Saturday 8th November 2014, Rescue!History day workshop
History and Climate change: What have we learnt?
Birmingham and Midland Institute, Birmingham.
This workshop is open to scholars, activists, policy-makers and members of the public and aims to explore two related questions. Firstly, to think about how climate concern is forcing us to rethink our understandings of history, often in quite radical ways. Second, how history and historians should inform our understandings of climate change and actively contribute to changing society to ensure an ecologically wholesome future. We are particularly keen to explore how our historical understanding and rhetoric around climate change have changed in the last five years and how they might need to change in the future.
Please see: History and Climate change for programme, booking and contact details.
Wednesday 28th May 2014, What can radical historians offer to a world threatened by climate change?
6.30 pm, Room 251, Birkbeck College main building, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HX
Rescue!History in association with Raphael Samuel History Centre www.raphael-samuel.org.uk @RSHistCentre
“What can radical historians offer to a world threatened by climate change?”
Post-humanism? Popular activism? Luddism!? Marxist naturalism? A discussion about the place of environment in history.
All welcome, no need to book.
Dr Carrie Hamilton (Roehampton) on “Activist Histories and the Challenge of Non-Anthropocentric History Writing.”
Dr Geoffrey Mead (Sussex) on “Shacks and tracks, shanties and plot-lands: an informal response to the UK interwar housing shortage.”
Dr Mark Levene (Southampton) on “Imagining an alternative path of history: E. P. Thompson, the Industrial Revolution, and the coming of the Anthropocene.”
Martin Empson (Trade Unions Against Climate Change) on “Marx’s ecology: understanding our changing relationship with nature.” (Martin is author of “Land and Labour: Marxism, ecology and human history.” Bookmarks 2013)
Professor Paul Dukes (Aberdeen).
For information contact George Yerby firstname.lastname@example.org
Rescue!History meeting, 3rd July 2013, room 220, Senate House
Richard Aldridge, Chris Callow, Jonathan Coope, Tim Cooper, Lesley Docksey, Paul Dukes, Carrie Hamilton, Mark Levene, Chris Shaw, Damien Short, Paul Warde, George Yerby (apologies : Marianne McKiggan, Matt Worsdale)
Mark Levene introduced the meeting by way of setting out what he saw as the current situation and possible directions for the group. Past activities included, the publication of an e-book in 2010, based around papers from the ‘An End to History? Climate Change, the Past and the Future’ (conference, held in Birmingham in April 2008) and the History and Climate Change teaching guide for HEA. More recently Tim Cooper (Exeter University) has suggested providing online teaching materials to be made available via a MOOC in order to reach a wider audience. Another example of more local activity had been the Kineton, Warwickshire, Diggers Awake! (October 2012), workshop which could be a model for more local activity. ML. noted, however, that academic research councils had not funded the network’s activities and that funding remained a key challenge.
ML asked the group to consider what its target audience should be – one or all of: academics, policy makers, and the wider public. He suggested:
- organising a conference, to be made open to the public, which addressed history, historians and the anthropocene,( the label made popular to describe the modern era in which man has significantly altered the biosphere).
- a series of locally based workshops, in different UK venues, organised by local historian-activists from the Rescue!History network (provisional title: What can Historical Radicalism offer to a World in Biospheric Crisis? ‘Voices from the Past : Inspirations for the Future’ . which would seek to consider – and celebrate – thinkers, activists, peoples, movements and ideas from the recent and not so recent past, who/which have sought to challenge received wisdoms, consumerist values and environmental destruction in favour of social and environmental peace and justice.
- that the group consider how it makes its existence and influence sustainable.
The issue of a presence for the group on the internet was addressed in various ways in the meeting. RA referred to the platform available through Faculti <http://www.facultimedia.com/> for sharing widely academic research through in depth short films. TC developed his idea for a MOOC on history and climate change. He proposed that it would be free but could provide accreditation. At present neither FutureLearn nor other obvious providers seemed to offer something on this topic. TC suggested that his existing teaching materials core (in part derived from the R!H HEA document) could form the core of a course but that input would be required from others to develop it. His existing course emphasised the importance of climate change as a social issue which has been either responded to or ignored. It was noted that developing the course would require time rather than money to set up. Some pre-existing online courses were maintained and improved by students as part of their assessment. TC suggested that the course should be made available for free. Others agreed that the MOOC proposal offered a good opportunity for a sustainable Rescue!History impact.
