-in-Monaco-cr3t0pgd.jpeg%3Ftrim%3D0%2C0%2C2%2C0%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
Prince William calls for urgent action to save world's oceans ‘diminishing before our eyes'
Prince William has issued an impassioned call for 'immediate action' to save the world's oceans, warning that ecosystems vital for humanity's survival are 'diminishing before our eyes'.
Stressing that 'healthy oceans are essential to all life on Earth', the Prince of Wales warned that 'we all stand to be impacted' by the destruction of ocean life.
In a speech to heads of state and other delegates at the Blue Economy and Finance Forum in Monaco, the future monarch insisted that – despite the threat presenting a challenge like none humanity has faced before – there 'remains time to turn this tide'.
But he warned that the 'clock is ticking', with bold action needed 'to protect and restore our planet'.
William addressed Sunday's forum in his role as founder of the Earthshot Prize, launched by the prince in 2020 with the aim of taking steps to tackle environmental problems within a decade.
World leaders were greeted by a blue carpet as they arrived at the event, with William meeting French president Emmanuel Macron, Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, Prince Albert II of Monaco, and Costa Rica's president Rodrigo Chaves Robles.
The oceans generate half the world's oxygen, regulate the climate, and provide food for more than three billion people, William noted in his speech, which came ahead of the UN Ocean Conference, which begins in France on Monday.
But he warned: 'Rising sea temperatures, plastic pollution and overfishing are putting pressure on these fragile ecosystems, and on the people and communities who depend most upon them. What once seemed an abundant resource is diminishing before our eyes.
'We all stand to be impacted, and we are all responsible for change, both negative and positive.'
The heir to the British throne hailed the target agreed at the UN Biodiversity Summit in 2022 aiming to protect at least 30 per cent of the world's land and sea by 2030 as 'our best chance at reversing the damage done to our planet and restoring its wellbeing'.
'But the clock is ticking,' he said. '2030 is fast approaching, and only 17 per cent of land and just 3 per cent of the ocean has been fully protected. If we are to reach our goal, we urgently need to take bold action to protect and restore our planet.
'This challenge is like none we have faced before. But I remain an optimist. I believe that urgency and optimism have the power to bring about the action needed to change the course of history.'
Having filmed a conversation with Sir David Attenborough last month at the Royal Festival Hall, he praised the 99-year-old's new documentary Oceans – released on Sunday – as making 'the most compelling argument for immediate action that I have ever seen'.
He added: 'Watching human activity reduce beautiful sea forests to barren deserts at the base of our oceans is simply heartbreaking. For many, it is an urgent wake-up call to just what is going on in our oceans. But it can no longer be a matter of 'out of sight, out of mind'. The need to act to protect our ocean is now in full view.'
'The ocean is under enormous threat, but it can revive itself. But only if we act now,' said the prince.
On Saturday, William's office released a clip from his recent conversation with Sir David, in which the veteran broadcaster tells him: 'The thing which I am appalled by, when I first saw the shots that were taken for this film are what we have done to the deep ocean floor.
'If you did anything remotely like it on land, everybody would be up in arms.'
Referring to the words of Sir David in his closing remarks, William told the auditorium of 1,800 people on Sunday: 'Halfway through this decisive decade, I call on all of you to think big in your actions.
'Let us act together with urgency and optimism while we still have the chance. For the future of our planet, for the future generations, we must listen to the words of Sir David Attenborough: 'If we save the sea, we save our world.''
