigs – require a licence to operate in England and are subject to inspection by the Environment Agency. Officials physically check livestock housing, slurry and manure storage, and drainage systems. They also inspect farm records relating to animal numbers, feed, energy and water use, and waste disposal.

The records obtained by TBIJ reveal 770 breaches relating to farm infrastructure regulations, including measures designed to minimise pollution, and 568 relating to records and monitoring, including on farm waste. More than 650 violations were linked to the substandard management of farms, and 346 concerned emissions affecting air, land and water.

‘The British public are getting a bum deal – big agribusinesses dump their waste on our countryside and slink off the profits’


In one case, inspectors noted: “Management failure [has led] to slurry discharge to water course.” In another, officials wrote: “The site is in a general state of disrepair, issues have been raised and these have not been actioned.”

Much of the waste identified by Sustain in its report originates from intensive livestock units. These have proliferated in recent years and can house up to a 1.4 million birds or more than 20,000 pigs.

“The British public are getting a bum deal – big agribusinesses dump their waste on our countryside and slink off the profits,” said Sam Hayward, a campaign officer at Sustain. “We need to hold these big businesses to account for the toxic waste they produce, and we need to stop this bloated industry from getting any bigger.”

Virendra Sharma, the MP for Ealing Southall, told Sustain as part of research for a report: “It’s time that we acknowledge the alarming reality of river pollution caused by intensive agriculture in England.

“The government [needs to] treat Big Ag businesses with the same level of scrutiny as sewage companies and stop the expansion of intensive livestock units in the most affected areas.”


The dirty truth+ Show


Among the findings detailed in the Environment Agency inspectors’ reports were:

Water contaminated with manure and slurry passing into a watercourse, causing pollution.


Dirty water and slurry routinely discharging to ground after escaping from a drainage system – the issue has been “ongoing for several years”.


Overflow from a contaminated water tank was tracked offsite and a carcass bin found leaking while full of dead birds, leading to a “spill of white liquid”.


Spent disinfectant being disposed of by pouring directly onto land – “not an acceptable practice”.


“Black, foul water” found in unlined ditches, bubbling with gases around farm buildings.


No poultry litter and dirty water transfer records being held by farms including dates, destinations and quantities of exported slurry and manure.


Chickens and pigs being “overstocked” on some farms – in some cases involving hundreds of additional animals confined without permission.


Excessive air pollution at farms, including in one case of “ongoing odour detected beyond a farm boundary, at a level likely to cause pollution”.


Ammonia sampling not being carried out.


No air scrubbers – devices that remove air pollution – to reduce ammonia emissions as required, resulting in a “potentially significant impact on nearby nature conservation sites”.


Livestock being incinerated on farms without a licence.


Maggots observed on the external areas of the carcass bin (not completely sealed).


Adult fly activity on one site with evidence of breeding (larvae eggs in litter) at a level likely to cause annoyance outside site boundaries. “Report of flies in the local area.”



Celine O’Donovan, a solicitor at the law firm Leigh Day, which is mounting legal actions in relation to pollution in the River Wye, told TBIJ: “Sustainably disposing of waste produced by supply chains is part of the true cost of industrial operations.

“Many large meat and dairy companies have a business model that relies on a lack of accountability for the waste generated by their supply chain. This model outsources the rearing of livestock to hundreds of small third-party supply farms in a single region, while retaining complete ownership of every aspect of the process except the disposal of manure.”
Exporting excrement

In several poultry-producing hotspots, including in Northern Ireland and the Wye Valley, chicken firms are already “exporting” farm waste to other locations because of an over-saturation of waste and its associated water pollution and soil quality damage.

In January, as part of a “roadmap” for tackling the issue, Avara Foods, which is part-owned by Cargill, began trucking poultry waste from within the River Wye catchment, the epicentre of its poultry operations, to other destinations across the UK. Some locations were as far afield as East Anglia and north-east England.

‘Despite the attention focused on the River Wye, it is just one of the many UK rivers currently under threat from agricultural pollution’


After the exports began, the company contracted to transport the waste, Gamber Logistics, told the Times that the measure was “not sustainable” – at least in part owing to unnecessary transport emissions. The company claimed that when this was put to Avara, it responded by saying it needed “to draw a line in the sand” on river pollution.

TBIJ has learned that the export of Avara’s poultry litter out of the Wye catchment was discussed with the Environment Agency prior to starting.

Internal documents relating to meetings held between the regulator and the company in 2022 and 2023 list “export” as one possible solution, alongside processing litter in anaerobic digestion plants.

Environment Agency officials noted there had been “lost opportunities” in tackling the wider pollution issue due to a lack of data sharing and collaboration between Avara and the agency.

In Northern Ireland, documents first obtained by TBIJ revealed that poultry producer Moy Park had exported thousands of tonnes of bird litter across the border into Ireland and has sent waste consignments as far afield as Fife and Norfolk.

O’Donovan of Leigh Day warned that despite the attention focused on the River Wye, it was “just one of the many UK rivers currently under threat from agricultural pollution”.

Avara disputed Sustain and Friends of the Earth’s figures but did not comment further.

Moy Park also disputed the figures. A spokesperson said: “The poultry industry is highly regulated and we operate to exacting welfare, bio-security and environmental standards. We work closely with our supply chain and farming partners to deliver best practice against these standards.”

The company said it has a strategy for dealing with animal litter that meets all legal requirements. It added that it ensures waste is disposed of responsibly, including at sites in Fife and Norfolk, which it said were approved incinerators.


Main image: Slurry being spread by truck in Lancashire. Credit: Wayne Hutchinson/Farm Images/Universal Images Group via Getty


Reporters: Andrew Wasley
Environment editor: Robert Soutar
Deputy editors: Chrissie Giles and Katie Mark
Editor: Franz Wild
Production editors: Alex Hess and Emily Goddard
Fact checker: Ero Partsakoulaki
Impact producer: Grace Murray

Our Food and Farming project is partly funded by the Montpelier Foundation and partly by the Hollick Family Foundation. None of our funders have any influence over our editorial decisions or output

The silent casualty – how the Russian war is eroding Ukraine’s scientific potential

Dmytro Chumachenko shares his insights into research under fire in Ukraine, and the role the UK can play in supporting the sector

COMMENT 27/03/24

Dmytro Chumachenko
Dmytro Chumachenko is an Associate Professor at the National Aerospace University Kharkiv Aviation Institute



For two years now, Russia has been waging a bloody full-scale war in Ukraine. This has led to massive destruction; thousands of Ukrainian civilians have been killed or wounded, and millions have been forced to leave their homes.

