The insurance industry found itself in the spotlight last week as a Global Week of Action blossomed across the world. From February 27th to March 3rd 2024, a wave of protests, both online and in the streets, swept through the doors of insurance giants, demanding accountability over their support for polluters and decisive action on climate change.
Never before have these companies faced such pressure to clean their act up and insure our future, not fossil fuels. The Week of Action saw hundreds of thousands of people participating in online campaigns, while thousands more engaged in creative protests across 31 countries, spanning 5 continents. In total, over 100 events occurred worldwide, making it the largest ever coordinated campaign aimed at persuading the insurance industry to do the right thing.
The resounding message echoed by this global movement was clear: insurers can no longer hide their dirty deals with fossil fuel companies. As awareness grows around the crucial role insurers must play in solving the climate crisis, boardrooms and corner offices are abuzz with serious discussions about continued insurance coverage for polluting projects.
Coal Action Network combined forces with Extinction Rebellion, Stop EACOP and Tipping Point to hold the City of London to account. Here are the top picks from the Global Week of Action:
The week of action was opened on 27th February with sit-ins at 5 offices: Tokio Marine, Probitas, Talbot, Travellers and Zurich. Activists held banners reading “Don’t Insure EACOP” and “Don’t Insure West Cumbria Coal”.
Protesters joined arms around the whole of the iconic Lloyd’s of London building. The human chain lasted many hours, supported by beats from the samba band and performance from the ‘Discobedience’ dance group. There were speeches by Cumbrian activists and our own Will Attenborough from Coal Action Network.
Groups of friendly creatives, including Clowns and Crude Oil Mechanicals, visited the favourite watering holes of City workers at the Leadenhall Market, engaging insurance workers in discussion about the dangers of insuring new oil, coal and gas. Accompanied by the samba band, they gave out ‘Insure Our Future’ branded coasters.
A coalition of 12 climate justice groups came together in a moment of solidarity with the people of Palestine. A border wall was erected in front of the AXA building in London, to highlight the company’s continued investment in Israeli banks that fund an apartheid system and occupation of the West Bank. The coalition also demanded that AXA, as the 6th biggest fossil fuel insurer in the world, stops insuring all new oil, gas and coal expansion.
🔥 From Glasgow to Manchester, Birmingham to Brighton – local groups across the UK took to the streets to hold big insurers to account; including Zurich, Hiscox, Tokio Marine, AIG, Chubb, M S Amlin, QBE and AXA.
🌪️ Braving wild weather with courage and creativity actions included blockades, rallies, marches, occupations, letters, outreach and street theatre!
In Manchester, northern activists from a variety of climate action groups came together for a rally.
In Bristol rebels and Just Stop Oil activists held the roof of Tokio Marine overnight for 30hrs!
Activists from North East & Cumbria met at the AXA Insurance office in Middlesbrough with a coffin and banners for a die in with shrouds. Offices of AIG in Glasgow were occupied while a 100 others marched with Oil Slick performers, a bagpiper, and a huge "carbon bomb" to the Hiscox office nearby.
The Insurance Global Week of Action served as a wake-up call for an industry that has long operated in the shadows. Today, more people than ever before are acutely aware of the pivotal role insurers must play in transitioning towards a safe and healthy future. The global outcry has made it impossible for insurance companies to turn a blind eye to the mounting damage to our communities and our planet, caused by their enabling of polluters and new fossil fuels.
As the dust settles from this unprecedented mobilization, one thing is certain: the insurance industry can no longer afford to ignore the demands of a global movement that is determined to persuade them to do the right thing: insure our future, not fossil fuels.
Immediately cease insuring new and expanded coal, oil, and gas projects and the companies developing them.
Immediately adopt robust policies to ensure that clients fully respect all human rights, including Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) of impacted communities.
Play an active role in the just transition by increasing support to clean energy projects by, and for, communities most impacted by climate change and facing energy access crisis.
After a week of peaceful protest around the world, alongside hundreds of groups, our efforts have paid off. Yet another leading insurance company, Probitas, has ruled out insuring the proposed West Cumbria coal mine and the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP).