GY also noted that the Raphael Samuel History Centre (RSHC) website might be willing to expand its coverage to include a permanent discussion group on environmental history but required some initial input from interested individuals, e.g. from the Rescue!History grouping. Also GY offered to explore i development of a specific R!H event in RSHC’s ‘Conversations and Disputations’ series. A theme proposed was ‘History and the biospheric crisis.’
Action: TC to co-ordinate the development of a MOOC. GY to seek clarification on RSHC possibilities. CH as already on the RSHC advisory board to help facilitate.
We then discussed Policymakers and the relationship between Rescue!History and the History and Policy (http://www.historyandpolicy.org/). PW, an editor and reviewer of History and Policy papers, suggested a distinction between the apolitical stance of History and Policy and Rescue!History’s specific agenda. There was discussion of the effectiveness of targeting policymakers as an audience. The general consensus was that they ought not to be ignored but that R!H should concentrated on public engagement with the public, students and academics. It was however noted that credible, evidence-based research submitted via History and Policy would still be one good way to communicate historians’ research relating to climate change.
Wider engagement with the public was further discussed. LD talked about her local Dorset community’s involvement in the development of the Local Plan. Several villages and hamlets have united to influence the environmental elements of their Local Plan and used historical information to help shape it. This could prove a model for other communities where climate and environmental change formed part of the debate. LD suggested that radicalism was a topic which naturally led into discussing local activism on climate change. She also proposed that the www.globalresearch.ca <http://www.globalresearch.ca> website which runs articles from across the world on politics, economics, conflict, environment, was an excellent site for reaching a wider audience on climate change.
CC suggested Rescue!History could be the banner under which speakers visited local history societies or other interested groups (on the assumption that those inviting speakers would pay any expenses). CS can potentially get up an event Lewes with Tom Paine as possible peg and this might act as a useful kite-flyer. LD to consider similarly in her Dorset locale, with Tolpuddle Martyrs as possible theme.
Action: CC to compile a list of speakers CS/LD to explore local possibilities further.
It was agreed that the idea for a further conference would be a good idea and that Birmingham would make a good venue. There was discussion as to whether the ‘Anthropocene’ offered the best access into a further conference. and thereby engage the public. JC suggested that an alternative route might be the work up a historical event which would bring local,radical activism together with the global dimensions of climate change.
Action: JC to develop an A4 proposal fleshing out the argument/call for papers, for such a conference. CC to look into Birmingham and Midland Institute as venue for pos. 2014 (tbc).
PW noted that there was to be a conference at the University of East Anglia in early 2014 on global environmental governance. Perhaps a panel could be got up under its auspices, involving R!H?
Action: PW to consider organising academic panel for UEA conference.
Additionally, PW and ML have been invited to participate in the opening ‘Environmental Humanities’ symposium to launch the University of Exeter’s Centre for Environmental Arts and Humanities (CEAH) in September. ML urged that the anthropocene as concept should not be lost in the mix, and extolled PD’s ‘Minutes to Midnight, History and the Anthropocene’ as excellent signposting. Geoffrey Parker’s Global Crisis on climate change and catastrophe in the 17th century was also discussed. DS encouraged participants to view the Extreme Energy Initiative http://extremeenergy.org website for its parallel exposure of unconventional energy projects and their environmental and human consequences.
Provisional conference proposal – Local history, sustainability and the green agenda
This cross-disciplinary conference explores the relevance of local history to sustainability and the green agenda. Recently, Transition Town Totnes have used oral history to rediscover “more frugal and resilient ways of doing things that might help us to design the future… Oral histories give substance to understanding how the place we live functioned before cheap oil changed it profoundly, dismantling its resilience to a point where little remains” http://www.transitionnetwork.org/ingredients/connecting/oral-histories
People’s sense of environmental responsibility and ethics can be as dependent upon intimate relationship with particular local places and their flora and fauna (and what threatens them) as it is upon their understanding of more abstract ideas such as ‘anthropogenic climate change’ or ‘the Anthropocene era’.
This conference explores ways in which local history can contribute to sustainability, for example, towards local energy descent plans.
Contributions are invited from historians, local historians, activists, social scientists and writers on topics that might include (but are not limited to):
• Allotments and the allotments movement
• Can oral histories inform local energy descent plans?