Ukrainian science has also suffered. According to the Ministry of Science and Education of Ukraine, almost 3,500 educational institutions have been damaged, and 365 have been destroyed completely. Among the damaged institutions are 93 universities. The physical destruction of laboratories and scientific equipment affects the possibility of continuing scientific research in Ukraine. Still, it is not the only factor caused by Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Many scientists have been compelled to flee their homes, either relocating within Ukraine or seeking refuge abroad. The brain drain abroad amounted to 18.5 per cent, and 17.6 per cent of scientists have completely changed their profession. Others have joined the military efforts or have been war casualties. The Russian war complicates the exchange of scientific knowledge with foreign colleagues, as well as attending conferences to discuss scientific results. The scientific community’s challenges are exacerbated by restrictions on crossing the border by males due to martial law and the difficulties associated with securing academic positions abroad on short notice.

These factors have directly affected the scientific community’s ability to maintain its research output, contributing to a reported 10 per cent decline in research papers published by Ukrainian scientists since the onset of the war. Moreover, considering the delay in the peer review of scientific publications, this figure cannot reflect the long-term consequences of Russia’s military invasion, which will be much more extensive.

The decrease in financial support for research within Ukraine has led to a notable decline in scientific output, threatening the country’s future contributions to global science. The United Kingdom, with its world-renowned academic and research institutions, is in a unique position to offer support. The UK has already launched the Ukraine Twinning Initiative, a bunch of individual grants for Ukrainian scholars, and we need continuation and expansion of support for the Ukrainian scientific community because Russia’s war in Ukraine has not stopped.
Vital steps

The vital step the UK can take is to provide remote internships and scholarships for Ukrainian researchers. The financial strain on Ukraine’s scientific research, exacerbated by the conflict, has significantly hampered the ability of researchers to produce impactful results. By offering these opportunities, the UK can ensure that Ukrainian researchers remain engaged in their fields, contributing valuable insights and advancements despite the challenges they face at home. At the same time, Ukraine needs people who will not only restore the country after victory but also produce innovations right now. Therefore, support for those scientists who remain in the country and continue their activities is critically important.

International collaboration is crucial for producing world-level scientific results. However, the current situation makes it nearly impossible for Ukrainian male scholars to leave their country. The UK can bridge this gap by providing joint grants that allow for remote participation. An excellent example is the joint grant program between the University of Cambridge and the National Research Foundation of Ukraine. Such initiatives would enable Ukrainian scientists to collaborate with their counterparts in the UK and beyond, ensuring the continuity of high-quality research and maintaining Ukraine’s presence in the global scientific community.

Another vital area of support is granting Ukrainian researchers free access to UK university libraries, virtual laboratories, and computational power. These resources are indispensable for conducting cutting-edge research. Access to such resources would significantly alleviate the constraints faced by Ukrainian scientists due to damaged infrastructure and limited access to physical resources within their country.

A critical point is that the UK can assist by removing article processing fees for publications in British scientific journals for corresponding authors from Ukraine. The financial challenges faced by Ukrainian institutions in wartime conditions mean that many researchers are unable to afford the costs associated with publishing their work in international journals. By waiving these fees, the UK would enable Ukrainian scientists to share their findings with the global community, ensuring that their contributions are recognised and can inform future research and policy.
Wider support

In addition to bolstering Ukrainian science through academic and research support, there’s an urgent and broader call to action that extends to the very heart of the war. The swift victory of Ukraine over the illegal Russian aggression it faces is paramount not just for national sovereignty but also as a critical factor in the prosperity of European research and science.

We urge individuals and organisations to consider supporting Ukraine’s defence efforts in this time of need. Donations to credible funds, such as United24 or Come Back Alive to aid the Ukrainian army can significantly accelerate Ukraine’s path to peace and stability. Such support contributes to the country’s immediate defence and the long-term revitalisation of its scientific community, ensuring that Ukraine can continue to contribute valuable knowledge and innovation to the world. Now more than ever, standing with Ukraine means supporting its present struggle and its future potential in advancing global science and research.

The support from the UK could play a pivotal role in safeguarding and promoting Ukrainian science during these turbulent times. By offering a helping hand, the UK would not only provide immediate assistance to Ukrainian researchers but also contribute to the resilience and continuity of global scientific progress. This is a call to action for the UK to stand in solidarity with Ukraine, demonstrating a commitment to science, international collaboration, and the shared pursuit of knowledge. Together, we can ensure that Ukrainian science not only survives but thrives, now and in the future.

Why does the UK have the worst student rights in Europe?

Fresh from their latest bus tour to the continent, Jim Dickinson and Livia Scott try to identify why students in the UK seem to depend on benevolence rather than rights and protections


JIM DICKINSON
COMMENT 29/04/24

Jim is an Associate Editor at Wonkhe


Livia Scott
Livia Scott is Wonkhe’s Community and Policy Officer



In Serbia, students have the right to nutrition, rest and cultural, artistic, sports and recreational activities.

In the Netherlands, when a university terminates a course, it has to do so in a way that allows existing students to complete it – as originally described.

And in Sweden, students have the right to study in a safe environment – and have pretty much the same rights as employees, given that right is in the Swedish Work Environment Act.

Over the past few years, we’ve been assembling groups of SU officers (and the staff that support them) onto bus tours of students’ unions, guilds, associations across countries in Europe – the latest one of which was to the Balkans and Austria.

And we’ve seen any number of fascinating projects, initiatives, buildings, services and schemes that students deliver in the student interest.

But on the long (and often winding) roads between university towns and cities across Europe, we’ve been researching what it is that underpins all of the impressive stuff that we’ve seen.

And having burned through SIM data at an alarming rate, we’ve come to a conclusion. Save for Scottish domiciled students studying in Scotland, students in the UK pay pretty much the highest tuition fees in Europe.

Yet in return, they enjoy pretty much the worst student rights in the continent.
What’s underneath?

In the Netherlands, if an institution’s management has become aware in any way that someone on the staff may have engaged in harassment or sexual misconduct involving a student, the university has to inform the country’s confidential inspector of education. And if any staff hear about an allegation, they have to report it into management.

In Spain, every university has to have its own ombudsperson – an independent and impartial figure with statutory reporting duties that is given the role of protecting the rights and freedoms of the university community – and they’re selected by students and staff.

And in Croatia, every time a business employs a student, a small amount of tax is taken from that business to fund student activities, projects and services. Students’ unions then organise public funding competitions amongst students to run everything from cultural events to induction activities.

Everywhere we go, we first start by looking at the legislation that underpins the higher education system in a given country. Some have multiple acts of Parliament and some have one. Some go into excruciating detail about the operation of faculties while others afford wise autonomy. Some define and guarantee academic freedom, albeit often with some funding constraints and priorities – and slowly most now ensure that quality assurance (and enhancement) is carried out in a co-regulatory way through a version of the QAA.

