Dominick Chilcott

France and the US: once again a revolutionary alliance

New Haven, West Virginia may seem an unlikely spot for a revolution. The town is dominated by American Electric Power's monster (1,300 mega watts) coal-burning, Mountaineer power station but is otherwise unremarkable. But that is where AEP and the French company Alstom began, last Friday, to show the world that there really might be such a thing as clean coal. If this carbon capture and storage pilot works out, the effect really will be revolutionary.
 
The conundrum is a familiar one. Human beings need electricity and, in many countries, the cheapest and most available source of fuel to produce that electricity is coal. 50% of the US's electricity is produced from coal-fired power stations. The figure is about 33% in the UK. China is said to be building a new coal-fired power station every two weeks to meet its growing energy needs.
 
But buring coal produces a lot of carbon dioxide; in fact, twice as much, per unit of power generated, as gas does. 
 
The science is not complicated. If we are to restrict the rise in the average temperature of our planet to 2 degrees Celsius (above which scientists estimate the effects of global warming become catastrophic), we have to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas (that cause the greenhouse warming effect) in the atmosphere. In practice, that means we have to drastically cut back the burning of fossil fuels, which produce CO2 and of which coal is one of the worst offenders.
 
Humankind appears to be caught on the horns of a dilemma. We can have the electricity that powers our lives but warms the planet to dangerous levels or we can preserve our climate and save the planet for future generations. But not both.
 
The philosopher's stone of climate change and energy is a solution that enables us to have our electricity and preserve our planet. For some time, scientists and engineers have talked about methods to capture carbon and store it away from the atmosphere. But it had never been attempted in an intergrated system at a coal-buring power plant.
 
Until last week. At the Mountaineer plant at New Haven, West Virginia. Alstom have built a CCS plant at AEP's power station that uses chilled ammonia to capture the CO2. The gas is then pumped thousands of feet underground into safe storage. Alstom reckons that its system will capture and store some 90% of all the CO2 passing through it. For now, that applies only to 20mw, a fraction, of the power generated at Mountaineer. But the intention is to scale up the CCS activity as it proves itself.
 
In Britain, the government are strong supporters of finding a commercially viable CCS system. Our target is to achieve this by 2020. For now, that means any new combustion plant must be designed to be able to retrofit CCS once it is commercially proven. Once the technology is proven, all new coal power stations approved after April 2009 will have five years to retrofit CCS to their full capacity. The UK is fortunate in being so close to the North Sea where there are a number of potential sites for storing captured CO2 in depleted gas and oil reservoirs .
 
So last week was a beginning, the start of a clean revolution in power generation, a shot heard around the world. And it was fired by an American company in alliance with a French one. But this time, unlike in the American revolutionary war, the British are on the same side as the US and France. And we all hope that the revolution succeeds.

Posted at 14:50 04 November 2009 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[0]

2009 Marshall Scholars

Yesterday, I wished bon voyage to this year's group of Marshall Scholars, who are heading off for post-graduate studies at British universities. You can read my remarks to them here in which I reflected on the Marshalls programme and the sort of Britain the scholars will find.

Posted at 11:16 16 September 2009 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[0]

Letters to the editor

I want to draw your attention to two letters to the editor I've written in US papers today. The first responds to inaccuracies about the NHS in The Washington Times. The second, which runs in The New York Times, points out that the UK has integrated climate change into its national security strategy.

Posted at 10:13 14 August 2009 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[0]

Honouring Stephen Hawking

I well remember the buzz that Stephen Hawking’s “A Brief History of Time” created when it appeared in 1988 and the tremors of excitement I felt when I picked up the book for the first time. I had studied philosophy and theology at university in order better to understand ‘life, the universe and everything’ (in Douglas Adams’ memorable phrase). Here were the pages that would explain the secrets of the universe, if I could only follow the reasoning.

This week, on 12 August, President Obama awarded Professor Stephen Hawking the highest US civilian honour, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, at a ceremony in the White House. Professor Hawking was accompanied by his three children, his carers and a few lucky friends.