Probitas is the 29th insurance company to rule out EACOP and the sixth to rule out West Cumbria coal mine.
Insurance is the polluters’ Achilles Heel - without it, polluters cannot operate coal, oil or gas projects. So if the insurance industry refuses contracts with new and expanding projects, that ends fossil fuel expansion for good.
The decision by Probitas is a strong sign that the insurance industry is starting to recognise the severe risks of dirty fuel projects - to their reputations, their bottom lines and to ordinary communities who want a safe, healthy word.
The more insurance companies pull away from these controversial projects, the harder it will be for them to raise the money they need to go forwards.
Another breakthrough came earlier in the week of action, when Zurich agreed to enter talks with campaign groups, including Extinction Rebellion, about Insure Our Future’s demands - including an end to insuring new fossil fuel expansion.
These victories can be attributed to the great diversity of approaches used throughout Insure Our Future’s Global Week of Action. Through many forms of non-violent protest and campaigning, groups encouraged insurance workers to reflect on how the industry’s support for new fossil fuels is making the world more chaotic, and the unique power of insurers to instead bring more safety and fairness to communities facing extreme weather and a lack of clean energy.
From protest marches to direct action, from petitions to mass phone calls and emails from volunteers, Coal Action Network and our many partner groups used all the tactics in the protest toolkit to urge insurance companies to step up.
In London, the week kicked off with a spectacular dance performance by Mothers Rise Up, directed by one of the world’s leading opera choreographers Denni Sayers, set against classical music and conveying an important message for insurers to protect children and future generations.
This was followed by office occupations and a peaceful protest that encircled the headquarters of insurance marketplace, Lloyd’s of London’s. Later, groups took similar action against insurers up and down the country in major cities, while many thousands took part in online mass emails, phoning and commenting on crucial platforms like LinkedIn.
The ongoing Insure Our Future campaign has the potential to prevent new coal, oil and gas projects from ever destroying our climate, communities and nature.
By working together, we can urge insurers to play their part in creating a safer, more secure world for future generations and countries on the frontline of the climate emergency.
We can achieve this if we convince enough insurance companies to reject contracts with the companies behind these two key ‘carbon bombs’ - the toxic French energy giant Total and West Cumbria Mining Limited.
The Global Week of Action is not over yet. Coal Action Network is keeping up the momentum by running another round of mass emails this week. To get involved, keep an eye on Coal Action Network’s social media pages.
'Energy Recovery Investments Ltd' is proprosing to extract coal from large coal tips created by the Bedwas Colliery (1913 - 1985) in Bedwas, Caerphilly, South Wales over an operational period of 7 years (but this is often extended later). The company claims that it would use some of the sales of the coal to restore those coal tips afterwards. Based on historical estimates, the total volume of the Tips is approximately 5,000,000m³ which equates to around 8,500,000 tonnes of colliery spoil. The company claims that it expects to haul 468,000 tonnes of coal off the site via 20-tonne heavy goods vehicles (HGVs), driving further climate chaos by over 1.3 MILLION tonnes of CO2.
The Tips are classified as Category D which is defined as “A tip with the potential to impact public safety, to be inspected at least twice a year.”. The main risks associated with Bedwas are understood to be risk of tip fire and contamination of local watercourses (including Rhymney River), with land stability being of a lesser concern.
'Energy Recovery Investments Ltd' has not disclosed what proportions of coal will be sold to which market but does indicate "ERI’s proposal is to sell on these stockpiles of coal to heavy industry, the cement manufacturing industry and potentially energy production industry...", and elsewhere cite the steel sector and brickworks as potential customers.
The company would need to build a new section of haul road 575m long and 6m wide cut into the rock, and widen the existing forest track - possibly at the loss of trees bordering the road. It would involve works on setting up the site starting at 6am and continuing into the night until 10pm (16 hours/day, 15 hours every Saturday, and only Sunday without works) for 6-9 months (but this is likely to be extended, as is common for projects like this). Outside of these hours, maintanence works could still occur, according to the company. The company estimates an average of 90 hauls by HGVs per week to occur over the seven years operational period. This is equivalent approximately to 18-20 hauls HGVs going to and from the site every day.