But what’s remarkable is that in pretty much every country we’ve been to, there is an entire section of their legislation on students and their rights.

Take Lithuania. There’s a minimum amount of space that has to be allocated, by law, on campus per student. Student reps have veto power in the senate, faculty councils and assembly on issues related to student interests – and if they use their veto, a special committee reviews the issues, and a two-thirds majority vote is required to override it.

In Latvia, students’ unions receive at least 0.05% of the annual university budget to run activities and representation in the student interest. And SUs have a legal right to request and receive information from any university department on matters affecting students to perform their accountability function.

In Austria, students from subject councils make up a decent proportion of every curriculum committee – ensuring that study options become more flexible, more interdisciplinary, meet their future career needs and offer the right balance of stretch and challenge.

In Poland, students have the right study programmes where at least 30 per cent of the credits are elective optionals – and when universities recruit anyone to a managerial position whose responsibilities include student affairs, there has to be consultation with the student government. Study regulations have to be agreed with the SU.

So important are the rights of students in Poland that their protests and strikes are specifically protected, with mediation rights. And in recognition that students are transitory and need assistance in enforcing their rights, every year its NUS organises a three day conference for student reps explaining both the legal frameworks and the mechanisms for using them – co-funded by the government and national regulatory bodies.
Big schools, little kids

We’ve never really been into rights for students in the UK. Pre-devolution, the Teaching and Higher Education Act 1998 barely mentioned students. England’s Higher Education and Research Act 2017 offered little other than Student Protection Plans that are doing nothing of the sort. Scotland’s Higher Education Governance (Scotland) Act 2016 gives some limited rights to students to sit on key bodies. Pretty much all of the legislation and regulations have endless detail on how much home students can be charged, and almost nothing on what they get in return.

Probably the closest we have to rights for students is slowly emerging in Wales, where the under the Tertiary Education and Research (Wales) Act 2022 the new regulator will determine the effectiveness of a provider’s arrangements for supporting and promoting the welfare of its students and staff, and will be able to mandate a learner engagement code. But that’s likely to be legislation that reflects, rather than drives up support – and is unlikely to be executed in a way that a student could rely on in a complaint.

Outside of HE-specific legislation, a complex and confusing patchwork of provisions exist in theory in the legal briefing notes of expensive law firms, but barely help students in practice when there’s a problem. UK consumer protection law is supposed to ensure that students get what they were promised, but nobody seems interested in enforcing it. Equality law seems more often challenged by politicians in a culture war than enthusiastically enforced in universities. And in student accommodation, to the extent to which there’s been any consideration of students at all by officials and politicians, it’s usually been to ignore the profit-gouging asset-class purpose-built sector, and sideline the concerns of students in the private rented sector.

What students do have in the UK is an ombuds – in the form of the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIAHE) in England and Wales, and in the form of public services ombuds in Scotland and Northern Ireland. In the case of the latter, there are few in the SU community that have any confidence in the way their bodies work. And while the former is well-respected, it’s a distant and “last resort” body whose “good practice framework” is increasingly ignored – operating in a system that is strategically calculated to exhaust, ignore and pay off anyone not prepared to run the Indiana-Jones style gauntlet of the often 18-month process.

In the (often-subsidised) restaurants, cafes and dining halls of the countries we’ve visited, we’ve often speculated on why it is that students get so few rights and guarantees in the UK. Luck and chance will have played a part, sector resistance (where pride in “autonomy” was frequently translated into “freedom to treat students badly”) was always around when Jim worked at NUS for a decade, and the country has for a long time felt like one obsessed with nostalgia for an era when students were homogenous, young, and at a big school.

That’s perhaps why, if we look at legislation on student organisations, while almost every European country has positive provision on role, funding and participation rights, here the Education Act 1994 was borne out of a distaste for students’ unions in an era that preposterously defined SUs as “the last closed shop” – and both the Education (No.2) Act 1986 and the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 funnel intergenerational fears about students into unworkable legislation rather than hope, pride and optimism in our young.

Some will say that any further definition of student rights is unnecessary, and that generally student surveys tell us that they are happy with their experience, and that students’ unions are afforded budgets for activities and participation rights in university governance that exceed those described above. And that may be true in the good times – but listening to SU officers describe how they’re being treated and consulted during this round of viscous cuts demonstrates the problem.

Universal rights aren’t about when there’s money around and everyone’s feeling benevolent. They’re about saying to citizens – especially those least likely to feel able to challenge others – here’s how we’re protecting you.
Best practice makes perfect

Sometimes it’s the little things. In Sweden, universities must provide students participating in, or who have completed, a module, with the opportunity to present their opinions about that module through an evaluation – which must then compile those evaluations and provide information to students about the results and actions prompted by those evaluations. It’s not “best practice” – it’s the law.

In Austria, students who are unable to study full time due to child care or similar care commitments are entitled to notify the university of the times at which they have special needs in respect of courses and examinations – and universities must take into account those needs in their course and examination timetabling, on the basis of the information supplied. And that’s a requirement – not the result of an access and participation project plan.

In Ukraine, students will soon be able to organise their study patterns to suit their specific circumstances, with the expectation that they achieve between 30 and 80 ECTS per year, allowing them to complete between three and six years, as demands of their personal lives permit. They will also be given the right to more curriculum flexibility, will be able to avoid specialising until their third year of study, and will be explicitly able to adopt an interdisciplinary approach to their study. By law, not as a result of a best practice project.

And sometimes it’s the principle. In Croatia, the country’s widely understood student standard covers basic needs like food, accommodation, work and cultural and sports activities. There’s always budget shenanigans and implementation detail to haggle over, but it at least sets out what students should be enjoying – allowing its reps to argue for programmes or allocations with confidence.

In the Netherlands, there’s a requirement that universities publish a decision-making participation scheme for students, a duty to provide financial support to student volunteers in student clubs and university bodies, and specific types of decision that have to be made with the consent of the student and staff councils that ensue. The world has not fallen in.

In Finland, students can obtain information on how assessment criteria have been applied to their grades, have the right to a safe learning environment, and have a right to a proper induction – leading to well established and sophisticated student tutoring schemes that we’ve looked at on the site before.

In Sweden, students have the right to representation whenever decisions are made or an inquiry undertaken that concerns them – and if such decisions are to be taken or inquiries conducted by one individual, a student representative must be informed and consulted in good time before the decision is made or the inquiry completed.

In Lithuania, universities must support an SU and and other organisations of students, provide premises and funds to finance their activities, and provide funds for cultural, sports and public activities of students. And in Croatia, univetrsities are obliged to provide the SU and the elected student ombudsman with a place to work, co-finance their activities and provide them with administrative and technical assistance.