The key part of the White House citation ran as follows:

“Persistent in his pursuit of knowledge, Stephen Hawking has unlocked new pathways of discovery and inspired people around the world. He has dedicated his life to exploring the fundamental laws that govern the universe, and he has contributed to some of the greatest scientific discoveries of our time. His work has stirred the imagination of experts and lay persons alike. Living with a disability and possessing an uncommon ease of spirit, Stephen Hawking's attitude and achievements inspire hope, intellectual curiosity, and respect for the tremendous power of science.”

This very distinguished honour, given by the American president to a British scientist, serves as a metaphor for transatlantic cooperation on science. To be world class, British science has to collaborate with the best scientists in other countries. The United States is Britain’s most important international scientific partner. And Britain makes a significant contribution to the advancement of science in the US too.

The UK Astronomy Technology Centre leads a consortium developing instruments for the James Webb Space Telescope, Hubble’s extraordinary replacement. The University of Cambridge is part of an international team tracking the origins of swine flu to enable better remedies to be found.

US science is second to none – in funding, quality and sheer volume of activity. About a third of all scientific papers are published in the US. That’s why British scientists value so highly their collaboration with American counterparts.

But British scientists also enjoy an impressive reputation.

• With just 1 percent of the world’s population the UK receives over 12% of all citations to published papers and almost 13% of high-impact citations.

• UK scientists receive approximately 10 percent of internationally recognized science prizes annually.

• According to the Times Higher Education World University rankings, 4 of the world’s top 10 universities in research and teaching quality are in the UK. - The UK is the top European recipient of R&D investment.

So this UK-US scientific relationship brings benefits to both sides of the Atlantic.

Perhaps the two best known British theoretical scientists of all time are Sir Isaac Newton and Professor Stephen Hawking. Both of them redefined the way we understand the fundamental laws of physics. Stephen Hawking is the present day holder of the Lucasian Chair of Mathematics at Cambridge University, a position held by Sir Isaac Newton in his day.

Stephen Hawking, though, seems to have stolen a march on Newton in two respects. First, Newton never received the US Presidential Medal of Freedom, for the very good reason that neither the office nor the medal existed in the 17th century. Second, Newton’s “Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica”, published in 1687, though one of the most influential books in the history of science, was not a popular hit with the masses.

Hawking’s “A Brief History of Time”, on the other hand, with its more accessible English language title, stayed on the Sunday Times best-seller list for a record-breaking 237 weeks. Now would be a good time to take it down from the shelves, blow the dust of the jacket and see if my hands still tremble with excitement as I turn the pages.

Posted at 14:53 13 August 2009 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[0]

Holocaust Memorial Day

The United Nations has designated 27 January, the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz by the Red army, as an annual International Day of Commemoration to honour victims of the Holocaust.

One purpose of this day is to remember the past and honour the victims. A second and related objective is to encourage all countries to ensure that the Holocaust is known about and understood in our present time. And this leads, in turn, to a third purpose, by keeping the memory of the Holocaust alive, we and future generations should be more on our guard against allowing circumstances to arise in which such terrible events are repeated.

The British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, has put it this way, "Holocaust Memorial Day communicates our conviction that the politics of hate will not triumph, and it symbolises our resolve to safeguard the future by understanding the past".

In the UK, we have held our own national event, Holocaust Memorial Day, every year since 2001. This year's commemoration took place in Coventry, a city heavily bombed in the Second World War, and had as its theme the exhortation "Stand Up to Hatred".

Learning about the Holocaust is a compulsory part of the national curriculum in the UK. It is taught not just in history lessons but as part of the English literature course, citizenship studies and religious education. As you would expect a responsible multi-ethnic, multi-cultural country like Britain to be, we are serious about learning these lessons from history.

In Washington, I attended a remembrance event at the Holocaust Museum during which we were addressed by a survivor who told us about her experiences during the war and her present work at the museum. As ever, when one hears a survivor tell his or her story, it was deeply moving. I felt shock at the first hand account of persecution and admiration for her indomitable spirit and calmness.