The coal tips lie above a coal seam, which the company claims it would coincidentally have to dig into to create 'lagoons' for processing the coal from the coal tips. That's right, Energy Recovery Investments Ltd claims it needs to mine the coal in the seam, creating a further coal tip, in order to mine the coal in the coal tips already created. The company is trying to rebrand the coal mined from the tips and from digging the lagoons, as 'reclaimed' and 'incidental' coal respectively, in an attempt to get around Welsh Government policies against further coal extraction.
Energy Recovery Investments Ltd creates a new name for the coal it proposes to mine: "Reduced Carbon Coal" - a name based on the claim it could displace coal imported with the associated travel miles. This is an old argument that has been debunked many times. See our video with Economics expert, Prof. Paul Ekins or our myth-buster.
The company is so keen to distance this project from a coal mine, it has gone into greenwash overdrive - refusing to even call a coal washery by its normal name, and instead rebranding it as a "beneficiation/processing plant.
With absolutely no evidence or calculations, Energy Recovery Investments Ltd makes the outlandish claim in its planning statement that any, eventual and additional, 'carbon sink' like properties of the site after operations have finally ceased may offset the processing and extraction of the coal, transport by deisel HGVs, and end use.
Energy Recovery Investments Ltd presents the mining of coal as "a beneficial by-product of the tip reclamation process". It's the very objective of this company to generate a profit for itself from the mining of the coal tips - it is very far from being a by-product.
Energy Recovery Investments Ltd claims that a proportion of its coal will be used at steelworks, necessary for green infrastructure - a common argument which is even less true today than it was previously, as both virgin steelworks in the UK converts to using processes for producing steel from scrap that doesn't rely on coal inputs, ending the UK steel market for coal.
Energy Recovery Investments Ltd is a small company with assets valued at £114,000 in its 2022 annual financial accounts on Companies House – but only £9,000 cash assets. This is concerning as there would be limited scope to recover damages if mistakes are made or the company refuses to remediate the coal tips after extracting profitable coal from them.
The company was registered in 2008 and “the principle activity of the company is the recovery of coal from redundant coal tip sites”. But since 2012, the company has idled with zero staff until employing just 2 staff a decade later in 2022. Energy Recovery Investments Ltd has only operated one other site, in 2008, Six Bells and Vivien Tips near Abertillery, South Wales - which it extracted 260,000 tonnes of coal from over 2.5 years, by subsequently getting permission to opencast coal mine one end of the site.
Despite all its efforts to distance itself from coal mining, Energybuild Ltd (the coal mining company at Aberpergwm) has previously been a major shareholder in Energy Recovery Investments Ltd.
ERI Ltd is the wholly owned subsidiary of PPM Holdings Limited, a company incorporated in just 2022 with no published company accounts and currently registered as a ‘non-trading company’. The current Director of PPM Holdings Limited, Sian Thomas, was previously Director of Green Steel Works Ltd, which deals with ‘Remediation activities and other waste management services’ and is the official office address for Energy Recovery Investments Ltd. This kind of complicated and confusing corporate structure is typical of mining companies, and has been used in the past to evade corporate accountability. The other Director of PPM Holdings Limited is Mark Harvey, is a Director of 6 companies dealing with mineral waste disposal and storage, and real estate.
This proposal has strong similarities with the sprawling Ffos-y-fran opencast coal mine. The sale of the coal from this mine was to pay for the restoration of a neglected hill in Merthyr Tydfil to the extent the coal mine was even branded as the "Ffos Y Fran Land Reclamation Scheme". Yet, the profits from 16 years of coal mining has been put of reach, and the local Council faces up to £120 million shortfall to pay for the much greater restoration works now needed. We don't want Bedwas to become the next Ffos-y-fran disaster.
With over 300 at-risk coal tips registered across South Wales, and financial shortcomings to pay for their remediation, the concern is that the Bedwas coal tip is a testing ground for remediating the remaining coal tips. This would be disasterous for our climate and represent total contempt for the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act. The company has presented a planning statement littered with the tired justifications of mining companies. Stay tuned as we ask for your help in this campaign.