In Belgium each university has to have a Student Services Council, which seperately governs student facilities (including the separate government budget line for) food, housing, social services, medical and psychological services, transport and student activities. Who would have thought that the governance and management of study programmes or estates schemes should be of a different character to governing the funding and programmes that meet students’ basic needs?
The frame game

We think it’s partly because of the way in which students are framed. Rather than the ugly idea of the institiution as “provider”, universities are routinely described as communities in other countries – of which students are seen as an integral part. And universities frequently have formal obligations not just to teach, qualify, assess and produce – but to develop the social responsibility of students.

Estonia frames student organisations as helping in universities’ missions to support the development of the students into enterprising and responsible citizens. France frames students as integral members of the educational community, demonstrated through their active participation in councils. Finland explicitly describes universities’ mission to educate students in part to prepare them to serve their country and humanity at large.

This is not just about universities. Most countries give formal participation rights to students in national bodies, government committees and councils. In Slovenia, purpose-built student accommodation is defined as a public service – and while it can be run by universities, commercial companies can run it too as long as they hit key standards and they ensure the representation of student interests in management.

Students in most countries get subsidised public transport (discounts on prices that in any case are vastly cheaper than we see in the UK). Some systems incorporate preventative systematic health check-ups for students. Most give students the right to good careers support. And in countries without an NHS, students are routinely given both personal and health insurance. Given how utterly useless the NHS is for the young in the UK, there are few of us arguing positively for our system abroad.

Funding and credit systems play a part. We’ve noted here before that the UK appears to have pretty much the youngest undergraduates and the fastest completion time – via an archaic student finance system and university cultures that demand bachelors completion in three years when almost everyone else in Europe can take longer, allowing for setbacks, voluntary work and student diversity where we just don’t.

And the relative lack of institutional elitism – at least when it comes to admissions rather than research – coupled with a concern for pan-European mobility, means that pretty much every country has significantly more sophisticated (and legally guaranteed) course and credit transfer schemes than are present in the UK. Once they’ve enrolled, nobody traps students like UK universities manage to.

It’s also clear that PhD students enjoy much better rights elsewhere. Some are treated as staff and salaried. Many have the right – not a vague idea in a policy document – to switch supervisor. Many have bespoke rights laid out in law to challenge decisions and get appropriate support. It’s the sort of thing that happens when you actually consider students in your HE law, rather than retro-bodging equality or consumer law onto a sector where whose power dynamics don’t suit doing so.
What are we like?

Of course, not all of the examples above are universal, and not all of the rights are easy to enforce. All countries find that financing the entitlements they want their citizens to enjoy is hard, and most SUs in countries we’ve met argue that students sometimes get treated badly or find themselves in sitiuations where they need the help of an SU officer.

But when we’ve been travelling around, we’ve often reflected that UK HE feels like it’s caught – between grand North American ambitions of scale, funding, and service provision, and European styles of regulation, bureaucracy and community. And we also think that even the mention of student “rights” in the UK can cause some to start muttering about merketisation and neoliberalism when what they really mean is “remember the old days when we had authority”.

In this Chronicle piece on the politics of campus protest over Israel/Palestine in the US, Gabriel Winant argues that student protest has always arisen from students’ inability to exercise meaningful sway over their institutions except through the “client” status that condemns them to a kind of conservatorship:


Meaningful deliberative participation in the governance of the campus community has been denied to students, faculty members, and staff, forcing them to shout if they wish to be heard. Then, when they do finally raise their voices, they are written off as shrill, fragile, and childish (a decade ago) or menacing, antisemitic, and terroristic (now).

When Winant argues that universities “do not compete to provide students the best possible education”, but rather to “keep their clients sufficiently satisfied”, we hear endless echoes – of those on our tours asking European counterparts whether they have data on how their volunteering schemes or committee positions or activities programmes improve the NSS or some other metric – and being met with blank faces. Because for the most part, student rights and citizenship isn’t something that has to prove its impact on recruitment or retention. It’s essential.

There are aspects of that that we think have infected our own students’ unions too. Democracy can be messy, having a wide breadth of representatives can be hard to maintain, and judging by the logos we see abroad, the need to “market” the professional “services” of the SU can sometimes feel more important than taking steps to ensure that students feel more connected their course, their community and their world – and able to argue out their interests democratically.

On each of the trips, we’ve discovered endless examples of the way in which giving students capacity, credits, responsibility and power generates positive change. We’ve seen astounding community volunteering projects, curriculum change initiatives that cause their experience to be more future-facing, and student support initiatives that start from the assumption that students want to, and can, support each other.

We’ve also asked the impressive student leaders that we meet whether the package of rights, protections and participation on display causes conflict, or encourages endless complaints. What they (and we) can say with clarity and confidence is that giving better, clearer and more enforcable rights to students is neither incompatible with academic excellelnce, and nor does it create an adversarial relationship between students and their university. Far from it.

Instead, treating students as assertive members of an academic community – with both obligations to others and reciprocal rights to take part, be heard, be treated well and to get what they promised – is not only an essential component of what students are supposed to get from higher education, it’s also the route to a healthier and more democratic society when they graduate, and one of the crucial ways in which higher education innovates and improves.

It’s not especially hard to do so, and wouldn’t cost the earth. On the assumption that it’s about to take office, Labour should develop a bespoke Student Rights Bill without delay.

 UK

A DECADE OF TORY AUSTERITY

Four out of five UK schools are crumbling due to a lack of funds, shocking survey finds

By ELEANOR HARDING
28 April 2024

Schools are falling into disrepair because of a lack of funds, with teachers reporting mould, damp and holes in classroom walls.

A survey of 1,000 school leaders found four out of five said they lack the funding needed to properly maintain school buildings.

Six in 10 said they were dissatisfied with the state of their buildings, and almost a fifth said there were parts of their school estate which could not be maintained at all.

Continue watchingI work in Canary Wharf - but I commute five hours from Hamburgafter the a

This included toilets, laboratories, playgrounds and kitchens.

Almost two in five said they had to raise funds to cover estate management and buildings.

A survey of 1,000 school leaders found four out of five said they lack the funding needed to properly maintain school buildings. Six in 10 said they were dissatisfied with the state of their buildings (stock image)

Some of those surveyed even said parts of their school were out of bounds because they were not safe enough.

The headteachers' union NAHT, which carried out the poll, said it showed schools are not receiving enough funding.

The NAHT said capital investment in school buildings has been cut by 50 per cent in real terms since 2010, just when many buildings are reaching the end of their life cycle.

The union called for urgent government investment in school estates, saying an additional £4.4 billion a year was needed to upgrade school buildings.

Paul Whiteman, general secretary of the NAHT, said: 'The crisis of capital investment in our schools has been brewing for 14 years, and it is now clear for all to see.