This week, I am hosting, with my Czech colleague, a reception to launch the English translation of a book about Sir Nicholas Winton ('Nicholas Winton's Lottery of Life' by Matej Minac, translated by Peter Rafaeli). Winton was a young British man who went to Prague in the months before war broke out in order to provide humanitarian relief to refugees. He quickly decided the priority was to get Jews out of the range of Nazi persecution. In eight months, he managed to get 669 Jewish children to safety.

Winton did not advertise what he had done. It came to light only in 1988, when his wife found a scrapbook in the attic, full of names, photos and letters from the parents of the children. When asked why he had kept his rescue activities quiet, Winton said that he didn't think he had done anything extraordinary.

The five thousand people who are today descended from the original 669 children might beg to differ.

In September 2007, the US House of Representatives passed a resolution honouring Sir Nicholas Winton in which they hit the nail on the head. They urged men and women everywhere to recognise 'in Winton's remarkable humanitarian effort the difference that one devoted, principled individual can make in changing and improving the lives of others'.

Let us leave the last word to Winton himself. In a letter written in 1939 he said the following. "There is a difference between passive goodness and active goodness. The latter is, in my opinion, the giving of one's time and energy in the alleviation of pain and suffering. It entails going out, finding and helping those who are suffering and in danger, and not merely leading an exemplary life, in a purely passive way of doing no wrong."

That's not a bad lesson to take away in the week we commemorate the Holocaust.

Posted at 13:07 30 January 2009 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[1]

My inauguration day

Although millions of people around the world and on the National Mall watched President Obama's inauguration, it was also an intensely individual and personal experience. Everyone who was there will have some kind of story to tell of the day they saw history being made. Here's mine.
 
I left my house in north west DC to walk to the National Mall at 08h30. That was a bit casual. Most of my friends and colleagues were already there by then. In my pocket was a ticket for the blue zone, a gift from a generous Congressman. 
 
The city had changed character for the better that morning; very unusually, there were lots of pedestrians and almost no cars. Everyone was walking in the same direction with the same purposeful stride. It was freezing cold. Underneath thick cord trousers, I wore long-johns and under my top coat I had on a blazer, short-sleeved jumper, thick cotton shirt and a thick cotton T-shirt. A wooly hat, gloves and a shnoo (is that the right word for a circular scarf?) completed the inauguration look. Despite all those layers, I was still grateful to pass a waiter, outside a Starbucks, handing out free cups of something red and hot (which was very welcome but sadly not mulled wine).

Soon the tributaries of people converged into streams and then rivers of well wrapped folk of all colours and varieties. At one point,  I became surrounded by tall men, sporting fezzes and jackets with the baffling slogan 'Moorish Gatekeepers for Obama'.  The crowd was already pretty big and making one's way through so many people was tricky. But it was all very good humoured. Eventually, I got to the right place and found a very long queue for blue ticket holders wrapped around a massive, concrete office building. I joined the back of the queue and waited. It was about 10h10.

As one does, I began chatting to the couple next to me in the queue. She was a state senator from Arizona and he was a public official. Lifelong Democrats, they were making the 4,000 mile round trip to celebrate an historic day. And there were plenty more, like them, who had travelled immense distances. Which made it all the more disappointing that the blue zone queue was moving so slowly. The official music programme began at 10h30. We could just about hear the military band from where we stood, bent almost double against the biting wind, conscious of the minutes ticking past. The delay appeared to be caused by the time taken to screen people at the security checkpoint. With about 20 minutes to go before the inauguration proper, people began to lose patience and queue discipline evaporated. I managed to get into the wide end of a V shaped wedge of people, moving forward towards the blue zone gate at a glacier-like speed.

The press of people meant it was difficult to go backwards and impossible to go forwards through the crowd. There were thousands of us blue ticket holders, many of whom had travelled huge distances to witness the inauguration, and where we? Stuck in a mass of people, tantalisingly close to the National Mall but out of sight of it and the action. The crowd began to chant 'Let us in' but without much expectation that anyone would. Some wag, echoing Reagan's appeal to Gorbachev, called out 'Mr President, tear down this gate'. By now the inauguration had started. We knew this because someone behind me had a portable radio. Was that Aretha Franklin singing 'My country 'tis of thee'?

