“THIS is our land, our planet, our atmosphere and our future. Yet decisions are being taken without us,” says Lauren Waterman, a 39-year-old wedding photographer, who was involved in Rig Rebellion 2.0 – Extinction Rebellion Scotland’s series of actions focusing on the role of the fossil fuel industry in the climate crisis.
Actions started on January 7 when activists scaled a Shell-leased rig in Dundee harbour. Last Tuesday, about 60 protesters blocked entrances to Edinburgh fund manager Baillie Gifford, which manages Holyrood’s pension fund and invests in Shell. On Thursday its final action involved the blockade of Shell’s Aberdeen headquarters for more than 12 hours. Waterman concedes that all fossil fuel companies are responsible for climate change but said Shell was symbolic of the need for action in the face of the climate emergency.
“The problem is not just with Shell,” she said. “But we found concerns about human rights abuses.” In 2009, Shell agreed to pay $15.5 million (£9.6m) in settlement of legal action in which it was accused of having collaborated in the execution of the writer and environmental activist Ken Saro-Wiwa and Ogoni tribe leaders in the Nigerian Delta. It strongly refutes involvement and says human rights are in line with its core values.
READ MORE: Environmental group takes legal action against Shell
The aim of the actions was to highlight Scotland’s key role in the oil industry and raise awareness about the way it affects the whole of society, from pension funds to petrol stations. Extinction Rebellion says it wants the Scottish Government to tell the truth about the role of the fossil fuel industry in climate change, to stop supporting the industry, and set up a citizen’s assembly to manage the process.
“The North Sea oil industry affects everyone and it’s such a huge part of the debate on independence,” Waterman said. “With indyref2 of on the horizon we need to be asking: ‘What’s the plan?’ We’re trying to show people that they can be involved, that three women can scale a rig, that ordinary people can have their voices heard.”
In response, Shell said it welcomed heightened awareness of climate change and was working hard to play its part in reducing global emissions.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here