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Against Identity by Alexander Douglas review – a superb critique of contemporary self-obsession
Identity is something socially negotiated, both claimed and given. I cannot be French if that nation does not exist; I can't be a doctor if no one will grant me a medical degree. Social media, however, promises that we can don or doff identities like so many digital masks. We may become persuaded that identities are private goods over which we have rights of ownership and choice, that we can freely select what we 'identify as'. The heightened salience of identity in modern political discourse thus represents an unwitting internalisation of the neoliberal view of humans as atomised individuals who navigate life purely by expressing consumer preferences. The idea that the identity of the speaker should count when assessing his or her argument is what the right used to denounce as 'identity politics' (now subsumed under the general concept of 'wokeness'), though it is in this way a logical outcome of Thatcherite and Reaganite economics. One strong critique of the critique of identity politics, on the other hand, points out that privileged white males, of the sort who make such complaints, don't have to worry about their identity because theirs is the default one of power and influence – whereas for various minorities identity might matter much more, not least in how it influences the ways in which privileged white males will treat them. Philosopher Alexander Douglas's deeply interesting book diagnoses our malaise, ecumenically, as a universal enslavement to identity. An alt-right rabble rouser who denounces identity politics is just as wedded to his identity as a leftwing 'activist' is wedded to theirs. And this, Douglas argues persuasively, explains the polarised viciousness of much present argument. People respond to criticisms of their views as though their very identity is being attacked. The response is visceral and emotional. That's why factchecking conspiracy theories doesn't work. And it's not just a social media problem; it's far worse than that. 'If you define yourself by your ethnicity or your taste in music,' Douglas argues, 'then you ipso facto demarcate yourself against others who do not share in that identity. Here we have the basis for division and intergroup conflict.' The escape route Douglas recommends is nothing so banal, then, as policing misinformation or even just being nicer to one another; no, we should strive to abandon identity all together. He deploys close readings of three thinkers from wildly differing epochs and cultures: the ancient Chinese sage Zhuangzi, the 17th-century Dutch philosopher Benedict Spinoza, and the 20th-century historian-critic René Girard. Each of them, he argues, hints at a similar ideal of enlightenment: to abandon our attachment to identity and become one with the undifferentiated flow of all things. This sounds fluffy and improbable in precis, but we should begin by noticing how fragile our own sense of self really is. Douglas says of his three thinkers: 'Look within, they would say, and you will find a mess. Introspection reveals only a confusion of qualities.' Oddly, the author doesn't mention the great Scottish philosopher David Hume, though his is probably the most famous expression of this idea: that what we call the self is, per Hume, 'nothing but a bundle or collection of different perceptions, which succeed each other with an inconceivable rapidity, and are in a perpetual flux and movement'. If so, it follows that what we think of as our identity must have been drawn from the example of others. This is the meaning of 'mimetic desire' as theorised by Girard: that we choose an admired person to imitate and so teach ourselves to want similar things. 'Individualism,' Douglas concludes, 'is really conformism to a model.' What we think of as our own special identity is just a suit of borrowed clothes. What, then, is the alternative? It is somehow to psychically merge with the 'superdeterminate' nature of Spinoza's concept of God, who exists everywhere and in every thing. Has any human being achieved such a feat? Perhaps, Douglas suggests, Jesus. Another model for us is Hundun, an emperor with no face in an old Chinese fable. His friends drilled holes into his head in an attempt to give him human features, and thereby killed him. Against Identity is a powerfully strange book, melding such matters with enjoyable references to Evelyn Waugh and Jean-Paul Sartre, and a strongly aphoristic turn of phrase. 'The 'inner voice',' he writes, 'is just the noise of others echoing inside your own emptiness.' To the 'romantic lie' that says you can be what you want to be, Douglas counterposes the bracing challenge: Don't be yourself. Sign up to Inside Saturday The only way to get a look behind the scenes of the Saturday magazine. Sign up to get the inside story from our top writers as well as all the must-read articles and columns, delivered to your inbox every weekend. after newsletter promotion Here, then, is a superb counterblast to modern identity fetishism. Whether readers will agree with its proposed solution is more doubtful. It warns against 'making value judgments', but we should make some value judgments, for example about murderers. And Douglas relays the Taoist advice he finds in Zhuangzi like this: 'We would be happier and more peaceful letting things flow, vanish, transform, be indistinct, be ambiguous' – which is all very well, but terrible advice if you're trying to build a bridge. Against Identity: The Wisdom of Escaping the Self by Alexander Douglas is published by Allen Lane (£20). To support the Guardian, order your copy at Delivery charges may apply.