'In the last year, hundreds more school buildings have quietly slipped further into disrepair.

'Our children deserve to learn in safe, comfortable conditions.'

Cindy O'Sullivan, headteacher of Gosden House School, a state-maintained school in Surrey which supports children with special educational needs, said: 'Our Grade II listed school building is over 230 years old.

Paul Whiteman (pictured), general secretary of the NAHT, said: 'The crisis of capital investment in our schools has been brewing for 14 years, and it is now clear for all to see. In the last year, hundreds more school buildings have quietly slipped further into disrepair'

Education Secretary Gillian Keegan. A Department for Education spokesman said: 'Schools and sixth form colleges will benefit from £1.8 billion this financial year to help maintain their buildings, taking the total amount of funding to over £17billion since 2015'

'The building and grounds are picturesque, but it is also rickety, decrepit, and woefully out of date, with leaky pipes, a sky-high heating bill, blocked drains, and rotting single-pane windows.

'We don't have the budget to maintain the building.'

Tim Jones, headteacher of Spring Gardens Primary School in North Tyneside, said: 'Over the last 14 years, our school, which is approaching its 100th birthday, has slowly been slipping into disrepair as funding for buildings has been cut - we are struggling to cover the cost of basic repairs.

'It's simply unfair to expect kids to learn, and feel inspired, in classrooms that are damp and mouldy.'

The union is holding its annual conference in Newport, South Wales at the weekend when it will debate issues including school funding.

A Department for Education spokesman said: 'Schools and sixth form colleges will benefit from £1.8 billion this financial year to help maintain their buildings, taking the total amount of funding to over £17billion since 2015, and our School Rebuilding Programme is transforming buildings at over 500 schools over the next decade.

'It is up to responsible bodies, such as local authorities and trusts to make their own decisions on investment in their schools each year.

'We offer additional emergency support on a case-by-case basis to schools which face significant issues that could risk building closures.'

Schools falling into disrepair through lack of funds – report

Specialist classrooms, laboratories, playgrounds, kitchens and toilets cannot be maintained in some schools, survey reveals.

GOSDEN HOUSE SCHOOL IS MORE THAN 230 YEARS OLD (NAHT/PA)

ALAN JONES

Schools are falling into disrepair because of a lack of funds, with classrooms, playgrounds and toilets not being maintained, according to a new report.


A survey of more than 1,000 school leaders found that four out of five said they lack the funding needed to maintain their school buildings.


The school leaders union NAHT said almost a fifth of respondents reported that parts of their school estate, including specialist classrooms, laboratories, playgrounds, kitchens and toilets, cannot be maintained.


Headteachers told of struggling to deliver a 21st-century education in outdated buildings, with only one in 20 feeling they had enough money to ensure buildings met pupils’ needs.


Almost two in five said they to had to raise funds to cover estate management and buildings.


Some of those surveyed said they were forced to use classrooms that are damp and mouldy, with some areas of schools out of bounds because they were not safe enough.


The NAHT said capital investment in school buildings has been cut by 50% in real terms since 2010, just when many buildings are reaching the end of their life cycle.

We are struggling to cover the cost of basic repairs

TIM JONES, HEADTEACHER OF SPRING GARDENS PRIMARY

The union called for urgent government investment in school estates, saying an additional £4.4 billion a year was needed to upgrade school buildings.


Paul Whiteman, general secretary of the NAHT, said: “The crisis of capital investment in our schools has been brewing for 14 years, and it is now clear for all to see.


“In the last year, while the Raac crisis has grabbed headlines, hundreds more school buildings have quietly slipped further into disrepair.


“Our children deserve to learn in safe, comfortable conditions. With a general election on the horizon, I urge all political parties to commit to a long-term plan backed up by serious new investment to ensure all school buildings are safe and fit for purpose.”


Cindy O’Sullivan, headteacher of Gosden House School, a state-maintained school in Surrey which supports children with special educational needs, said: “Our Grade II listed school building is over 230 years old, and we have been supporting children with special educational needs since the 1940s


“The building and grounds are picturesque, but it is also rickety, decrepit, and woefully out of date, with leaky pipes, a sky-high heating bill, blocked drains, and rotting single-pane windows. We don’t have the budget to maintain the building and ensure children continue to receive the outstanding 21st-century education that they deserve.”


Tim Jones, headteacher of Spring Gardens Primary School in North Tyneside, said: “Over the last 14 years, our school, which is approaching its 100th birthday, has slowly been slipping into disrepair as funding for buildings has been cut – we are struggling to cover the cost of basic repairs.


“It’s simply unfair to expect kids to learn, and feel inspired, in classrooms that are damp and mouldy.”


The union is holding its annual conference in Newport, South Wales at the weekend when it will debate issues including school funding.


A Department for Education spokesperson said: “Schools and sixth form colleges will benefit from £1.8 billion this financial year to help maintain their buildings, taking the total amount of funding to over £17 billion since 2015, and our school rebuilding programme is transforming buildings at over 500 schools over the next decade.


“It is up to responsible bodies such as local authorities and trusts to make their own decisions on investment in their schools each year.


“We offer additional emergency support on a case-by-case basis to schools which face significant issues that could risk building closures – and in just a matter of months we have completed our identification programme and confirmed how we will fund removal of Raac from our schools and colleges for good.”

NIMBY OR NOT

Plans for huge solar farm described as frightening

Gareth Wyn Williams,

BBC Wales

Lightsource bp has already developed a smaller scale solar development in Maes Bach, Rhondda Cynon Taff

Residents have described plans for a solar farm stretching across an area the size of 1,700 football pitches as “frightening”.

Lightsource bp wants to build the solar panels across three sites in northern Anglesey, producing enough energy to power more than 130,000 homes.

With a capacity of 350MW and covering more than 3,000 acres, the Maen Hir development would be almost five times that of the biggest active solar farm in the UK.

According to developers, the solar and energy storage project - which will need UK government consent due to its scale - would go some way towards reaching the net zero targets.

They also state that they plan to invest in skills, education and jobs on the island.

But the plans have already attracted opposition from some who question the scale of the development, with additional concerns over the loss of so much high quality agricultural land.

150-acre solar farm approved despite opposition

Fears giant solar farms flooding communities

Wales' biggest solar farm backed

The Maen Hir plans spread across three separate sites - Rhosgoch, land to the south of Llannerch-y-Medd and the northern bank of Llyn Alaw reservoir.

But this is by no means the first solar development on Anglesey.

Recently a 49.9MW development, over 190 acres, was built near Rhosgoch.

Also last year, a 35MW development was granted planning consent, covering around 150 acres of land near the villages of Bryngwran and Caergeiliog.

