

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

For the first time in history, over 400 public financial institutions from around the world gathered to discuss policies that, if adopted, would ensure a just and sustainable transition to a better future for all. In the context of the COVID-19 crisis, all participating banks agreed to work to align with the Paris Agreement, the sustainable development goals and biodiversity goals. But they fell short to demonstrate how these principles would translate into concrete and measurable commitments. Approximately $2 trillion in public money should now be being put into real actions to address the health, economic and planetary crises the world faces, but campaigners are critical about the outcomes of the Finance in Common Summit (FiC) and warn that this was yet another wasted opportunity.
Taking place 11-12 November 2020, the summit shed light on the crucial role of Public Development Banks (PDBs) in enacting sustainable recovery measures that will have a long-term impact on the planet and communities. A joint statement signed by over 320 civil society organisations called on PDBs to devote their considerable financial resources and influence towards building a just, equitable, inclusive and sustainable future for all. But the clear lack of concrete time-bound pledges made the FiC commitments well below the level of ambition that was expected from public development banks.
"With their public mandate, development banks have a great responsibility in making sure that investments directly benefit communities. We urge them to stop funding fossil fuel projects, and place human rights, racial and climate justice at the core of their actions. They must seize the opportunity to lead the way and initiate a deep and rapid shift in the way they operate, in line with a Just Recovery for all. But they are choosing to lag behind. Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, limiting global warming to 1.5degC, protecting communities and ensuring climate justice should be the key drivers of action for all sectors of our society over the coming decade," says Clemence Dubois, France Team Leader at 350.org.
The Finance in Common Summit is one step of many. One month from now, on December 12th, the Paris Agreement will be celebrating its 5th anniversary. The past five years have not seen enough climate action. G20 nations are still providing three times as much money each year to fossil fuels as they are to clean energy, and this has not changed despite their public commitments under the Paris climate deal. This occasion should be a moment to speed up action towards truly implementing its goals, including to align financial flows with "pathways to low greenhouse gas emissions and climate resilient development."
In the leadup to COP26, where finance will be a key topic, civil society groups call on financial institutions to lead the way and increase their support for a just transition away from fossil fuels. They must increase the share of finance dedicated to climate action to assist countries in accelerating their own low-carbon development pathways, commit to fully align with the Paris Agreement, and support other financial institutions in their efforts to implement similar commitments.
"Getting public finance institutions out of fossil fuels is an urgent task. This is the time for these publicly funded entities to make the right call and make sure that the resources available will be spent to create the future we need. We have a historic chance to drive real, transformative change and build back better in line with climate and sustainable goals. Real leadership from public banks would send a strong political signal towards the private sector to help build momentum towards a successful COP26 in 2021. With a rampant climate crisis and so much at stake for people's jobs and health, simply paying lip service to the need for a just recovery and a low-carbon transition won't cut it," says May Boeve, 350.org Executive Director.
##
NOTE:
During the week, civil society groups organized actions in Nigeria, Brazil, Philippines and France calling on development banks to stop funding fossil fuel projects.
Photos and videos are available HERE.
QUOTE SHEET
Landry Ninteretse, 350.org Africa Team Leader:
"As concerned citizens of Africa, we are firm that the future the world needs is one that no longer burns fossil fuels for energy generation. It is totally unacceptable that public financial institutions continue to fund fossil fuel projects while millions hardest hit by the climate and pandemic crisis are struggling to get appropriate healthcare, social protection and economic assistance. Development banks need to lead the way and direct public money to a truly healthy, equitable, sustainable and just recovery. That would be a first and solid step towards building real resilience for the people and the planet."
Chuck Baclagon, 350.org Asia Finance Campaigner:
"While leaders and power brokers in the financial sector meet, in Asia, we are now just beginning to pick up the pieces left by the strongest storm this year, Super Typhoon Goni, in the middle of a pandemic. Public financial institutions are given the responsibility to chart a future that ensures Asia can thrive justly and sustainably, by shifting the financial flows away from fossil fuels to one that prioritizes access to a low-carbon economy and healthcare. They must commit with a clear timeframe to end support for fossil-fuel projects and ensure that the money goes towards building sustainable, healthy, and resilient societies."
Ilan Zugman, 350.org Latin America Interim Managing Director:
"Many Latin American countries are among those that have had proportionally more deaths and greater economic losses because of Covid-19. However, scientists warn that these damages will appear mild when compared to those that the climate crisis may cause, if the planet reaches the worst scenarios of global warming. Latin America's economic recovery only makes sense if it is accompanied by measures to reduce emissions and build climate resilience in our countries, which is why development banks must make comprehensive and urgent commitments to zero their funding for fossil industry projects. Taxpayer money needs to stimulate job creation in sectors that benefit the most vulnerable families, such as clean energy, urban mobility and public health."