• Food production
• Histories of local planning and changing priorities of conservation
• Local history in schools
• Local landscape in poetry and the arts
• Oral history and the uses of ‘elder’ testimony
• Theorising relationships between meta-narratives and local ‘micro-narratives’
• Radical nostalgia
• Radicalism locally in 18th/19th centuries
• WEA and adult education provision in the past
• WW2 and the uses of green spaces (e.g. the ‘Holidays-at-Home’ campaigns)
If you an interest in offering something for this, please contact Jonathan Coope jonathan_coope (at) hotmail.com More information to follow.
Last updated: 7 August 2013
A moment in English history and its relevance to land, food, the biosphere and human potential now
A Discussion and the film ‘Winstanley’
Saturday 20 October 2012
Kineton Sports and Social Club, Kineton, Warwicks
3.30 – 7.00
With food policy expert Professor Tim Lang, English revolution historian George Yerby, Latin America land rights watcher Tony Campbell – and the film Winstanley.
In 1649, in defiance of local landowners, a group of activists and unemployed people led by Gerrard Winstanley, occupied the common land on St George’s Hill, Surrey and began growing food there. So began the Diggers movement.
Today we face big challenges of how we use and look after our land. Whether it’s global food security, or local community activism, land use and land rights are as relevant as ever. Who owns our land? What should we do with land? Nature or nurture?
To celebrate the Diggers and discuss their contemporary resonance, Getting Kineton Growing, in association with Rescue!History, is organising this afternoon event. It also dovetails with the Sealed Knot’s 370th anniversary commemoration of the battle of Edgehill.
Admission for the event will be by prior registration and will include the cost of a wholesome, vegetarian, locally derived buffet supper.
Registration by 30 September
£6.00 unwaged and students
For registration and more information Contact Marianne at marianne (at) crisis-forum.org.uk There are a limited number of places at this event, so register early!
Organised by Getting Kineton Growing in association with Rescue!History
An End to History? Climate Change, the Past and the Future
3rd April 2008
Birmingham and Midland Institute, Margaret Street, Birmingham, B3 3BS
Conference papers and PowerPoint presentations ( updated: 9 May 2008)
To play a Powerpoint presentation, click on the links below and select “open with Java”; click with your mouse to see next slide.
Patrick Ainley, ‘Education and Climate Change – some systemic connections’ (PDF file – this paper first appeared in the British Journal of Sociology of Education)
Call for Papers and Contributions (now closed)
The premise of this conference is that human society has had a potentially catastrophic effect on the earth’s climate. For some commentators it is not out of the question that we will bring about our own extinction unless we modify our behaviour. And while the scientific community has had a major influence on governments’ and the public’s understanding of climate change, the contribution of the humanities has been less significant. Therefore this conference seeks contributions from across the humanities, from historians, archaeologists, anthropologists, sociologists, psychologists, human geographers, demographers, philosophers, writers, and from students of politics, economics, international relations, religion, literature and culture.
Contributions should aim to:
- explore how this potentially catastrophic situation has arisen
- understand how societies, polities and cultures have previously, or currently, sustained themselves in conditions of scarcity and adversity
- learn from the experiences of past and current societies which have coped with severe climate or environmental change
- raise awareness of the value of humanities for understanding climate change and its impact on past and present societies
The conference is open to everyone with an interest in the development of our understanding of climate change, whether they are researchers, students, campaigners or others. There will be a conference fee of £15 per day for waged delegates. For students and the unwaged there will be a fee of £10 per day and a small number of bursaries will be available to allow free attendance. A list of accommodation in Birmingham can be provided to delegates.
Organisers: Dr Chris Callow (Birmingham University); Dr Mark Levene (Southampton University); Dr Jean-Francois Mouhot (Birmingham University)
The conference is supported and co-organised by the University of Southampton and University of Birmingham.