Just after 12 noon, we heard the sound of gun fire and cheering. That meant President Obama had sworn the oath. This apparently prompted the police to decide that enough was enough and close the gate into the blue zone. That wasn't a good moment. A small African-American boy, pushing his mother in a wheel-chair, had tears of frustration rolling down his cheeks. There were plenty of fed up faces, though no real anger. The discipline and stoicism of the crowd was remarkable.

Then we had a stroke of luck. The police removed one of the barriers that had been hemming us in and we spilled out to one side, in the direction of the National Mall. And when we came to the road in front of the park, we saw signs of a people's revolution. The security checkpoints had been abandoned. The waist high fences had been tramped underfoot. It was possible to walk anywhere and everywhere. So I made my way into the crowd as Obama began his speech. I had a clear, if somewhat distant, view of the Capitol building and could just about make out where Obama must have been standing. The sun was out. The capitol looked resplendent, draped in huge flags. And the mostly silent huge crowd stood still, listening to their new president's words.

It was a rather strange Narnia wardrobe-like experience, going suddenly from a confined, shaded press of frustrated folk, seeing nothing and hearing little, to this wide, sunlit expanse of enrapt people, focussed on one man, some distance off, but clearly audible through the array of speakers, telling us that we had to put away childish things and become more responsible. It felt almost as if one were dreaming. 
 
President Obama's speech was definitely the best attended inauguration speech in America's history. And actually, it was quite hard to concentrate on the words of the speech when the significance of the occasion was so massive. Afterwards, I found it quite hard to remember what the president had actually said. I needed to read the text.

If getting down to the National Mall was difficult, it was far worse making one's way back. But despite the hopelessly inadequate checkpoints, the abject failure of the authorities to manage the movement of so many people, despite the long and pointless queues, the bitter cold, the interminable waiting and all the associated frustrations, it was worth it.

It was worth being there to see Barack Obama become president. He showed Americans how far they have come from the days of slavery (begun during the colonial period), the civil war and the civil rights movement.  His election constituted unaswerable proof that Lincoln's vision of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people had not indeed perished from the earth but was more real than ever before.
 
One of the phenomenal aspects about President Obama is that the whole world, not just Americans, feels we own a bit of him.  He is someone with grandparents who still live in a Kenyan village, with an Indonesian-American half-sister married to a Chinese-Canadian and with Christians and Muslims in his immediate family. His very being seems to symbolise the diversity of mankind in a globalised age. He really does make us dare to hope for a better world.

Later that evening, my wife and I had dinner with American friends in DC. Among the guests were two New Zealanders who had also had tickets for the blue zone. They had got to the queue for the gate at about 08h00 but had nonetheless failed to make it past the security checkpoint and onto the National Mall in time. They must have been in the same press of people as me. But like the rest of us that evening, as they told their inauguration tale, they were smiling broadly.

Posted at 15:34 23 January 2009 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[0]

Remembrance and reconciliation

Many of us are used to taking part in remembrance services, commemorating those who have died for our countries in past wars and present conflicts. The words, music and hymns are familiar and comforting. We can take a quiet pride in the achievements of those we are honouring. Watching the veterans march past is always moving.

This year, in Washington, a conference or 'conversation' on the theme of the universality of remembrance is being held in the week that Veterans' day is celebrated. As I understand it, the aim is to find a way to commemorate the dead of past wars collectively. This would not be a substitute for the national commemorations that are now a well established tradition - our British tradition of Remembrance Sunday will continue to be the best means of acknowledging the debt we owe our forebears. But it would be a way of acknowledging that many, perhaps most, combatants who died, whether they were on the right or wrong side of the argument, were ordinary people, doing their duty as best they could. In the end, we are all human beings. In death, we all dissolve into the same earth.

Many of the great poets of the First World War, soldiers who captured the experience of warfare most eloquently, felt a degree of empathy towards their enemies. Wilfred Owen's poem, Strange Meeting, contains the shocking line, directed at the poet: 'I am the enemy you killed, my friend'. It concludes with the words 'Let us sleep now'.