The Crown Prosecution Service has dropped all charges against the four Extinction Rebellion (XR) activists who blockaded the entrance to the UK’s largest open-cast coal mine, last summer with a pink boat.
While removing the immediate burden of legal confrontation for the defendants, the decision has left a “crater of unfinished business” in the fight for climate justice and accountability for local residents..
“The action was always designed to have a much deeper impact beyond the immediate disruption with a pink boat,” explained Liz Pendleton, one of the four defendants who occupied the site for over 24 hours in July 2023. “It was designed to expose the alleged illegal activities and environmental negligence of the mining operation, in particular, its continued operation beyond permitted planning conditions and contradictory and misleading financial statements which may well constitute fraud.”
The Ffos-Y-Fran mine in Merthyr Tydfil, Wales had been operating without a licence for almost ten months when XR activists took direct action.
“By denying us our day in court the CPS has denied us the opportunity to shine a light on this potentially illegal and criminal operation,” said Liz.
The legal proceedings revealed a shocking lack of cooperation from the mine, including failure to provide basic operational logs, communications between the mine and governmental bodies, and internal documents relating to the financial and environmental management of the mine's operations. This critical information would have shed light on the legal position of the operation and whether funds had been set aside for environmental restoration - which was a condition for the getting the go ahead in the face of overwhelming local opposition. The defendants were also confident this would have led to their acquittal.
The dropping of the case also casts doubt on the legitimacy of the arrests, as in the case of aggravated trespass the police can clearly be seen acting in the interests of corporate bodies who then fail to prove that they themselves were carrying out lawful activities.
The discontinuation of charges is a testament to the strength of the activists case and the shaky foundation upon which the mine's operations stood, explained Raj Chada from Hodge Jones & Allen, representing the defendants:
“In seeking disclosure from the CPS, we highlighted the need for transparency on several critical points. Our requests were aimed at uncovering potential evidence of the mine operating beyond legal scrutiny, which raises concerns about the legality of its operations. The CPS's inability to meet these disclosure obligations casts a shadow over the proceedings and suggests that the depth of the mine's legal and environmental mismanagement may be greater than previously understood.”
For over a decade and a half, the Ffos-Y-Fran mine has been a symbol of the environmental and social challenges that face communities at the ‘coal face’ of climate degradation. The abrupt end to this case marks not a clear-cut victory but a complex milestone in the ongoing struggle. While it spares the defendants the strain of a continuing court battle - already exceeding seven months in duration - it denies the platform to publicly expose the depth of negligence and alleged fraud by the mine's operators, Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd., including their failure to fulfil obligations towards land reparations and the creation of green jobs.
Speaking upon hearing the news, local resident and defendant Marcus Bailie commented: “Our fight was not just against the physical act of coal extraction but against disregard for the land's future and the community's well-being. The piles of coal and the colossal scar on the landscape left behind serve as stark reminders of the environmental impact that has yet to be addressed. The real victory would have been to hold those responsible to account in a public forum, forcing a reckoning with the consequences of their actions.” Marcus went on to say, “We’re not the criminals here!”
Chris and Alyson Austin, residents of Merthyr Tydfil who have been campaigning for years for the mine to be closed said: “We feel angry and betrayed about the waste-land they have left behind.”
The bittersweet outcome underscores the resilience and dedication of activists and the broader environmental movement. It also highlights the complexities of seeking justice in a system where procedural technicalities can overshadow substantive issues. The fight for the Ffos-Y-Fran mine was never just about legal vindication; it was about bringing to light the injustices inflicted upon nature and communities - and campaigners promise, it won’t end here.