Minutes of the first Rescue! History meeting at Warwick University, November 2006
Rescue!History Workshop, 24.11. 06:
Minutes of the Inaugural Meeting
Prof. Colin Feltham, Counselling, Sheffield Hallam,
Dr Penny Roberts, History, Warwick
Dr Richard Maguire Philosophy, UEA
Richard Jordan, History, Southampton
Dr Amanda Root, School of Health and Social Care, Oxford Brookes
Julie Cappleman-Morgan, ‘Sociologists Outside Academia’
Greg Neale, BBC History Magazine, Newsnight,
Dr Robert Johnson, History, Warwick
Dr Christopher Callow, History, Birmingham
Dr Jean-Francois (Jeff) Mouhot, History, Birmingham
Prof. Steve Wright, Praxis Centre, Leeds Metropolitan
Prof. Dave Webb, Praxis Centre, Leeds Metropolitan
Dr Mark Levene, History, Southampton
Chris Shaw, Sociology, Sussex
Jo Rathbone Ecocongregation, Stonleigh, Warwicks
Apologies: Louise Tattersall, Dr Deana Heath, Dr Marius Kwint, Annie Tunnicliffe, Tehmina Goskar Dr Brian Golding, Dave Musgrove, Anthony Rudolf, Dr Pertti Ahonen, Jo Overend, Dr Mark Roodhouse, Prof. Emma Clery
Morning session: What is the argument of Rescue!History and what are its objectives?
Discussant: Professor Colin Feltham:
It is difficult to grasp the complexities of the environment, especially for most amateurs and the analyses of the current crises’ origins are variously dated, some tracing back 6,000 years to a period that required greater human organization and exploitation of resources. The assumption made is that by understanding the origins of this process we might be able to correct our course. However, we should perhaps acknowledge that all things, including civilizations, come to an end. Some go so far as to posit that there is a determinism inherent in animal behaviour. Nevertheless, others argue that humans are inherently co-operative and that they have been changed by competition.
Does the source of our problems lie in our minds, our nature or in politico-economic factors? Are we more barbaric than in the past, or just more equipped to be more lethal? There are several crises being faced at the moment, including the environment, terrorism, and religious conflict, but some point to problems of greater deception in Western society which distorts an analysis. Therefore, to fully understand the problems we face, is a multi-disciplinary approach essential? CF offered some current works to illustrate the variety of interpretations of the world’s crises. These included:
McNeal’s Something New Under the Sun (a classic interpretation which appears to be neutral in its objectives);
Jameson (?), Endgame (which states that the current type of society is untenable and that what is required is the violent destruction of this order to a pre-industrial society: these views are based on the extreme notion that sustainable technologies are already too late);
Lomburg, Sceptical Environmentalist (critical of scare-mongering, the thesis here is that all the problems will be addressed in time)
Which genre is right? Who do we believe? Academics perhaps should take a lead here.
ML explained the reasons for issuing his manifesto, which he offered without being sure of the response it would receive. David Cromwell and Mark Levene had set up the Crisis Forum in 2002, but ML established Rescue!History to look specifically at the environmental aspects of the current world crises. He noted that environmental change is creating stress points elsewhere (such as energy issues). ML called for two questions to be answered: One, who is the audience of Rescue!History? and, two, where does Rescue!History go?
ML further queried: Are specific disciplines needed, or more?
For historians, ML suggested there are some philosophical problems to overcome, not least the fact that, if there is a serious malfunction occurring in the world’s environment and this is linked to human activity, leading to a catastrophe in the near future, shouldn’t we be taking account of that in our current historical research? ML believes that a crisis is now inevitable, but asks: how did we get here? Is it prehistoric, inherent or recent in origin? He also asks: what are the byproducts?
ML suggests we need more environmental history to address these questions.
Denial-inevitability arguments are curiously related, but action can be taken. In offering explanations, we need to acknowledge Ecological Organisation Theory. It is suggested that a combination of organization and technology can create a ‘win-win’ situation (it is good for business if the environment is respected), but this requires good management.
Too many variables (in assessing the environment) tends to deter analysis. Taking the example of empires, SW notes that they fight not just for resources but also for truths, ideas, and symbols of meaning. To overcome the deceptions of the deniers or reluctant states, we need to recognize our common ground. Co-operation across structures (such as statistical structures), and analysis of complex theory can give us the opportunity to understand processes and intervene at the micro-level to make a difference. We have to recognize we have limited time and energy so we would be best served by picking a way to make the system backfire on itself.
RM rejects the idea of inevitability and decline, citing examples of humanity being able to deliver. Successes of the human condition should not be ignored. He suggests we need to understand the problem, trace the chain of the problem and offer solutions based on a causal dynamic. He argues that we certainly need experts from other disciplines, and take our inspiration from the Enlightenment thinkers.