Charles Sorley, killed aged 20, at the battle of Loos in 1915, in his poem 'To Germany' looked forward to peace, 'then we may view again with new-won eyes each other's truer form and wonder. Grown more loving-kind and warm we'll grasp firm hands an laugh at the old pain, when it is peace'. Incidentally, Robert Graves reckoned that Sorley was one of the three truly great poets killed in the war (the others being Wilfred Owen and Isaac Rosenberg). 

Siegfried Sassoon, who despite his name was not partly German, also wrote about this theme. In his poem, 'Reconciliation' he appeals to Britons to remember 'the German soldiers who were loyal and brave'. 

No-one, I trust, is arguing that Britain should despense with the annual ceremony at the Cenotaph. But after we have honoured our Commonwealth dead, perhaps the time has come for us to pause and consider the young men and women who died fighting against us. It was, after all, only an accident of birth that meant we and they ended up on one or other side of these historic conflicts.  

It is no bad thing in today's more interconnected world where no nation can solve global problems on its own to remind ourselves that, as human beings, what we have in common is greater that that which divides us. And in doing so, we should be fulfilling the wishes of many of our own troops who gave their lives in the hopes that peoples and countries at war would later be reconciled one to another and become friends.

Posted at 09:20 14 November 2008 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[2]

Election night in Washington

Where were you at 11pm Eastern time when the networks announced that Senator Barack Obama would be the next president of the United States? Will you always remember the circumstances of the moment when America choose its first African-American head of state? I shall.
 
I was watching the BBC covering the election, at their headquarters in downtown Washington DC. The main newsroom was a hive of activity - banks of journalists, producers and directors hovering about flat screens, communications devices and computers, sucking up the nectar of the early results from the states. It looked a fantastically complex operation, with the BBC broadcasting simultaneously on, at least, two TV and three radio stations. Amazingly, everyone seemed to know what they were doing and, despite the appearance of chaos, all this activity had to be following a disciplined and meticulously planned system.
 
And then, after Ohio (the rock on which Kerry's ship had foundered in 2004), as the world collectively did the maths of the electoral map and concluded that Senator McCain could not possibly win without a stunning upset in the Western seaboard states, the realisation grew that Senator Obama had really done it. At eleven o'clock, the polls closed in California, Oregon and Washington state and the networks called his victory. It was an emotional moment. Hard bitten journalists around me stopped for a few seconds to savour it. There were tears of joy, punches in the air and hugs. 
 
McCain's graceful concession speech struck an affirmative tone that commentators suggested his campaign had missed. Americans I spoke to seemed to be relieved to be reconnecting with the John McCain they knew and admired. It was followed by Obama's wonderfully lyrical and moving acceptance speech, renewing the promise of America to the vast crowd gathered in the middle of the night in Chicago to hear him. "If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer," he said. I have been replaying that speech on my i-pod ever since.
 
Just as gracious and almost as moving were President Bush's and Secretary of State Rice's statements the next day. The election was rightly being interpreted as a victory for the whole country, even by the defeated party. As Rice said, "One of the great things about representing this country is that it continues to surprise. It continues to renew itself. It continues to beat all odds and expectations." 
 
Senator Obama wasn't elected, of course, because he was African-American. But the fact that the colour of his skin and his unusual name didn't put the American people off shows how far this country has travelled since the civil rights activists challenged segregation and racially-based laws in the 1960s. The original sin of slavery, inherited from the colonial era, feels more and more like ancient history. Obama's election has proved that, in America, it's your qualities as a leader and a human being, not your ethnicity, that determine whether you can get to the top. I wonder when we'll be able to say the same about Europe.
 
There are, of course, huge challenges ahead for President-elect Obama. But the contemplation of these difficult times must not be allowed to tarnish the glory of the wonderful thing the American people have done in this election, once again becoming a shining example to the rest of the world. What a night to remember.

