that you should start focusing on is start speaking to more of your current customers and give them more opportunities to work with you. Now, here's two good examples. Number one, if you're doing any sort of private one-on-one training with any of your clients, I would ask them if they would want to step into a group session sometime. Maybe ask them to do that once a month. And upgrade them and give them more of your program by just simply asking them, right? That's number one. Number two is you could take anyone that's in your program that's already paying you and put them into a clinic membership or a camp membership. This way they get more of your training because you have to remember clients that are already working with you, they already know like and trust you, they're already getting results. And the easiest way to guard your business is go to your existing clients and ask them to do more things with you, right? And this is not something I would do just via text or via email. Like literally just go ask your clients, next time you see them say, hey, I'm thinking about putting this together, which you guys want to do it. Now, when you do this over the next 30 days with all of our clients, I think you're going to be shocked with how many of them are going to want to start paying you more money for more services, right? And this is how you can easily grow your business over the next 30 days. Now, if you like this video and you like these shorter videos that I've been posting over the last week or so, let me know, hit the subscribe button. And if you just have any general questions for me, send me a text. I'm an open book. I love helping coaches. It's why I'm here. It's why I've created 400 plus videos on this channel at this point. And yeah, that's it. See you later.


Hello and welcome to the International Daily Roundup by People's Dispatch, where we bring you some of the major news developments from across the world. Our headlines. COVID-19 cases across the world cross 786,000. US has twice the number of cases China. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban assumes emergency powers citing the pandemic. Palestinians mark the land day and anniversary of the Great March of Return and the ELN announces a ceasefire in Colombia. We begin with our daily COVID-19 segment. The number of cases as of 9 a.m. GMT was over 786,000. The number of deaths was close to 38,000. The US has now twice the number of cases of China with the peak death toll estimated to be seen in a few weeks. Across the world, countries continue to tighten travel norms and move into various stages of lockdown. With over 164,000 cases, the outbreak in the United States has reached crisis-level proportions. It has added over 20,000 reported cases in a single day. In the meanwhile, 6 members of the US Congress tested positive yesterday, while 30 others are under self-imposed quarantine. Nevertheless, 230 members of the US House of Representatives attended a session to pass the CARES Act, which will infuse $2.2 trillion for measures to find the infection. The attendance of Congress members, despite health risks, was necessitated after Republican House members threatened to block the passing of the bill if half the members did not attend the session. The Congress is now speculated to go into the second phase of action to contain the COVID-19 epidemic in the country. At the same time, delivery and warehouse workers across the country went on strike yesterday over concerns about their health and safety. Strikes were organized in Instacart and Amazon in several facilities across the country, demanding protective gear and hazard pay for their work during the epidemic. Workers have also raised concerns of what they see as inadequate policies on part of the company, especially in ensuring a safe and hygienic work environment to prevent the spread of the disease among workers. In Europe, Spain continued to suffer with over 7000 new cases and 913 new deaths are called yesterday, even as the country is considering tougher restrictions. Italy recorded over 800 deaths yesterday, although the number of new cases has fallen. Italy too has extended the lockdown for at least two weeks. Meanwhile, in a dangerous development, Hungary's far-right wing Prime Minister Viktor Orman has assumed virtually unlimited powers after a parliamentary vote on the government's request to rule by decree. The opposition severely criticized the move, saying that democracy itself has been placed in quarantine. Among the dangerous provisions are curbs on the media. Meanwhile, in the Asia-Pacific region, WHO has wanted the pandemic as far from over. Countries in the region have seen an increase in cases, but no major spiralling has happened in the West. The WHO official warned that countries where cases are declining or with slow growth rates must keep up with the vigil, else the pandemic might strike back again. China reported 48 new cases today, all of which were imports. In Africa, Tanzania became the latest country to report a death. In our in-focus section, we bring to you a feature on the issues faced by migrant workers in India. After Prime Minister Narendra Modi declared a sudden lockdown last Tuesday. Yesterday, March 30th of Palestinians marked the 44th anniversary of the land day as well as the second anniversary of the Great March of Return protests. However, due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, no mass remaster rallies and organizations were organized, keeping in mind the health and safety of Palestinians. Instead, activists and Palestinian-soldier organizations announced that they would be holding an online rally and a Twitter storm to mark the anniversaries and to highlight the sufferings and struggles of Palestinians, especially in Gaza, who were living under a crushing Israeli-Egyptian land, air, and sea blockade for the past 14 years. Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, occupied East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, as well as those in the diaspora and countries across the world, took to raising the flag on their rooftops and in their balconies. The Great March of Return began in 2018 to demand justice and the right of return for hundreds of thousands of Palestinians and their descendants who were forced to leave their homeland in what is called the Nakba during the formation of Israel. The Great March of Return became a symbol of Palestinian resistance and was met with horrific brutality by Israel. Close to 300 Palestinian protesters have been killed since the protests began. The land day marks the killing of six Palestinians in 1976 when they were resisting the confiscation of their land. In our next story, the left-wing Colombian national group, the National Liberation Army or the ELN, declared a unilateral ceasefire for the month of April in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. In their ceasefire statement, they said it is a humanitarian gesture from the ELN to the Colombian people who are suffering from the devastation of the coronavirus. The ELN explained that the cessation was active and that its combatants would defend themselves if they were attacked by Colombia's armed forces. The group called on the government of President Iván Duque to re-establish dialogue with their delegation in Havana, Cuba to finalize a bilateral and temporary ceasefire. They also called for an end to the persecution of the people and the murder of social leaders and activists. That's all we have in this episode of the International Daily Roundup. To know more about these stories, visit our website, peoplesdispatch.org and follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Thanks for watching.