Lightsource bp wants to place solar panels over three sites (dark green), covering ​​more than 3,000 acres.

But as the proposed solar farm is so large, with the expectation that it will produce more than 350MW, it is considered a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP).

This means that UK government ministers, rather than Anglesey council or the Welsh government, will make the final decision based on the recommendation of the Planning Inspectorate.

William Hughes lives near one of the three proposed sites where Lightsource bp wants to install the panels.

Last year a separate solar development over 200 acres was built a stone's throw away from his home near Amlwch.

William Hughes lives near one of the proposed sites the company wants to put panels


Having farmed in the area for more than 50 years, Mr Hughes said he is concerned that more quality agricultural land will be lost.

"These plans are quite frightening," he said.

"We are losing good quality land here on Anglesey

"From where I live there is a glare from them… will they take away from the value of our houses?

“We live in such a nice place and we should try to keep it as nice as we can."

At present the largest development of its kind in the UK is the Llanwern Solar Farm, Newport, which has a capacity of 75MW.

The Maen Hir project would be almost five times bigger, but a development of a similar size is already being built between Faversham and Whitstable in Kent at a cost of around £450m.

A 49.9MW solar development, over 190 acres, was recently built in Rhosgoch

A spokesperson for Lightsource bp said it "respected local concerns", but that this was "only the start of the process".

It is expected that the land will remain available for grazing even after any panels are installed, with additional screening measures to mitigate the visual effects.

“Currently, our proposals for Prosiect Maen Hir are in the preliminary stages," they said.

"Work is being undertaken to identify the most appropriate areas of the land available to us for development in advance of consultation taking place later this year."

The spokesperson added the company wanted local people to inform and influence the development, and urged them to take part in the consultation.


'Young people are leaving'

Despite being early in the planning process the plans have already been discussed by some of the area's community councils.

Among them is Amlwch Town Council, whose members have already submitted a letter stating their strong opposition.

Chairman Gareth Winston Roberts, said there were "very strong feelings" and that other solar schemes had not created permanent jobs, which he said are badly needed in the area.

Gareth Winston Roberts said there were strong feelings about the plans

"Neither Anglesey nor other local councils have the right to make a decision at the end of the day, nor do Cardiff, and I think that is unfair on us in Wales," he said.

"What effect is it going to have on nearby people?

"It's so big, I think it would be the biggest in the UK, and that’s scary."


An Anglesey council spokesman said the authority would state its position on any proposed development as part of the planning process.

But a final decision is not expected for possibly years, with UK government ministers set to make the final judgment based on Planning Inspectorate recommendations.

Their challenge will be to balance the need for green energy with concerns over the impact of such plans.

UK

Get ready to stop Tory plan to snatch refugees

The Home Office will launch a surprise operation to detain refugees waiting for their asylum decision

By Isabel Ringrose
Sunday 28 April 2024
SOOCIALIST WORKER


Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has a new plan to attack refugees (Picture: Simon Walker)

The Tories are coming for refugees—and they want to block anti-racists from stopping them.

The Home Office will launch a surprise operation to detain refugees waiting for their asylum decision from Monday to prepare them for deportation to Rwanda. This will be done to refugees attending immigration appointments without warning.

The state will also begin to pick-up refugees nationwide in a two-week operation, and hold them for up to ten weeks before the first flight takes off to Rwanda. From here they will be immediately transferred to detention centres who have already been prepared for the rounding up. The first flights are due to take off this summer.

It’s clear why Rishi Sunak has decided to do this—to time with the local elections on Thursday. Sunak hopes cracking down on refugees will secure at least some seats and avoid a landslide humiliation.

The Rwanda bill passed through parliament last week after two years and Sunak wants to waste no time seeing the first flight taking off.

Sunak said, “To detain people while we prepare to remove them, we’ve increased detention spaces to 2,200.

“To quickly process claims, we’ve got 200 trained, dedicated caseworkers ready and waiting. To deal with any legal cases quickly and decisively, the judiciary has made available 25 courtrooms and identified 150 judges who could provide over 5,000 sitting days.”

Cops in Scotland are also on alert to evade street protesters who block detention vans and stop the state snatching refugees. This is because of the strength of anti-racists who have stopped deportation vans before.

Anti-raids mobilisations stopped deportation raids in Glasgow on Kenmure street in May 2021 and Nicholson Square in Edinburgh in June 2022.

And anti-racists across Britain have done similar—in Peckham and Hackney in London and this week in Kent.

Some 100 protesters in Margate last Wednesday blocked the Home Office from taking 22 asylum seekers from a hotel to the Bibby Stockholm barge. The men have been in Margate for seven months and have suffered with ceilings falling down in their rooms.

The Block the Barge group tried to stop the move through letters to MPs and the Home Office, but instead stood last Tuesday night ready to block the removal coach.

This is the type of action that the Tories want to avoid. They know that anti-racists will fight to stop refugees being transported to Rwanda.

And that’s exactly what anti-racists have to do. The Home Office wants to snatch refugees without warning or support, and it can’t be allowed to.

Charity Care4Calais said to those who may be taken, “Please be assured that we remain firmly on your side and ready to help anyone targeted by this inhumane plan.

“Our caseworkers helped stop the first Rwanda fight and with your support we can do it again.”

Anti-raids groups need to be organised and prepared—networks have to make sure that any attempt to transport refugees and lock them in detention centres doesn’t happen. They have to block vans and organise occupations of immigration centres when refugees don’t return from their meetings.

Mass disruption outside Home Office buildings, in town centres and in workplaces have to demand any refugees that are taken are returned from their holding cells—and kept off flights.

And if any refugees are put on planes, they cannot be allowed to take off with a single refugee on board.

It’s time for trade unionists, anti-racists and any who hate the Tories to unite to stop the mass round-ups.

Protests in London over death sentence imposed on Iranian rapper Toomaj Salehi

Sky News
Updated Sun, 28 April 2024 



Demonstrators protested in London on Sunday against the death sentence imposed on a rapper by a court in Iran.

They wore masks of Toomaj Salehi's face and erected a mock gallows outside Downing Street.

The 33-year-old rapper was sentenced to death by a court in the Iranian city of Isfahan earlier this week for his support of the Woman, Life, Freedom movement.


Through his music, Salehi supported months of demonstrations in Iran sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini in 2022.

She died in police custody after being arrested by morality police for allegedly wearing an "improper hijab".

During the protests that followed, Salehi was one of "the leaders of the riots who promoted violence", according to news site Iran International, citing Fars news agency which is affiliated with Iran's Revolutionary Guard.

Iranian flags and placards, including one reading "free Toomaj Salehi - death sentence for rapping", were carried by the protesters in London.

Salehi is known for using his lyrics to criticise the Islamic Republic of Iran, highlighting corruption, poverty, state executions and the killing of protesters.