Eri Watanabe, 350.org Japan Finance Campaigner:
"Prime Minister Suga's recent pledge of "carbon neutrality" in 2050 will be meaningless if Japan's public financial institutions continue to support fossil fuel projects. To slow the warming of the Earth, JICA, JBIC and NEXI should stop funding coal fired power plants in Bangladesh, Indonesia and Vietnam in the name of "international cooperations". They must instead support sustainable sources of energy for the communities in developing countries who suffer the most from the dual crises of COVID-19 and the climate change."
Fenton Lutunatabua, 350.org Pacific Managing Director:
"The Pacific is fighting for their homes, and their lives, to turn the tide against climate change. Public development banks globally must join this fight in solidarity by committing to a Just Recovery from COVID-19, and stopping investments in the fossil fuel industry, the greatest source of carbon emissions. There is no time to lose. These institutions must effect policies that will divest from carbon-polluting industries and instead support renewable energy solutions so that all people can continue to thrive."
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
"This is a massive and unprecedented presidential plunder of the American people," said Rep. Jamie Raskin.
The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday accused US President Donald Trump of "orchestrating a $1,700,000,000 fraud on the American taxpayer to line the pockets of his MAGA political allies" amid new reporting on the terms Trump is seeking in talks to settle his $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service.
ABC News reported late Thursday that Trump is expected to drop his lawsuit in the coming days "in exchange for the creation of a $1.7 billion fund to compensate allies who claim they were wrongfully targeted by the Biden administration." The money would come from the Treasury Department's Judgment Fund, which pays out court judgments and settlements against the federal government.
The president is also expected to receive a public apology from the IRS for the leak of his tax returns during his first White House term.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said in a statement that the reported settlement terms represent "another installment" in Trump's "ongoing effort to turn the federal government into a personal cash machine for his unpopular extremist movement."
"This is a massive and unprecedented presidential plunder of the American people," said Raskin. "Worse still, this is only the beginning—a declaration that the prior payouts were just a down payment, and that he now intends to earmark billions more in taxpayer dollars for his political allies, sycophants, and private militia of unemployed insurrectionists."
“The president has no authority to conjure up billion-dollar compensation schemes or raid the Judgment Fund, which exists to settle valid lawsuits. Trump is systematically converting neutral government mechanisms into a presidential slush fund to build his army of political dependents," Raskin continued. "Congress must act immediately to reassert the power of the purse and stop this brazen looting of taxpayer funds before this ‘pilot program’ for corruption becomes the permanent operating system of our government."
According to ABC, which cited unnamed sources who emphasized that the settlement's terms should not be considered final until officially announced, the deal is "expected to prohibit Trump from directly receiving payments related to those three legal claims; however, entities associated with Trump are not explicitly barred from filing additional claims."
"The arrangement would be an unprecedented use of taxpayer dollars with little oversight," ABC noted. "Under the terms of the potential settlement agreement, President Trump would have the authority to remove members of the commission running the fund without cause, and the commission would be under no obligation to disclose its procedures or decision-making process for awarding more than a billion dollars."
ABC's story came on the heels of reports earlier this week revealing internal Justice Department discussions on settling Trump's lawsuit, which he filed in late January. Last month, a federal judge questioned the constitutionality of Trump's suit, noting that "he is the sitting president and his named adversaries are entities whose decisions are subject to his direction."
"Real story: Judge was about to throw out the case because Trump controls both parties," Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) wrote late Thursday. "Before it’s dismissed, Trump tells both parties to reach a 'settlement.' Settlement shields Trump from any future audit and creates a secret slush fund that can dole out money to anyone with no transparency."
"Mind-boggling corruption," Goldman added.
"We are relieved that access to mifepristone remains protected for now, but this should never have been on the table in the first place," said one campaigner.
While welcoming that the US Supreme Court on Thursday blocked restrictions on dispensing mifepristone—a medication commonly used in abortion and miscarriage care—as a legal battle over it moves forward, rights advocates also continued to sound the alarm about attacks on reproductive freedom and argue that "temporary relief isn't enough."
At issue is the 2023 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decision to permanently lift mifepristone's in-person dispensing requirement, which has enabled doctors to serve patients nationwide via telehealth and the mail, as forced pregnancy advocates have intensified the fight for state laws cutting off access to abortion care since the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade in 2022.
Louisiana sued over the FDA's move, and early this month, the notoriously right-wing US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit halted the agency's rule easing restrictions. Drugmakers Danco Laboratories and GenBioPro appealed, and Justice Samuel Alito, a member of the high court's right-wing supermajority, issued a one-week stay, which he then extended to Thursday evening.
With that deadline looming, the court ultimately blocked the 5th Circuit's ruling. Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas, another right-winger, dissented.
"While it is good news that, for now, patients can continue to get this safe medication by mail and at pharmacies as they have for more than five years, we all know abortion opponents are continuing their unpopular and baseless attacks," Julia Kaye, senior staff attorney for the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project, said in a statement.