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Use car industry fines to boost EV sales, says Polestar boss
Polestar UK MD Galvin has been outspoken in his views on government support for electric vehicles, telling us last year that the UK is the ' worst in Europe ' for electric car incentives. Now his frustrations are boiling over on additional EV taxes and a lack of incentives for people to drive cleaner electric cars. 'I find it immensely frustrating that the government is slowly nibbling away at the few benefits that are left for retail buyers or any driver actually to consider an electric car,' Galvin told The Independent. Galvin also takes issue with the government's expensive car supplement, a levy on 'luxury' EVs costing more than £40,000. 'The supplement was [extended to EVs] in April with a value that was created back in 2017 and not adjusted for inflation. It's completely ridiculous. Even a Vauxhall Astra Electric is considered a luxury car with that price cap.' Also hindering the transition to EVs is a recent proposal by TfL to extend London's congestion charge to include electric vehicles, says Galvin. 'There wasn't going to be any preferential rate for EVs. Now there is a small discount, but the fact is as retail demand for electric cars is still sluggish, we need more carrot and less stick to attract as many people as possible to make that transition.' 'They should leave the congestion charge alone. The air quality in our towns and cities is widely reported as not being particularly good. And one of the ways to make that better is, of course, to encourage more people to drive an EV.' Galvin suggests a congestion charge exemption for EV drivers and preferable parking rates. 'We also need a fiscal incentive for retail customers to consider an EV. We keep talking about it, the government keep not listening.' Galvin also has a plan for how EV incentives could be introduced at no cost to taxpayers. 'I don't think the taxpayer should fund that incentive, but what we could do is use the fines that are going to be paid by [car makers] for not meeting the ZEV mandate to fund it. Then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy with no taxpayer liability. It means those [car makers] that aren't compliant end up funding the incentive to attract more customers to electric cars.' The ZEV mandate was introduced to push car makers to increase the number of EVs they sell, with the 2025 target set at 28 per cent. Recent changes to the mandate allowed car makers greater flexibility in meeting those targets through the use of a credit system that includes relying on future sales of EVs. Galvin thinks it was the wrong move. 'What that has done is allow manufacturers to kick the can down the road in terms of accelerating the change to zero emission vehicles by mortgaging future underperformance further and further and further into the future. 'When we all get to 2029 and that can has been kicked down the road for the past four years, are we suddenly going to meet the target overnight? No, we're not. There needs to be a roadmap which gets people to that compliance level and that roadmap has been altered significantly.' However, industry mouthpiece SMMT (Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders) has been more positive, saying 'recent adjustments to the ZEV mandate were welcome'. Galvin is aware of the impression he gives as the boss of an electric car company criticising the government for not trying to boost electric car sales. However, he's confident that his proposals wouldn't be criticised by tax payers. 'The irony of me saying this as a boss of an electric car company isn't lost on me. But if you follow the method that I just described, which is to use the fine revenue from OEMs that miss the ZEV mandate to fund incentives, the revenues are coming from a fine mechanism that was never budgeted for in the first place.'
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
French budget minister warns of IMF, EU oversight risk
PARIS, June 10 (Reuters) - France must put its finances into order or face the risk of being placed under the supervision of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or of European institutions, Budget Minister Amelie de Montchalin said on Tuesday. "Today, we need to seize the budgetary weapon again, get our house in order, and put it back in order, because if we don't, others will decide for us," Montchalin told RTL radio. "There is a risk of supervision by international institutions, European institutions, our creditors," she added when asked if France faced a risk of supervision by the IMF. French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou plans to unveil proposals in July to get public finances under control, hoping to push through a 40-billion-euro ($45.62 billion) budget squeeze in 2026. France has a long history of flouting EU overspending rules and is currently running the biggest public sector deficit in the euro zone, at an estimated 5.4% of economic output this year. ($1 = 0.8768 euros)
