baldy resaerched gbubins

————————————————————
From: baldmosher™
Sent: 27 June 2012 11:35
To: Natural History Museum <Feedback@nhm.ac.uk>
Subject: Please don’t host an arms dealers’ reception

Dear Dr Dixon,

I was very disappointed to learn that the main reception for Farnborough International will be held at the Museum this July.

Farnborough International is an international arms fair which brings governments which abuse human rights together with weapons sellers. In 2010 the delegations included Libya, Bahrain, China, Saudi Arabia and Algeria. Exhibitors in 2012 include Rosoboronexport, currently arming the Assad regime in Syria.

I support the Museum’s mission to inspire better care of our planet; I do not believe that the Museum’s support for events which promote the arms trade is compatible with that mission. Please cancel the reception and end the Museum’s association with the arms trade.

Yours sincerely,
baldmosher™

————————————————————
From: Natural History Museum <Feedback@nhm.ac.uk>
Sent: 3 July 2012 12:14
To: baldmosher™
Subject: Please don’t host an arms dealers’ reception

Dear baldmosher™,

Thank you for your email addressed to Dr Dixon. The Director is aware of your concerns and we have been asked to respond on his behalf.

We routinely make parts of our building available for private hire by charities, companies, government bodies and individuals for a wide range of events throughout the year. These private events are not partnerships, sponsorships, and the hirers do not have any an association with us beyond the rental of the space. Farnborough International Ltd is not a corporate sponsor or patron of the Museum.

The income from hiring our spaces provides a valuable source of revenue which enables us to continue important research into understanding the natural world, as well as provide inspiring exhibitions and events for over 4 million visitors a year. Our goal is to maintain and develop the national collections to promote the discovery, understanding, responsible use and enjoyment of the natural world. We do not campaign or lobby for any other organisation or cause unrelated to that mission.

We appreciate that commercial activities can give rise to a range of opinions and we respect your right to hold different views. Should you have any further queries related to specifically to Farnborough International Ltd activities please contact them directly at enquiries@farnborough.com.

Yours sincerely,

Catarina Nunes
Customer Services
The Natural History Museum

————————————————————
From: baldmosher™
Sent: 03 July 2012 13:15
To: Natural History Museum <Feedback@nhm.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Thank you for your feedback

Dear Catarina,

The Museum is receiving direct payment from and directly providing the use of its buildings to a private company that will directly facilitate the sale of weapons to various countries with a deplorable record of human rights abuse. Direct association between the two is unavoidable and undeniable.

However, I accept that enabling the deaths of innocent civilians around the world is not at odds with the specific goals of the Museum, and I thank you for clarifying that point.

In order that I may form a full and factually correct opinion on the ethics of NHM, with its stated goals in mind, perhaps you could confirm (hypothetically speaking) that bookings by the following commercial industries would be refused:
- whaling
- non-renewable energy generation
- large scale intensive/”factory” farming
- large scale deforestation and/or surface mining and/or non-exploratory drilling

Yours sincerely,
baldmosher™

————————————————————
From: feedback <Feedback@nhm.ac.uk>
Date: 3 July 2012 16:49
Subject: RE: Thank you for your feedback
To: baldmosher™

Dear baldmosher™

Thank you for your follow up email which has been forwarded to me by my colleague.

With regard to commercial hire of our premises, we do not rule out working with any specific company, individual or sector, but for each enquiry, as with the case of Farnborough International Ltd we consider:

* the proposition
* the client and their business
* the nature of the event

We also consider whether the format or the content of the event may be damaging to the Museum; put the building, safety or well being of staff, guests or contractors at risk. We provide a venue for many receptions for a wide range of different organisations through the year.

We regularly review our processes and procedures to ensure that we are following best practice and that they meet the needs of the organisation. Part of this includes giving consideration to the feedback that we have received from the public on relevant issues. We really appreciate the time and thought that people put into giving us feedback, and consider it in the wider context of our mission and objectives.

Apart from the ‘grant in aid’ from the Government, the Museum is encouraged to develop and grow our businesses in order to raise further funds for the upkeep of the Museum, its collections and the visitor offer. Our Catering and Events business is an important part of this. However we certainly appreciate people’s concerns as to how we fund ourselves in the future. Undoubtedly this will be a very important topic for consideration in the current economic climate.

Once again thank you for raising issue with us.

Yours sincerely

Robert How
Customer Services Manager
Natural History Museum

Jun 28

Zombie Apocalypse? Don’t be daft. PCP? Nope. Bath salts? No evidence of that either. In fact, sobriety probably caused this vicious attack.