"And let's be clear about the Trump administration's role here: When nationwide access to a critical abortion and miscarriage medication was on the line, the Trump administration refused to defend the FDA's action and threw patients under the bus," Kaye noted. "The American people have made clear time and again that they oppose political efforts to interfere with their ability to make their own healthcare decisions—and the ACLU will keep fighting with them every step of the way."
Advocates stressed that the fight is far from over. Monica Simpson, executive director of SisterSong: Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, said that her organization "is relieved that the Supreme Court granted the emergency appeal to keep mifepristone accessible through telehealth and mail nationwide."
"This decision ensures that people, especially Black, brown, queer, trans, immigrant, poor, and people living in rural communities who already face barriers to healthcare, can continue accessing essential reproductive care," she noted. "While today's decision prevents immediate harm, people's lives shouldn't hang in the balance between back-and-forth litigation."
"Attacks on mifepristone have never been about safety or medicine," Simpson added. "They are about power and control—about who gets to make decisions about their body, their family, and their future."
All* Above All president Nourbese Flint also welcomed the decision while arguing that "the fact that patients and providers were forced to endure the confusion and disruption of care because of yet another court ruling on whether basic healthcare would remain available is unacceptable."
"This legal whiplash is exhausting, dangerous, and completely disconnected from science," Flint continued. "We know that mifepristone is safe and effective, and has been for over 25 years. People should not have to navigate a week-to-week roller coaster just to find out if they can still access basic healthcare and medication they need."
Serra Sippel, executive director of the Brigid Alliance, which helps people forced to travel for abortion care, similarly said that "we are relieved that access to mifepristone remains protected for now, but this should never have been on the table in the first place. Patients and providers should not be forced to wait on court rulings to know whether people can access critical healthcare."
"The back-and-forth of this case does have a cost. Confusion and uncertainty can delay care, and every day makes a difference. When people are pushed later into pregnancy, care becomes harder to access, more expensive, and many more miles further from home," Sippel explained. "We're seeing this firsthand. Last year, the Brigid Alliance helped 1,879 people travel for abortion care—a 35% increase from the year before—and those numbers will continue to rise as state abortion restrictions force more people to cross state lines for care."
"Those who consider waving the flag of a state to be 'inciting hatred' have either lost their judgment or been blinded by their own ignominy."
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez hit back Thursday after senior Israeli officials condemned FC Barcelona star Lamine Yamal for waving a Palestinian flag during a parade celebrating the soccer team's La Liga championship.
The 18-year-old winger—who has established himself as one of the world's best soccer players—waved the flag from atop an open team bus during Monday's celebration in Barcelona. Yamal also shared a photo of him holding the flag with his 42.5 million Instagram followers. The post had nearly 7 million "likes" as of Thursday afternoon.
The display of solidarity with Palestine—whose people have endured 31 months of genocide in Gaza and generations of illegal occupation, settler colonization, apartheid, and ethnic cleansing in the West Bank—drew predictably baseless claims of "antisemitism" and "supporting terrorism" from numerous Israelis, including Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who in 2007 was convicted of supporting a Jewish terror group.
"He is raising the flag of a nonexistent entity," Ben-Gvir said of Yamal in a Facebook post. Numerous Israeli officials including Ben-Gvir deny the existence of the Palestinian people and nation.
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said on X Thursday that Yamal "chose to incite against Israel and foment hatred while our soldiers are fighting the terrorist organization Hamas, an organization that massacred, raped, burned, and murdered Jewish children, women, and elderly" during the October 7, 2023 attack.
"Whoever supports this type of message should ask themselves: Does he consider this humanitarian? Is this moral?" added Katz, who oversees military forces that have killed or wounded more than 250,000 Palestinians in Gaza in a war that United Nations experts and many others, including prominent Israeli Holocaust scholars, have called a genocide.
Responding to the criticism, Sánchez wrote on X: "Those who consider waving the flag of a state to be 'inciting hatred' have either lost their judgment or been blinded by their own ignominy. Lamine has only expressed the solidarity with Palestine felt by millions of Spaniards. Another reason to be proud of him."
The Spanish government's support for Palestine includes intervention in the International Court of Justice genocide case against Israel, backing the International Criminal Court's effort to bring Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to justice for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza, promotion of United Nations Gaza ceasefire resolutions, an arms embargo against Israel, and formal recognition of Palestinian statehood.
Katz also said on X that he expects "a great and respected club like FC Barcelona to distance itself" from Yamal's display of solidarity "and make it unequivocally clear that there is no place for incitement or for support of terrorism."
FC Barcelona coach Hansi Flick said Tuesday that if Yamal wants to show support for Palestine, "it is his decision. He is old enough. He's 18 years old."
Yamal's display came just weeks before the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) Men's World Cup kicks off in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Yamal is a member of the Spanish national team. Some observers have voiced concerns about possible backlash from the Trump administration, which has revoked and denied visas for people who publicly support Palestine.