OK, nice to meet you after this long wait. Hi there, Bob. Tell me what you'd like to change today, Rowena. I would like to be able to do some activity, some work, some pleasure, some something, without prevaricating. I'd like to be able to enjoy it more. So, for instance, I went to that conference, and I had to write my notes up and send them off. And I'm busy putting it to one side, and putting it to one side, and putting it to one side. Other things are more important. And I do the same with reading, or I'd love to sit down and read a chapter of a book, and I think, no, no, no, I'd better do so and so else first. I'm very, very good at surfing the web and not doing my work.  There could be a psychological thing going on that's stopping me from achieving what I want. Sounds like what you want, is to be able to prioritize and take action. Yeah, I can prioritize beautifully. I can write a do list. So you want to mobilize yourself. I can do it for the years. The thing I've used in order to make myself do things, even though I want to do them, I start to make myself do them, is on the bottom of my do list, I put the worst possible thing I can think of. So I'll avoid doing that. I'll do the other things. It's usually mopping the kitchen floor. Hate that the most. So tell me again, in real terms, what is the change you want? So, for example, when you walk away today, how would you like to be different and spell it out to me? I'd like to be able to think, tomorrow's Tuesday, I'm going to sit down in the morning and do those conference notes and then do it. So you want to actionize yourself? I want to be able to take the action I've promised myself that I want to do, but somewhere along the way it gets blocked. Okay. So what stops you actionizing? That's the puzzle I don't know. Well, Irina, here comes a magic question. Okay. If you did know when you just guessed, what do you think it would be? I think maybe, and I don't feel this, but it's a thinking thing, that maybe it has to do with my schooling and my mother and not doing things on time became a way of thwarting, being rebellious. How is this a rebellious action? I think, but it doesn't feel like that. Sometimes it just feels like, oh, I'll just surf the web or I'll go and do something else instead. It doesn't feel rebellious at the time I'm doing it. But it's all my life, so it's not something that's happened recently. It's always been there. So do you see it as a passive action? Surfing the web or whatever, instead of actionizing? I suppose, as a whole, it doesn't get things done. It might get other things done. It doesn't get what you want to be done done? No, it doesn't get the thing that I've allocated to do that day done. It might get something else done. So it's not always passivity, it's sometimes activity, but it's not the thing I said I'd do. So it's as if the thing I said I'd do is forbidden. I can't do the thing that I promised myself. I have to do all the other things first. I've got a fantasy with you. Can I share it with you? If I got my pen and paper out, I said, OK, let's do a list of the things that you really want to do. I will stick it on your fridge. A nice big red letter, so you know they're there.  I might. You probably watch it. I might do some, but I probably wouldn't do them all. I do really like crossing them out when I've done them. I get a lot out of that. Well, that's different. This is about you doing things that you want to do in your own time for you. Rather than, rather than, so I must do this, I ought to be doing this. You know, it's almost like a parent. You know, when you said that in the bed of your stuff, that's what it sounds like to me. It could be, yeah. Except it's not, I mean, it's ignored just as much as the things I don't want to do. So I just don't, I don't get that bit. Well, I was, what Jessica and I did was again, I'm going to bring in again, and she's practising to be a teenager, and she's often telling me exactly what you've reported. Even though she might like to do certain things, she wouldn't do it because I've told her to do it. OK. That's what it sounds like. You know, that's what teenagers do. They push the boundaries, and often don't do things they even want to do. Hmm. Because they're pushing those boundaries. Yeah. Yeah, I think I do that a lot of the time. Internally, and probably gets played externally out. Yeah. Yeah, I suppose so. Like, yesterday I was doing some computer work, and I could tell that my fella was irritated because I wasn't doing some house-type work, so what I should be as well. And there was a sort of free song for me of, I'm not going to, you know, I know what you want me to do, but I'm not going to do that. You're not going to do it, and you're not going to make me do it. Precisely. Yeah. Yeah. But I'm doing that to myself. Sounds like you're doing externally and internally. Hmm. Makes sense. So, my parent is telling my child what to do, and my child is basically being defiant. Sounds like it to me, Rowena. You caught me out.  