Use our 'subvertised' Rio+20 logos!


29 May 2012

The Rio+20 conference on sustainable development taking place at the end of June 2012 bills itself as an opportunity for people to come together to "shape how we can reduce poverty, advance social equity and ensure environmental protection". Sounds great, but here at the World Development Movement we're a bit sceptical about some of these claims (to say the least). I suspect some of you are too. 

As we've shown in our recent work on the green economy, the "sustainable development" agenda that is likely to be agreed at Rio+20 actually looks more like a 'Trojan horse for bankers' than true economic and environmental justice. 

So we had some fun with the Rio+20 logo to make it better reflect that. Feel free to use these wherever you want. (To download them, just right-click and choose 'save as').

Rio+20: Selling off the world's land, air and water to the financial industry

 

Rio+20: Selling off the commons to the highest bidder

 

Rio+20: Hiding more privatisation by using green language

 

Rio+20: Handing over the global commons to the financial sector

Tags:

Blog

A trade deal with the US could lower standards for cosmetics, toys and many other consumer products


22 October 2020

The risks from a trade deal with the US are not limited to chlorinated chicken and hormone-pumped beef.  A US-UK trade deal could also result in the import of lower quality consumer products from the US containing chemicals currently banned or restricted in the UK.

Full list of MPs who failed to protect food standards in the Agriculture Bill

Last night MPs voted by a majority of 53 to remove an amendment from the Agriculture Bill that would have protected British farmers and food standards in future trade deals like the one with the United States.

 

We can defeat the US trade deal, whoever is in the White House


08 October 2020

This November, the US presidential election offers Americans a stark choice. Yet while the rest of us don’t get even get that choice, we will surely be affected by the results. On the most basic level, Trump’s rejection of multilateralism makes the world a more dangerous place. Pulling funding for the World Health Organisation in the middle of a pandemic is a case in point.