DW asked: Is the situation now different, or the speed of change more difficult to cope with? He outlined the scope of the damage.
JM suggested that death and the decline of civilizations were inevitable, but offered a more optimistic proposal that history should move out of its current narrow confines. Contrasting the ‘popular’ histories written by journalists and the demand of his students for broader surveys, he lamented the way that academic histories tended to concentrate on the minutiae of the past. He concurred that there were too few environmental histories, and too few studies that demonstrated the environmental situation. He queried drawing ‘rules’ or ‘lessons’ from history, noting in an analogy that inequalities of wealth have not always sparked a crisis. He suggested we do need to look back into the past to see what has happened, but we need to address the popular or public questions, not simply examine the questions we, as academics, think up. Being more relevant and more responsive was the imperative. JM added that we need more than just a technical programme of solutions. Whilst technology is important, it is, in fact, a political issue.
Is this a problem with academics? He referred to previous periods of academics being dissenters.
Students are potential activists and allies who appear disengaged with mainstream politics. We need to state our position clearly to enlist them.
The lazy option would be to acquire more academic data: we need to use it to fulfil our remit as ‘research activists’. SW cited the example of Mark Thomas who has used the medium of television to ‘set up’ politicians. He used humour and alternative thinking to engage with mass culture.
We need to convey that activism is acceptable, but acknowledge that inertia is problematic.
Comedians, like Mark Thomas, can grab our attention, but cannot offer a coherent agenda. He suggested that, in engaging the media, Rescue!History needs to avoid an overt political point of view which can alienate the audience. He recommended that conventional channels of media are used and that sometimes failure should be expected. He noted that there is a wave of current interest to be exploited. Changes in the environment are now evident to all. The media will look for the stories, both big and small. He suggested the group establish what it has in common, target other academics, examine where the greatest difference could be made and the methods that could be used. He urged the group to be pragmatic, and argued that a study of previous societies and crises would be our strength.
We need to understand how we got here (such as our use of energy) and acknowledge that our systems enslave. The motor car now provides the equivalent horsepower that hitherto would have required a large number of slaves. The transition from slavery has been possible because there was no change in lifestyle. JM calls for studies to be made with this sort of striking contemporary relevance.
We have common concerns, even if we are to disagree on detail: that is valuable. The oil industry and hydrocarbon economy is a very recent and very important development that needs further investigations. He suggests that the current academic regime in terms of funding coerces us away from experimenting with our research and perhaps from reaching a wider audience. However, we could offer a book to show our seriousness as academics. See book proposal reference.
We need to exploit the genre of story-telling (film makers are the new ones and are very effective).
He noted that we need to convey the Chinese view of technology, that it must be used in harmony with the environment.
He explained that he intended to show how, in his field, that the military-establishment are dominant in the media, and therefore cautioned how the use of media will be critical.
Observing the previous discussion, RJ suggested that a study of former societies and their environments might be of interest to a wider audience (such as the fate of Aku-Aku or Easter Island) but we could balance this narrative of apparently endless disaster with studies of marginal societies that have made a virtue of living in difficult climates (Inuit, rainforest dwellers, mountain peoples). In terms of attracting the media, pre-prepared statements that are deployed as crises unfold would meet the criteria for informed, newsworthy material. To that we should add maximum use of new media – blog, on-line publishing, webpages, and email.
GN advises that we should appear to be disinterested, non-partisan and without fixed agendas.
CC suggests we work on our own institutions as much as the wider public audience.
Academics can offer backing to the students who want to do something practical about the situation.
In trying to motivate action, the story needs to be told.
‘Global dimming’ thesis interesting because it suggests the impact of climate change influenced by man may actually be limited by nature’s response. An informed position is therefore vital.
We need to emphasize the costs and consequences of climate change.
Ideas can make a difference.
ML: Deskilling is a problem in the West: Many westerners are now unequipped to survive as their ancestors would have done. We can learn a great deal from marginal societies.
It is interesting to study behaviours when people are faced by imminent crisis. There are reactions of herd instinct, denial, blame, even depression and suicide. There are also survivalists who look to escape. We might look at examples of sixteenth century settlers who escaped persecution in Europe and established colonies in marginal conditions in north America; those who, facing genocide, fought back against their oppressors; or those who survived the ice-age.