Jun 01

Fish Fight

Dear Richard Beynon,

I write to you regarding the ongoing discussions in the European Parliament about reforms to EU fishing policy.

Despite the public protestations of British MPs such as yourself in support of British MEPs such as Chris Davies, the explicit backing of hundreds of thousands of people in Britain, plus hundreds of thousands more people across Europe who have heard of the “Fish Fight” campaign, why has the British government not yet give its firm support to a total ban on discards? I appreciate that the details of any such ban are yet to be finalised, but adopting this neutral position weakens any arguments in favour of a ban and thus a swift end to the shocking waste of perfectly good fish.

Yours sincerely
baldmosher™

You have come through to my parliamentary email address. However, just to reassure you, we are determined to get meaningful reform and agree that the June meeting is vital. We are working well with the Dutch, German and Scandinavian Governments to get a clear way forward on eliminating discards and on achieving MSY in the management of fisheries

May 14

Jan 15

Dec 19

Letter to/from Paul Nuttall MEP (Fish Fight)

Dear Constituent

Thank you for your email regarding reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP).

The CFP has, quite frankly, been an economic and environmental disaster in which the UK fishing industry and fish stocks have suffered terribly.

The draconian quotas system, forced on to us by the EU, has led to the throwing of dead fish back into the sea. For example in the North Sea, nearly half of all fish caught are thrown back dead. That is nearly one million tonnes a year.

But the question remains what we can do about it?

As I’m sure you are aware, the UK gave up regulation of the fishing industry to the EU. So not one MP you or anyone else elected in the UK can propose or amend law regarding discards or the wider fishing sector. The government repeatedly comes out against discards, as was seen by the recent “fish fight” (CFP reform) campaign led by Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall. What is laughably called the Fisheries Minister, supports Hugh, but can do nothing about it.

So Hugh went to the top. He met with EU Commissioner Damanaki (Fisheries portfolio) and for the cameras, she said that “you the people can make this change” - when in fact this isn’t true. The EU parliament has very little say and is easily ignored by the Commission, which is the only body that can really regulate.

The UK MPs you elect can’t do anything about it, the UK government can’t do anything about it, the MEPs you vote for are powerless to initiate reform. No one you vote for can initiate or substantially change any CFP reform. It is at this point I have to ask the question, what sort of democracy do we live in when we can’t change a policy by the ballot box?

This gets to the core of my position. The only way we can deal with the problem of discards is by taking back control of fishing policy and instituting policies to end such waste - which means kicking the EU out of Britain.

But this is just the tip of the iceberg. There are more and more areas becoming an EU “competence”; look at environmental legislation and the effects of bio fuels on developing countries, look at the Common Agriculture Policy - one disaster after another and there’s nothing we can do about it because the Commission calls the shots, and we can’t vote them in or out.

UKIP policy on fishing can be summarised as below:

• Immediately withdraw from the Common Fisheries Policy

• Reassert our territorial rights, reclaim our fishing grounds, restore our fishing fleet and support our fishing industry for future generations

• Return £2.5bn a year in fish sales to the UK economy

• Establish an ‘Exclusive Economic Zone’ extending 200 nautical miles from the UK’s coastline over which the UK exerts total control

• Abandon all EU quotas and strictly forbid the shameful discarding of dead fish - sometimes up to 70% of catches or 800,000 tons p.a.

• Require all commercial species of fish caught, regardless of size or species, to be landed and recorded. This will allow the Government to determine how best to manage the recovery of UK fishing grounds. To preserve fish stocks, UKIP will establish a system of moveable ‘No Take Zones’ allowing fish to spawn and assisting recovery in overfished areas

• Ban all forms of industrial fishing and pair trawling for bass. Industrial trawlers have helped cause a catastrophic decline in key fish species

• Strengthen the UK’s Fishery Protection resources to guard British fishing grounds

As a member of the Fisheries Committee, Nigel Farage (UKIP Leader) in the EU “Parliament” has made many speeches against discards. Here is one from the hearing of Commissioner Damanaki:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUYrj-mjIu4

I shall, of course, vote against the quota system any chance I get, and will continue to speak out against discards as much as I can in the media.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Nuttall

UKIP MEP - North West

www.paulnuttallmep.com

www.ukip.org, www.ukipmeps.org

——-Original Message——-
Sent: 14 December 2011 12:07
To: NUTTALL Paul
Subject: [SPAM SUSPECTED] FishFight - Email Your MEP

Dear Paul Nuttall MEP

As one of your constituents, I have previously written to you to express my deep concerns about the future of Europe’s fisheries.