For further information, quotes, or to arrange interviews, please contact: press@extinctionrebellion.uk | +44(0)7756136396
Citing different grounds to the High Court, the Court of Appeal has nevertheless found against our appeal. The Court of Appeal judges disagreed with the judge in the High Court, and decided that current statute limits Welsh Ministers to only deciding whether a new conditional licence may be issued—rather than deciding at the stage that a conditional licence is turned into a full licence, which is what allows coal mining to begin. This judgement is disappointing, and runs contrary to the careful analysis of the High Court judge and the position expressed by the Coal Authority and the UK Government. We think there are grounds for a potential challenge to the judgement and we are receiving advice from our legal team on our next actions.
Today, 6th February 2024, Coal Action Network was back in court, this time appealing last year’s decision by the court that the Welsh Government couldn’t prevent an extension at Aberpergwm coal mine. Our legal team believes the Welsh Government can, and we believe it should, stop the Aberpergwm extension—keeping 42 million tonnes of coal underground. At stake in this case is an additional 1.17 million tonnes of methane and up to 120 million tonnes of CO2 would be released.
Barristers Estelle Dehon KC and Asitha Ranatunga (Cornerstone Barristers), supported by Matthew McFeeley (Richard Buxton Solicitors), argued that there is a difference between the authorisation for a coal mine and the licensing for one, particularly in the conditional form.
While the specific legal argument is complicated, the case is really a question of whether the Wales Act (2017) means the Welsh Government, rather than the UK Government’s Coal Authority, gets the final say on whether the Aberpergwm coal mine extension can go ahead.
Aberpergwm deep coal mine supplies 70% of its coal to Port Talbot steelworks, which is expected to significantly reduce its coal demand as it decarbonises.
Welsh Government policy, while not without loopholes, does make a stand against the extraction of coal. Should the 3 appeal judges decide that Coal Action Network’s legal team is correct, the Welsh Government will need to decide whether to allow the extension to happen. A ruling is expected in the next 6—12 weeks.
We’re thrilled to announce that after months of campaigning, five more major insurance companies have announced they will not support the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP)!
This is a huge win for communities all over the world fighting fossil fuel pollution.
With your support, we’ve kept the pressure up on companies at the controversial insurance marketplace, Lloyd’s of London. As a result, 5 of those companies – SiriusPoint, Riverstone International, Enstar Group, Blenheim and SA Meacock – all confirmed to us last week that they would have nothing to do with EACOP.
That brings the total to 28 global insurers now distancing themselves from the pipeline.
But we’re not stopping there. We’re going to ramp up pressure on the big insurers who are still choosing short-term profits over a safe future for our loved ones.
With your help, we can persuade major corporations AIG, Tokio Marine and Hiscox, to rule out involvement in EACOP.
From 26th Feb to 3rd March, we will be taking part in a Global Week of Action – with citizens from Africa to Latin America getting out on the streets and telling insurance companies to protect our future, not fossil fuels.
Sign up here to find exciting events near you.
The Global Week of Action is a perfect opportunity for us to win more victories in the fight against EACOP. Young people in Uganda and Tanzania have been bravely taking the lead, protecting their communities from exploitation and rising temperatures. Alongside Insure our Future and StopEACOP, Coal Action Network is standing in solidarity with them, holding insurance companies to account for their involvement in a dirty project that would endanger local people, and harm vital ecosystems.
EACOP is majority-owned (62%) by French oil giant Total, with the rest of the project owned by the state oil companies of China, Uganda and Tanzania.
But, the pipeline has struggled to get insurance and the $3bn loan it needs, causing construction to be delayed by over 4 years. Uganda’s Energy Minister has even said that, due to campaigners’ efforts, securing insurance has been the biggest challenge to the pipeline’s construction. And we’ve convinced 27 major banks to recoil from the project.
But we’re not stopping yet. Total and the Ugandan government are hoping China will step in and lend them the billions they need. Their deadline is April. If we can convince enough insurers to step away from EACOP by then, we will show the Chinese banks that the pipeline is just too risky to touch.
That’s why we will make our voices heard loud and clear on EACOP during the Global Week of Action.
EMR Capital, the company that owns 81% of the proposed West Cumbria Coal mine, is currently operating another coking coal mine – Kestrel.
The Kestrel mine is an underground mine located in the Bowen Basin in central Queensland. The Bowen Basin contains the largest coal reserves in Australia.