Posted at 09:40 07 November 2008 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[5]

The World Wildlife Fund and Climate Change

The theme of this week's annual World Wildlife Fund dinner, at the Newseum in Pennsylvania Avenue, was climate change.

At first blush, this might seem surprising. We're all familiar with WWF's symbol of a black and white Giant Panda. WWF is a conservation organisation. They try to save endangered species, don't they? Why the emphasis on climate change?

Actually, it's pretty obvious when you think about it. The broad description of WWF's work is to encourage people to share the resources of our planet with other creatures and the natural world at large. Their vision, according to the WWF web site, starts with the aspiration to "seek to save a planet, a world of life. Reconciling the needs of human beings and the needs of others that share the Earth, we seek to practice conservation that is humane in the broadest sense".

The fact is that climate change and conservation are inextricably linked. As the WWF says, "every day a new story emerges about a species, habitat or a community affected by the impacts of climate change".

New analysis reported in the science magazine, Nature, suggests that 15-37% of a sample of 1,103 land plants and animals could eventually become extinct as a result of climate changes expected by 2050.

The WWF's Living Planet Index measures the population of some 1,300 species of vertebrates. Their records show a 30% reduction in numbers between 1970 and 2003. As WWF says, we are degrading natural ecosystems at a rate unprecedented in human history.

So climate change is rightly a WWF concern. If we fail to reduce the harm done to nature by human activity, we shall be bequeathing a dying planet to future generations.

Posted at 09:33 16 October 2008 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[2]

Remembering William Wilberforce

Two slim, elderly ladies pulled the sheet off the frame to unveil the artwork. More than 47,000 tiny squares of brightly coloured glass, like the pixels of a digital image, made up a strikingly realistic picture of a young, modern, confident black woman whose hair-style was cut into the shape of a backwards facing slave's profile. Someone boldly suggested that it might have been George Washington and I could see what they meant. I secretly hoped the artist, Jorge Burtin from California, had made the likeness deliberately. For this was a work of art commissioned by the Black Women United for Action as part of their annual commemorations of the slaves buried at Washington's home at Mount Vernon and the unveiling was taking place at a reception organised by the British Embassy.

The story of Britain's involvement in the slave trade contains much to make modern Britons feel deeply uncomfortable and ashamed. As the world's greatest industrial and maritime power in the 18th century, British merchants profited hugely from the transatlantic slave trade. Although figures are hard to validate, approximately a quarter of the 12 million or so Africans, shipped across the Atlantic as slaves, were destined for North America or British Caribbean territories. The vast majority of these enslaved people would have travelled in British ships. It's an horrendous record of human misery, and a shameful episode in British history. 

Britain also led the way in abolishing slavery. Last year marked the bicentennial of Parliament passing the Slave Trade Act, which made the slave trade unlawful throughout the British Empire. We, in Britain, spent 2007 remembering, and celebrating, the work of all who fought for the abolitionist cause and, in particular, William Wilberforce.

Wilberforce is now a name honoured around the world. Abraham Lincoln invoked his memory during his efforts to abolish slavery in the United States. The eminent 20th century British novelist, E M Forster, compared him to Gandhi. Nelson Mandela, the inspiration of post-apartheid South African, has called Britain "the land of William Wilberforce", describing him as the man who "dared to stand up to demand that the slaves in our country should be freed". Wilberforce's fame will have spread even more widely as a result of the recent movie, 'Amazing Grace', that dramatised his struggle against slavery.

Abolishing the slave trade was not the same thing as abolishing slavery itself. As it happens, possessing slaves had been illegal in England since a landmark judgement in 1772 had led to the emancipation of all the 10,000 or so slaves in the country at the time. But in the rest of the British Empire and in foreign countries, slavery, if not the international slave trade, continued after 1807. It wasn't until 1833 that slavery was finally abolished throughout the British Empire. Sadly, Wilberforce died a month before the Act passed into law. So he never saw the crowning achievement of his campaigning work.