He was arrested in October 2022 and was sentenced to six years in prison in 2023, avoiding a death sentence after a ruling by Iran's Supreme Court.

But that ruling appears to have been ignored.

"[This court], in an unprecedented move, did not enforce the Supreme Court's ruling... and sentenced Salehi to the harshest punishment," said Salehi's lawyer to the Iranian newspaper Shargh on Wednesday.

Salehi has 20 days to appeal the ruling.

"We will definitely appeal this verdict," his lawyer said.

Across the world, demonstrations have taken place in support of Salehi, including in Spain, the US and Australia.

On social media, the hashtag #FreeToomaj has been trending on platforms such as X, with users calling for Salehi's immediate release.

Protests in London over death sentence imposed on Iranian rapper Toomaj Salehi

Demonstrators in the UK's capital wore masks of Toomaj Salehi's face and carried signs reading "death sentence for rapping" after an Iranian court sentenced the rapper to death for his involvement in women's rights protests.

Sunday 28 April 2024 UK

Demonstrators in London have protested against a death sentence given to a popular rapper in Iran.

Demonstrators protested in London on Sunday against the death sentence imposed on a rapper by a court in Iran.

They wore masks of Toomaj Salehi's face and erected a mock gallows outside Downing Street.

The 33-year-old rapper was sentenced to death by a court in the Iranian city of Isfahan earlier this week for his support of the Woman, Life, Freedom movement.

Through his music, Salehi supported months of demonstrations in Iran sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini in 2022.

A picture of Iranian rapper Toomaj Salehi during a protest in Paris. Pic: AP

She died in police custody after being arrested by morality police for allegedly wearing an "improper hijab".

During the protests that followed, Salehi was one of "the leaders of the riots who promoted violence", according to news site Iran International, citing Fars news agency which is affiliated with Iran's Revolutionary Guard.

Iranian flags and placards, including one reading "free Toomaj Salehi - death sentence for rapping", were carried by the protesters in London.

Toomaj Salehi: Iranian rapper sentenced to death for supporting Mahsa Amini protests, says lawyer


Salehi is known for using his lyrics to criticise the Islamic Republic of Iran, highlighting corruption, poverty, state executions and the killing of protesters.

He was arrested in October 2022 and was sentenced to six years in prison in 2023, avoiding a death sentence after a ruling by Iran's Supreme Court.


Advertisement

But that ruling appears to have been ignored.


"[This court], in an unprecedented move, did not enforce the Supreme Court's ruling... and sentenced Salehi to the harshest punishment," said Salehi's lawyer to the Iranian newspaper Shargh on Wednesday.

Salehi has 20 days to appeal the ruling.

"We will definitely appeal this verdict," his lawyer said.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky NewsTap here

Across the world, demonstrations have taken place in support of Salehi, including in Spain, the US and Australia.

On social media, the hashtag #FreeToomaj has been trending on platforms such as X, with users calling for Salehi's immediate release.

 

Squad scores with Summer Lee win but faces a long primary calendar

BY JULIA MUELLER - 04/28/24 

Rep. Summer Lee’s primary victory over a more moderate Democrat in Pennsylvania this week offered a jolt of momentum for progressives and dialed up the urgency for those targeting the “Squad.”

It was a promising result for fellow Squad members, especially Democratic Reps. Jamaal Bowman (N.Y.) and Cori Bush (Mo.), who are both trying to fend off formidable primary threats of their own amid an influx of spending by pro-Israel groups looking to topple them.

“I expect we’re going to see a doubling down on some of the races they’ve already invested in,” Matt Duss, a former senior foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), said of organizations targeting the Squad. “And we’re going to see progressives doubling down to defend.” 

The Israel-Hamas war has highlighted significant divides within the Democratic Party as progressives demand a cease-fire and criticize both Israel and the Biden administration’s handling of the crisis.

Lee, one of the first lawmakers to call for a cease-fire, fended off a challenge on Tuesday from Edgewood Councilmember Bhavini Patel with an edge of roughly 20 points, according to Decision Desk HQ. Patel, a more moderate Democrat who accused Lee of antisemitism, was backed by billionaire GOP donor Jeffrey Yass, but Lee had amassed a sizeable war chest of her own. 

“It is a clear indication that progressives who can put together significant money and significant ground operations can win races against almost anybody,” said Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf, who argued Lee’s win stokes “urgency” and “intensity” for “those who want to keep the Squad going.” 

“The question then becomes … is the campaign in Pittsburgh an indication of where this is going to go? It’s one instance,” Sheinkopf said. 

Progressives should see Lee’s primary win in Pennsylvania as “a good sign heading into elections,” said Democratic strategist Michael Starr Hopkins. “If you’re Bowman, you’re feeling a lot better the day after the [primary] election than you were the day before.” 

But while Lee’s win is an overall boost for liberals, it’s no guarantee that her fellow Squad members will coast to victory. 

“One win or one loss does not signal a trend,” said Democratic strategist Rodell Mollineau. “Each of the Squad’s districts are different. Summer Lee’s district is nothing like [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-N.Y.)] district, and it’s nothing like Cori Bush’s district, and so on and so forth.” 

Notably, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a top pro-Israel group, didn’t wade into Lee’s primary race this year — though it invested heavily to back her Republican rival when she first ran for the seat back in 2022. 

The group has endorsed challengers in key Squad races and reportedly plans to spend $100 million to target progressive candidates. The United Democracy Project, AIPAC’s super PAC, raised more than $49 million in the first quarter of this year, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission. 

In New York’s 16th Congressional District, Bowman faces Westchester County executive George Latimer, and in Missouri’s 1st, Bush is up against St. Louis County prosecuting attorney Wesley Bell. AIPAC is backing and contributing to both challengers. 

Extensive polling hasn’t been done on those races, but some results signal potential trouble for the progressive incumbents. One February survey conducted by a Republican firm showed Bush down 22 points. And a March survey conducted by Democratic pollster Mark Mellman for the Democratic Majority for Israel showed Bowman down 17. 

AIPAC is also currently “evaluating other primary races involving detractors of the U.S.-Israel relationship,” spokesperson Marshall Wittmann told The Hill in an email.

“We will be engaged in races where our involvement can have the greatest impact. The stakes are enormous in the upcoming election, and the voice of the pro-Israel movement will be heard,” Wittmann said. 

The group has notably spent $4.6 million, filings show, to oppose California state Sen. Dave Min, whose campaign to replace Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.) in the House was backed by the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Min has reportedly been critical of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu but has not called for a permanent cease-fire. 

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D) also faces a primary challenge in Minneapolis, part of Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District, from moderate Democrat and former City Council member Don Samuels, who she beat back in 2022 by just 2 points.