The mine produces twice the annual output proposed for West Cumbria, at 5.56 million tonnes a year. The Kestrel coal mine is not without controversy, which could occur in West Cumbria if the mines started. See below for recent issues for workers, subsidence and with polluted water discharge which at Kestrel could affect the Great Barrier Reef or the coast at Cumbria.
There is not a strong campaign focus against Kestrel coal mine specifically, as in 2021, Australia had 94 operational coal mines, coal and a much lower population density than in the UK. The mine has operated since 1992.
Like the proposed West Cumbria Coal mine, Kestrel is not owned and operated by just one company.
Kestrel mine is owned by Kestrel Coal Resources (80%) and Mitsui Investments (20%). Kestrel Coal Resources is made up of 52% EMR Capital, with Adaro Capital Ltd owning the other 48%.
Location of Kestrel coal mine
Key facts
Protests and disputes
There were workers disputes at the mine in 2022 over job contracts, including redundancy policies, health insurance policies and our incentive bonus policy. The Mining and Energy Union vice president criticized Kestrel over the ongoing saga. [10]
The mine was for sale in 2022. It does not seem to have found a buyer.
Threat at a local level
The traditional owners of the land are the Western Kangoulu people who co-operate to some extent with the miners, but say “the sectors activities also present a large threat to the protection of cultural heritage and values with extensive and irreparable damage being done to the land resources of the Western Kangoulu area.” [11]
Environmental issues
Lock the Gate has highlighted that “Central Queensland coal mines are releasing billions of litres of polluted water many times saltier than the receiving rivers in the catchment of the Great Barrier Reef, prompting concerns about the ecological health of impacted waterways.”
According to the Environment Department’s figures, Kestrel, in Jan 2023 was releasing the equivalent of an Olympic-sized swimming pool of water every eight seconds into Crinum Creek.
The Environmental Advocacy in Central Queensland director said, “It’s particularly galling that even coal mines that publicly claim to be ‘zero-discharge’, such as Kestrel, are releasing thousands of litres into Central [Queensland] creeks every second which will be carrying sediment to the Reef.” [12]
Subsidence
There has been subsidence at the Kestrel mine, this was likely planned. The area over the mines is mainly agricultural. Subsidence is where the ground sinks after coal mining has cleared an underground void and the rock roof is allowed to fall in, causing disruption at ground level.
At the Kestrel mine there is recorded subsidence of 1.6m to 2 m down the centre of the 250 m wide panels. These panels are approximately 4km long.” At the Kestrel site this affects the hydrology of the area. Similar subsidence, were it to take place, at the currently proposed West Cumbria coal mine, would cause disruption on the sea bed. If this is expected a license for the mine is required from the Marine Management Organisation. As “subsidence increase[s] permeability and porosity”. [13]
1 https://kestrelcoal.com/stakeholders/
4 https://www.adaro.com/pages/read/7/22/mining
5 https://www.gem.wiki/Kestrel_mine
8 https://www.ga.gov.au/digital-publication/aecr2023/coal
11 https://lumburrabimbi.com.au/western-kangoulu/
12 https://lumburrabimbi.com.au/western-kangoulu/
13 file:///home/anne/Lechner2014Theimpactofundergroundlongwallminingonprimeagriculturalland.pdf Referencing Gullo D. 2006. Kestrel coal mine: subsidence and agriculture. Central Queensland Mining Forum. 18 October 2006. Fitzroy Basin Association, Emerald, Queensland, Australia., Booth & Spande, 1992; Potentiometric and aquifer property change above subsiding longwall mine panels, Illinois basin coalfield. Ground Water 30: 362–368., and Booth, 1998, Impacts of mine subsidence on groundwater. In Proceedings of Prime, Farmland Interactive Forum, Hooks CL, Vories KC, Throgmorton D (eds). Department of Agronomy, Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, University of Southern Indiana: Evansville; 143–148.).