Over three quarters of European stocks are already overfished, and half of the fish caught in the North Sea are thrown back dead. The current system is clearly not working, and needs to be radically overhauled. The 2012 reform of the Common Fisheries Policy is your chance to lay the foundations for healthier and more sustainable fisheries for generations to come.

I am one of over 750,000 people who have joined Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstallâ€™s Fish Fight campaign. In May, the House of Commons supported a motion to vote against the proposed EU reform of the CFP if it is not based on sustainability principles.

As my representative in the European Parliament, I urge you to press for a CFP reform that will ensure environmentally sustainable fishing in EU waters by:

• setting fishing levels so that they will produce sustainable stocks by 2015;

• eliminating discards;

• implementing ecosystem based fisheries management and involving all stakeholders;

• providing financial aid only to sustainable activities;

• eradicating all illegal fishing.

Thank you in advance for your support.

Yours sincerely

Dec 15

Please sign petition against arming oppressive regimes

This year, weapons supplied by this country have been deployed against democracy protesters in the Middle East and North Africa. There was public outcry when it emerged that the UK has sold equipment including tear gas, crowd control ammunition and fire arms to Bahrain and Libya.

Yet the UK is still supplying arms to authoritarian regimes today. Despite continuing repression, the government has continued to issue licences for arms exports to Bahrain, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other authoritarian and troubled states. This is NOT OK

The Government says its arms trading is “responsible” - yet it is supplying human rights abusers and conflict zones. While public services are being cut, taxpayers’ money is spent on promoting the arms trade. I’ve just signed Campaign Against Arms Trade’s petition to say This is NOT OK: http://www.caat.org.uk/not-ok

Please support CAAT in this petition and send it to anyone you think would be interested.

Best wishes,

Tom

Dec 14

Letter to/from Chris Davies MEP (Fish Fight)

Thank you very much for your e-mail regarding EU fisheries policy.

I agree completely with the contents of your e-mail. Last year I set up the European Parliament’s ‘Fish for the Future’ group which has been campaigning hard to bring about a sustainable fisheries policy in Europe.

Crucial votes on the future of the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy will take place around June next year. That’s when Ministers are likely to haggle out their response to the European Commission’s reform proposals, and when the European Parliament’s Fisheries Committee will vote.

I’m not hopeful of the latter. Although the rapporteur (the lead MEP) is a German Social Democrat with a genuine desire to introduce a sustainable approach, the committee’s membership is weighted towards Spanish, French and Italian members who have in the past demonstrated opposition to the reform we seek.

There are still far too many people who want to deny the reality of declining fish stocks and do the minimum, yet the evidence suggests that if we reduce our catches sufficiently we could see a dramatic recovery within just a few years.

The thrust of the Commission’s proposals are fine but they lack detail and are open to different interpretations. I’m drafting the Environment Committee’s response so will try to tighten a package that must put at its core a commitment to long term plans based on the best science available.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact me on this important issue. Please continue to lobby all your MEPs to ensure that they too wish to bring about a sustainable future for fish.

Yours sincerely

Chris Davies MEP
Liberal Democrat Environment Spokesperson in the European Parliament

——-Original Message——-
Sent: 14 December 2011 11:14
Subject: FishFight - Email Your MEP

Dear Chris Davies MEP

As one of your constituents, I have previously written to you to express my deep concerns about the future of Europeâ€™s fisheries.

Over three quarters of European stocks are already overfished, and half of the fish caught in the North Sea are thrown back dead. The current system is clearly not working, and needs to be radically overhauled. The 2012 reform of the Common Fisheries Policy is your chance to lay the foundations for healthier and more sustainable fisheries for generations to come.

I am one of over 750,000 people who have joined Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstallâ€™s Fish Fight campaign. In May, the House of Commons supported a motion to vote against the proposed EU reform of the CFP if it is not based on sustainability principles.

As my representative in the European Parliament, I urge you to press for a CFP reform that will ensure environmentally sustainable fishing in EU waters by:

- setting fishing levels so that they will produce sustainable stocks by 2015;
- eliminating discards;
- implementing ecosystem based fisheries management and involving all stakeholders;
- providing financial aid only to sustainable activities;
- eradicating all illegal fishing.

Thank you in advance for your support.

Yours sincerely

baldmosher™