Perhaps we should be suggesting the teaching of perma-culture practices in schools [I know of an Australian, John Hunwick, who is doing this already in Uganda: RJ] or survival skills too.
Points to take forward for the afternoon
Local level initiatives – how will climate change affect this village or that borough?
Could an audit of the environment be carried out by local authorities or even by small communities?
Could a televised piece show how ancient people (or marginal peoples) have lived, and how this contrasts with our Western lives with practical suggestions?
Afternoon Session: What is the agenda of Rescue!History?
To begin the discussion Mark Levene suggested a variety of options for Rescue!History (RH): A book,
- A special edition of an appropriate journal,
- An alternative event using the forthcoming ‘History Matters’ series as a foil, perhaps called ‘Why History Really Matters?’,
- A conference,
- Film and media events,
- School project – a pack to send around to schools,
- Take advantage of an event a Stirling University in March 2007 to which RH has been invited.
Steve Wright suggested that another thread might be ‘Why History Matters to Science?’ He also suggested that a local focus might be productive, as did Chris. Mark asked what might appeal to a local audience. Julie thought something on rationing would be appealing. It was pointed out that history in the media tends to be anniversary driven – the anniversary of the Great Storm of 1987 was highlighted.
Jeff suggested that RH should not focus on environmental history conferences and publications exclusively and also that letter writing in the manner inspired by Amnesty International, to targeted policy makers might be an approach.
It was suggested that an open letter in a newspaper might be an alternative route, which would place the RH agenda and RH itself ‘on the map’. This should be quite gentle in approach, to ensure the widest support.
Richard M suggested (in line with comments from Greg in the morning session) that the main aim of activity initially might be the academy, by establishing an academic reputation the group would later be able to act more widely.
Many people focused on the need for an RH website.
On the conference Christopher suggested that funding might be available at Birmingham for a conference organised with other universities, Mark, Richard, Dave and Steve all thought they could bring their universities to the table in a joint project. It was suggested that outside funding might be forthcoming if a public lecture was organised and organisations such as the National Trust invited to participate.
On the issue of the journal, it was suggested by a number of people that History Workshop Journal might be a very good choice. Greg also suggested that the New Statesman or Prospect might be an alternative format. The possibility of creating a new RH journal was floated, however, the workload involved was thought to be too great at this stage of the project.
Amanda argued that it would be potentially very useful to attempt to incorporate climate change into the curriculum development programmes of HE.
Strategic Plan.It was agreed that the key was to limit aspirations initially to a selected number of tasks, in order to ensure that the effort of the group was not spread too thinly. The ideas eventually agreed on were:
- To focus on the academy in the initial period,
- To begin the process with a statement of aims for widespread dissemination,
- To work on a conference at Birmingham,
- The creation of a website,
- To consider a special journal edition,
- Curriculum development options,
- To attend the Stirling conference,
- Explore funding options.
Statement of Aims. Richard M agreed to take the lead on this, Greg was happy to provide assistance.
Action. Richard M to draft the statement, agree this with Greg and then distribute it to members of RH for their comments. Once the statement is agreed RH members will distribute it to their own networks of colleagues asking them to sign up to it, in order that the numbers involved is maximised. Once signed it will be sent to media organisations, historical outlets, etc and placed on the RH website (see below).
The Birmingham Conference. Christopher agreed to take the lead on this, Jeff will support him.
Action. It was agreed to aim for the conference in about 12 months. Christopher will explore the funding options at Birmingham, Jeff will assist on this as required. Richard, mark, Steve and Dave will broach the subject of a joint conference at their own institutions.
Journal. The main question was which journal?
Action. Everyone to consider possible options. Greg to speak with New Statesman.
Website. A website is to be created as soon as possible. The domain name should include climate change, history and if possible RH.
Action. Jeff has agreed to manage the website when it is created. Steve’s son is involved in this business, he will arrange for hosting, and domain name and will pay for this. Rick J is to contact a friend re web design, Richard M will pay for it, Mark will also provide funds.
Curriculum Development. Amanda will explore this option.
Stirling Conference. Mark will attend this and give a paper, other RH members may attend in addition.
Funding. All members will explore sources of funding as they see fit. Mark has been in contact with the Prince of Wales and will report on the meeting and the RH agenda to HRH’s personnel.
Next Meeting. To be held in Spring 2007, possibly at Birmingham.