On 23 October 2023, over 30 Wales-based NGOs, businesses, and community groups signed an open letter to Wales’ Climate Change Minister, Julie James, calling for the Welsh Government to ban coal mining once and for all (sent by Climate Cymru). On 10th January 2024, Julie James wrote back—but claims a ban isn’t needed, even though 1.6 million tonnes of CO2 could have been prevented since 2022 if the Welsh Government had adopted a ban. That failure has caused 362 additional deaths from climate change related causes. Julie James’ claims just don’t stack up against those lives lost. Here’s why:
The open letter to Julie James highlighted that an issue with the current policy is that it is riddled with caveats and exceptions. Carmarthenshire County Council’s Planning Officer even wrote in September 2023 that it was “difficult to know for certain how to interpret the coal policy”. Julie James failed to respond to this point entirely. A clear ban would remove the existing ambiguity that makes the current policy challenging to apply.
Julie James also did not respond to our point that Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd would not have been able to mine 500,000 tonnes of coal from Ffos-y-fran over the past 1.5 years if there was a clear ban on coal mining. The mining company exploited the exceptions in existing policies to secure a de facto extension. To protect against this climate assault recurring by closing the loopholes, a clear coal ban is needed now.
In the open letter to Julie James, it’s stated “A coal mine ban can be drafted is such a way that allows for the safe winding down of existing coal mines, and Coal Authority access to fulfil its regulatory duties”. That didn’t stop Julie James trying to use that against a ban anyway: “we also have a duty to manage the safe closure and restoration of existing and historic mining infrastructure”. Julie James accompanies this with a reason that’s even more bizarre: “The incidental extraction of limited coal may also be required during the construction of infrastructure projects”. Those wouldn’t be coal mines so wouldn’t fall under a ban—the Coal Authority even licences this differently as an ‘incidental coal agreement’. The burden and hazards of historic mines across Wales would diminish under a coal ban, rather than risk being added to—a very real risk in light of Ffos-y-fran.
Julie James says “…coal licences may be needed in wholly exceptional circumstances and each application will be decided on its own merits”. But this creates exactly the problem that Julie James lamented in her letter in October 2011 to then Minister for BEIS Kwasi Kwarteng: "both the developer and the Coal Authority committing significant resources respectively to preparing and determining applications... before Welsh policy can properly be applied”. A coal ban would end the pipeline of applications, and the private and public funds they waste.
Julie James twice hails “the presumption being against extraction” in current policies. We hope it’s not presumptuous to argue for a commitment stronger than a ‘presumption’ in the face of catastrophic climate change. What justification could opening a new coal mine have in the face of the 362 lives that’ll be cut short due to the Welsh Government’s refusal to ban coal mines up until now? Climate vandalism over the past year shows nothing short of a ban on coal mining can protect the lives and ecosystems at stake.
Finally, Julie James concludes her letter by claiming the “Welsh Government has adopted and implemented the strongest policy opposition to coal extraction across the UK Governments”. Even if that were true, the Welsh Government clearly needs to go further given current policies have failed to prevent 1.6 million tonnes of avoidable CO2 in the past 1.5 years. But it’s also not true. Julie James’ claim to be leading on a progressive coal policy is based on her comparison to a similar one set out in the Scottish Parliament back in November 2021. She ignores the de facto ban that the Scottish Government more recently introduced in October 2022—as referenced in the open letter to Julie James. If Julie James actually wants the Welsh Government to boast the strongest policy opposition to coal mining, she’ll have to be bolder by committing to a ban on coal mining in Wales.
2014 Company directors buy Riverside Energy and change the name to West Cumbria Mining Ltd ( West Cumbria Mining Ltd).
2015 Cumbria County Council and West Cumbria Mining Ltd hold internal discussions.
2016 Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping Report is finalised.
2017 Initial planning application is submitted.
2017 September. First demonstration against the coal mine - organised by Radiation Free Lakeland
2018 Major changes to the application are made and a new Environmental Statement submitted.
2019 March. Cumbria County Council planning committee holds hearing for the Whitehaven coal mine application, and approves it “subject to S106 legal agreement".
2019 April. Call in Request to Rt Hon James Brokenshire Secretary of State from Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole (a Radiation Free Lakeland campaign) around potential nuclear impacts of the proposal.