Nor did he see the work of the West Africa squadron of the Royal Navy, which literally took the law into their own hands and seized ships of any and all countries carrying slaves. When Parliament passed a law declaring that carrying slaves on the high seas was equivalent to piracy, the Royal Navy effectively wiped out the slave trade around the world. It was a breathtakingly bold example of humanitarian intervention, dramatically so as the actions of Britain's navy were contrary to international law at the time.

It is more than 200 years since Wilberforce's struggle began to change the British Empire and the world. It is even longer ago that the slaves buried at Mount Vernon worked on George Washington's plantation. But the scourge of slavery has not been eradicated. Human trafficking, the exploitation of illegal migrants and the trade in women for the sex industry are modern versions of the slave trade.

According to a broad definition of slavery used by Kevin Bales of Free the Slaves (FTS), an advocacy group linked with Anti-Slavery International, there are 27 million people in slavery today, spread all over the world. According to Free The Slaves, these slaves represent at once both the largest number of people that has ever been in slavery at any point in world history and the smallest percentage of the total human population that has ever been enslaved. Whatever you make of these statistics, the world cannot doubt that it needs a new Wilberforce.

This year, Black Women United for Action are remembering Wilberforce in their commemorations at Mount Vernon. Hence their association with the British Embassy this week. In 1807, when the Slave Trade Act passed, the then British prime minister said that Wilberforce's memory would be blessed by millions yet unborn. I bet that the young, independent, black woman, depicted in those thousands of squares of coloured glass, would agree.

Posted at 16:12 29 September 2008 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[0]

The danger and science of flooding

Last week, Prof. John Beddington, the British Government's Chief Scientific Advisor, was the guest of honour at a reception in the British Embassy for participants in a seminar on tackling the threat from flooding. You could be forgiven for thinking this was run of the mill diplomatic activity - a reception, a visiting British VIP, a serious topic of public policy. Doubtless, all very worthy but why should anyone else give a gnat's whisker about it? Well, let me try to engage your attention.

If you'll forgive the pun, flooding, as an issue, is on the rise around the world. As people get more affluent and populations rise, we are demanding more land for houses, roads, new shops and other buildings. In a small-medium sized country like Britain, the amount of land available is limited. So we have been forced to build in places where there is a greater risk of flooding.

At the same time, climate change is contributing both to rising sea levels (as polar ice, mountain snow and glaciers melt) and to more storms. This year Gustav and Ike have wreaked great damage. And Katrina remains a painful memory for many. The number and severity of hurricanes and tropical storms seems, anecdotally, to be rising.

The science points to the same conclusion. According to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007 Fourth Assessment Report), hurricanes have become more intense since the 1970s. The IPCC judge that it is "more likely than not" that there is a human contribution to this trend. In the future, they think "it is likely that future tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense, with larger peak wind speeds and more heavy precipitation associated with ongoing increases of tropical sea surface temperatures."

These storms are likely to do even more damage in future because, with higher sea levels come bigger surges of water, more likely to breach sea defences. At the same time, coastal ecosystems, such as barrier islands and wetlands, are continuing to degrade. So just when our need for these natural sea defences is rising, we are increasing our vulnerability to the massive waves that severe hurricanes bring.

So we have been warned. In fact, the threat from flooding is now taken so seriously that facing up to it features in government national security strategies the world over.

It was against that background that the British Government set up the Foresight Flood and Coastal Defence Project, commissioned by Professor Beddington's predecessor, Sir David King. All parts of government concerned with flooding and the country's best geographers, scientists and other academics working in the field took part. The ambitious aim was to evaluate how the risks from flooding were likely to change in the next 30-100 years as a result of climate change and direct human activity such as building and land use. In Sir David King's words, it was "the most wide-ranging analysis of future flood risk ever made in the UK".

In April 2004, the project published its findings. It estimated that the cost of damage from flooding and coastal erosion in Britain could rise by 20 times over the next century. In the most extreme scenario and with existing defences, the damage could rise from about $2bn a year now to $40bn by 2080. The study called for a steady increase in spending on flood defences and better planning to avoid more homes being put at risk.