Omar was one of the original members of the Squad, while Lee and Bowman were later additions; the group is an informal label for roughly eight House progressives. 

Despite the energy behind those who would oust the Squad members, strategists underscored that it’s tough to beat incumbents. Sheinkopf noted that Bowman and Bush are both running in areas with significant minority communities. 

Lee made reference to her imperiled fellow progressives during her acceptance speech on Tuesday night. 

“I’m unapologetic when people say, ‘Are you in the Squad?’ Whatever, yes. Those are my people. … We got this victory here in Pittsburgh, but this is just the first step. This was the first race. So we gotta make sure that we have the same energy and we pick it up and we take it over to New York next,” Lee said. “And when we’re done with Jamaal Bowman, we’re heading over to St. Louis, where we’ll make sure … Cori Bush gets over the finish line.” 

A coalition of progressive groups launched a “Reject AIPAC” campaign last month, aimed at protecting targeted lawmakers. 

“After failing to find a candidate corrupt enough to run on their agenda, and seeing how connected Summer Lee is to the community, AIPAC stayed out of this election. Now, we’re ramping up to take on AIPAC in Jamaal Bowman’s race,” said Michele Weindling, political director for the Sunrise Movement, one of the groups in that coalition. 

Bowman’s primary in New York will take place in mid-June, and Bush’s Missouri race will fall in early August. 

Foreign policy is often shrugged off in presidential cycles, but tensions around the war in Gaza and U.S. support for Israel appear poised to bleed into races up and down the ballot. 

President Biden has faced significant protest votes and boycotts at the ballot box in several state primaries, making the war a political liability that could complicate his run in a tight rematch with former President Trump. 

The incumbent has also been interrupted at multiple campaign stops by pro-Palestinian protestors — some organized by the “Abandon Biden” movement, which hopes to punish the president by withholding votes on Election Day, even if it means clearing the way for Trump to take the Oval Office. 

“I think it’s true that foreign policy rarely plays a major role in elections or in voters’ decisions. But I do think this issue — the issue of Israel, Palestine, the issue of Palestinian rights and Gaza, especially — resonates because it’s seen as not just a foreign policy issue. It’s an issue of social and racial justice,” Duss said. 

“I think with the level of outrage we’re seeing … it’s really something that the party is going to have to contend with in a better way than they have up until now.”

Biden crackdown on power plants expected to speed shift away from coal

BY RACHEL FRAZIN - 04/28/24 

AP Photo/Charlie Riedel, File

Emissions rise from the smokestacks at the Jeffrey Energy Center coal power plant as the sun sets, near Emmett, Kan., Sept. 18, 2021.

The Biden administration’s crackdown on power plants’ planet-warming emissions will accelerate a shift away from coal, and potentially speed the U.S.’s adoption of renewable energy sources.

The administration this past week announced a new rule that will require coal plants and new gas plants to install carbon-capture technology to mitigate 90 percent of their emissions — or find another way to achieve the equivalent climate protections. 

But experts say that instead of trying to meet these requirements, more coal plants may just retire — and some power companies may opt to invest in renewables over keeping existing coal plants or putting costly carbon capture on new gas ones. 

“What we’ve seen, even without these rules, is that coal generation is falling,” said Christopher Knittel, a professor of applied economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), noting that “the writing’s kind of on the wall” because of fracking driving down natural gas prices.

“But,” Knittel added, “these new rules will certainly push to speed that transition up.”

The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) analysis shows that the rule could increase the amount of coal power that comes offline between 2028 and 2035 by nearly 25 percent.

The agency projects that without the rule, 84 gigawatts of coal power would have retired during that period. But under the rule, that number is expected to jump to 104 gigawatts of power. 

Research firm BloombergNEF reached similar findings for this decade. 

Julia Attwood, an industrial decarbonization specialist with the firm, estimated that around 44 gigawatts of coal power were due to retire by the end of 2030 anyway, but the rule will cause an additional 30 to 40 gigawatts to go offline during that period.

Attwood said BloombergNEF models an average coal plant as being equivalent to about 0.65 gigawatts, so this would amount to around 46 to 62 additional plant closures during that period. 

“A lot of coal plants are just going to be pushed to retirement because of the expense of using [carbon capture and storage],” she said.

The new rule received significant pushback from coal advocates, including workers, industry members and Republicans. 

Cecil Roberts, president of the United Mine Workers of America union, said in a written statement that it “looks to set the funeral date for thermal coal mining in America for 2032” — the date by which coal plants will now be required to cut their emissions.

Roberts added that the rule will “threaten the livelihoods of our members” and said the administration has been unsuccessful at replacing the jobs lost by miners in the energy transition thus far.

“I am not aware of a single dislocated coal miner who has been hired as a result of legislation or other initiatives put in place over the last several years,” he said. 

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), meanwhile, said she would introduce legislation to challenge the rule. 

“The administration has chosen to press ahead with its unrealistic climate agenda that threatens access to affordable, reliable energy for households and employers across the country,” Capito, the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said in a written statement. 

“I will be introducing a Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval to overturn the EPA’s job-killing regulations announced today,” she added.

In addition to driving the country further away from coal, the rule may also speed up an ongoing shift toward renewable energy.

The EPA projects the rule will boost the amount of the country’s power that is supplied by renewable energy by an additional 4 percent in 2030. Its impact will taper off over the years, however, as renewables would also be expected to grow under previous policies: In 2040, it is expected to result in just 1 percent more renewable energy.

Attwood of BloombergNEF said she believes the rule is good for renewables because it will “free up some needed capacity on the grid that renewables can fill.”

Mark Thurber, associate director at Stanford University’s Program on Energy and Sustainable Development, said that renewables’ reliance on weather conditions means they may not be able to sub in for coal in many cases.

“It’s kind of an apples and oranges comparison between renewables and then on the other side, gas and coal, because of the intermittency of those renewables,” Thurber said.

But Attwood noted that the rule’s exclusion of existing gas plants from the new requirements could keep some such plants online — mitigating concerns about renewables not working when there’s no sun or wind.

Knittel from MIT also believes the rule will “delay the closure of existing gas plants” because maintaining such plants will be cheaper than building new gas ones with carbon capture.

The Biden administration initially proposed restricting emissions from some existing gas plants under the rule but ultimately dropped those provisions, saying it would pursue a separate rule for existing gas.

It may not have time to do so if Biden isn’t reelected in November, however — and if former President Trump returns to the White House, he is not expected to increase climate regulations on power plants. 

“The big uncertainty that really remains here is what happens with existing gas plants,” Attwood said.

“If it’s the same administration, then the EPA will probably go back to those gas plants and try to figure out a way to put emissions restraints on them as well,” she added.