2019 June. A call-in request by SLACC is refused by Secretary of State (Secretary of State).
2019 October. Cumbria County Council planning committee holds second hearing and again approves the Whitehaven coal mine application “subject to S106 legal agreement".
2019 Judicial review launched by Leigh Day solicitors on behalf of Radiation Free Lakeland.
2020 May. Cumbria County Council planning committee sets aside (withdraws) previous “consent subject to S106”.
2020 June. West Cumbria Mining Ltd submits revised application (claiming to no longer mine and sell the high sulphur “middlings” coal in the area).
2020 October. Cumbria County Council planning committee holds third hearing for the Whitehaven coal mine application, and again approves it “approval subject to S106 legal agreement".
2021 January. SLACC issue second request for the Secretary of State to call-in West Cumbria Mining Ltd’s application.
2021 February. Cumbria County Council suspended approval decision because Climate Change Committee recommended the end of coking coal use by 2035.
2021 February. CAN petition with 110,000+ signatures is submitted to the UK Government for the Secretary of State to call in the mining application.
2021 March. SLACC launches judicial review against the Secretary of State’s failure to call in West Cumbria Mining Ltd’s application.
2021 March. West Cumbria Mining Ltd launches judicial review against Cumbria County Council and in opposition to SLACC’s judicial review of the Secretary of State.
2021 Secretary of State finally agrees to call in West Cumbria Mining Ltd’s application and to hold a Public Inquiry into it.
2021 September. 11 groups commit to taking direct action to stop the West Cumbria coal mine if government approves it.
2021 September. West Cumbria Mining Ltd make major change just ahead of Public Inquiry - tunnelling under the ancient woodlands.
2021 September. Public Inquiry is held.
2021 September. On the first day of the Public Inquiry, around 70 people gather outside the site of the prospective Whitehaven coal mine, and outside the Secretary of State’s office, Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government.
2022 December. Michael Gove publishes decision to grant planning permission to the Whitehaven coal mine.
2022 December. Twitter storm erupts with the message “We reject the Whitehaven coal mine, #StopCoal @luhc @CoalActionUK”.
2022 December. Protests at the site and in other parts of Cumbria against the approval. At the site they continue monthly throughout 2023.
2022 December. 5 Santas deliver sacks of dirty ‘coal’ to the Secretary of State at the Department of Levelling Up, Housing, and Communities as he is on the (very) naughty list for approving the Whitehaven coal mine.
2023 Jan. SLACC and FOE request permission to legally challenge the Secretary of State’s decision in a Statutory Review.
2023 April. High Court refuse permission to appeal.
2023 April. FOE and SLACC apply for ‘Renewal’—similar to an appeal, which is granted.
2023 May. Legal challenges against the governmental decision are approved for SLACC and Friends of the Earth for a combined hearing. Originally due to be heard in October 2023, but delayed to await the outcome of a linked case, relating to oil extraction in Surrey.
2023 August. 25 large banners opposing the proposed new coal mine near Whitehaven with the words ‘NO TIME for a COAL MINE’ were unveiled along all the roads entering Cumbria on the same day.
2023 August. Earth First! Gathering occupied the site of the proposed Whitehaven coal mine for 5 days, with around 150 attendees, ran workshops on all things environmental and engaged with many local residents over the days.
2023 September. Global Day of Action against Fossil Fuels includes demonstrations against Lloyds of London Insurance companies which fail to rule out insuring the project.
2023 November. Protests at Mines and Money Conference in London over 2 days. We demanded that investors stop pouring cash into the mining sector, and instead invest in our collective future.
2024 July. The Government has accepted that there was an error of law in the decision to grant planning permission for a new coal mine in Cumbria - and will no longer be defending the claims.
2024 September. The Judge over turned the previous Government's decision to allow the mine. There is no planning permission valid for this application.
2024 July. High Court heard 5 reasons why the Conservative Government's December 2022 approval of the proposed mine was flawed, and the court was asked to make the government re-decide. Protests were held in Whitehaven and London supporting the court case.