And here's the good bit. Because all relevant parts of government had taken part in the project and because it was the most thorough, serious and scientific assessment of the risks, particularly the risks of not taking more decisive action now, the British government responded by doubling the funding for flood protection. The Treasury bought the compelling argument that it was wise to invest now to prevent paying huge bills later.

The methodology of the Foresight Flood and Coastal Defence Project is perhaps as interesting and useful as the findings themselves. Getting disparate parts of government to come together and take a common view on any subject, even one as serious as flooding, can be complicated and frustrating. But it is probably necessary if governments are to put in place the funding and programmes that are needed to protect us in future.

Time will tell whether this experience is regarded as relevant and interesting in the United States. Certainly, government here can appear mind-bogglingly complex. But if the British experience catches on, then last week's reception with Professor Beddington may have made a small contribution to helping this country protect itself against future Katrinas, Ikes and Gustavs.

Posted at 15:14 25 September 2008 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[0]

A visit with this year's Marshall scholars

Seeing off this year's crop of Marshall scholars, as they left the United States to begin their university courses in Britain, was an uplifting experience.

This group of 37 bright, outgoing, accomplished, young people, from all parts of America - the Marshall scholars - are the beneficiaries of an Act of Parliament passed in July 1953, the month after the coronation of our present Queen, Elizabeth the Second. Britain's parliament wanted to offer the United States a living gift in the form of this scholarship programme in return for America's generous assistance to Britain to help rebuild the country after the Second World War, the famous Marshall Plan.

The early 1950s was the time when Britain began to believe that recovery after the war was firmly and assuredly on course. The Festival of Britain, designed to create a post-war feel good feeling, was held in 1951. In the same year as the coronation, 1953, sweet (or candy) rationing was ended, not a negligible event. And the mood of the country received a double fillip with the news of Hilary and Tenzing's conquest of Everest arriving on the eve of coronation day itself. There was a spirit of optimism in the country at the prospect of the dawn of new Elizabethan golden age. The Marshall scholarship programme emerged in those hopeful times.

The first Marshall scholars had plenty of hair-raising tales to tell of conditions in Britain then. Many of them centre on the shock of the cold weather in the days before student rooms had central heating and the really bad food. But almost all the Marshall alumni now look back on their British university experience with warmth and nostalgia and some call it the time of their lives.

The modern Britain that today's scholars will discover has, of course, completed its physical recovery from the Second World War. A few public health officials may lament the passing of sweet rationing, given the rise of obesity-related health problems in Britain, but most of us are delighted by the range of chocolates and confectionery into which we can sink our teeth.

Britons have also recovered their flair for entrepreneurship and innovation in business and the arts. Despite the turmoil in the financial markets, the Marshalls will find Britain a vibrant, confident country with plenty going on - the best football in the world, some of the best TV, beautiful countryside to explore and places of historical interest on every corner. Even British food is winning plaudits these days. And if you like your weather damp and your beer warm, there's nowhere better to be.

Oh and British universities are pretty good places to study at too. History and a first rate research output have built up a strong international reputation for them. In the THES - QS World University Rankings, a widely acknowledged international ranking of universities, four of the UK's universities in 2006 came in the world top ten, these being Oxford (2nd behind Havard), Cambridge(3rd), Imperial College London (5th) and University College London (9th).

This year's scholars are an impressive and inspiring group, studying a fascinating and diverse range of subjects from trumpet performance to philosophy, from criminology to French painting. They are also going to many different parts of the United Kingdom. One is studying terrorism, violence and security in Belfast. Another will read theological ethics at Edinburgh. There's a systems engineer heading for Sheffield, an economist going to Brighton and a naval officer from Annapolis with a place at Exeter, close to where Britain's Royal Navy has such strong roots. And there are plenty of scholars with places at Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial College, UCL and other learned institutions in London.

Wherever they are going and whatever they are reading, all of us at the Embassy and the British Council wish them God speed and the very best of luck. We hope they have a wonderful and enlightening time and that, despite (or maybe because of) the warm beer and the weather, they will come to consider the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to be their 'home from home.'

Posted at 09:43 19 September 2008 by Dominick Chilcott  |  Comments[0]