But every once in a while something comes along and I really want to do, and I do get to really do it. Hmm. And there's usually some sort of overriding factor, like I must do it for Bob because Bob will be pleased if I do it for Bob. Oh. I'd be honoured. Sometimes, not always. So, how's this going to change, Rowena? What's going to happen differently? Well, I'd like it to change. I'd like to be able to think I'm going to do this and then sit down and do it. This ain't going to change on its own. No. So, you know, what's going to happen, do you think? I don't know. What do you recommend? Oh, God, the pressure of asking me why. Just like toss it to you, you know. I tell you what. I tell you what. I tell you what. What about if both I recommend something and you recommend something and I recommend something and you recommend something and maybe together, we'll come to some sort of full options. Okay. Do you think about it? Okay. We'll share it out. You start, then. What do you want me to start? I'm happy to start. I suppose I could just make myself do it by... Forcing yourself. Yeah. Making myself up to the nth degree. That doesn't sound like a very good option, but I mean, I suppose you could force yourself to do it. Yeah. It's an option. Another one you could do is cause of somehow make the whole process fun. Because my friends say, I'm not sure with all these listed things that you've got to do that it may not be fun. I don't know. But somehow it becomes some sort of... It's usually all right once I start. So the starting could be made. So it's the start. It's the actual sitting down to do the thing. Yeah. You know, I can provaricate forever before that sitting down moment. So it's to be somehow to make that whole process fun instead of sort of a, you know, I've got to do it sort of thing. Yeah, okay. That's one of mine. How could I make it fun, then? Well, that's your... Over to you, then. Well, because everything I'll put in my list to do to make it fun, I'll provaricate and not do one. I say it's just circular. Is that an option? Is it my go or yours? That was my go. It's your go now. My other one, but you include your fellow in this. That's just a recipe for disaster. Well, it's an option. Okay. Somehow you two could work out a way where both of you can get your needs met instead of an iron or your situation. It's a remote possibility there. That would work. But it is remote because I think I'd probably just end up fighting him. You wouldn't work towards a system where you could both get your needs met from an adult perspective. That requires that both of us be an adult. And do you not want to be an adult? Well, yeah, I'd love to be an adult. But I don't know that I could get him an adult. I don't know. He could get him an adult. So that's a possibility. So there's another possibility. So you've got five or six options so far. Is it? Okay. No, we've got the option. You've got four. She's half to do it. Okay.  I'm going to make it fun. And then there's one that I wasn't quite sure about. But you were saying you could do something. And then there's the next one I talked about, which was including the other person. Yeah. Any more? I could not do it. At all? Yeah. I mean, that's great. Then nothing will get done, eh? Yeah. Eventually, if you leave things long enough, you don't need to do them anymore because the deadline's gone. That's a lot of work to do. Yeah. I don't think that will work with my next year's tasks for my training course, do you? I don't think I'd get passed if I didn't do anything. Probably not. Kind of productive then. I can't think of anything else. No. Well, I've got one. I think it would demand a piece of therapy now. Okay. So it's an option.  And that's fine. Yeah. Well, that was quick. Okay. Did that seem appealing to you? Well, I'm not quite sure how to do it. But there won't be much point in telling my father that he wasn't there and wasn't really involved anyway. So he wouldn't be the one... he wouldn't be... he wouldn't be involved. He wouldn't be involved either in the telling me what to do or not to do, or the result which was whether I did it right or not he wouldn't be involved really. So it would have to be my mother.  Well, that wouldn't have very much impact. Because he wasn't involved. Oh, but he wasn't there. Oh, because he wasn't there. Well, he was there, but he went out to work really early and came back and, you know, we worked in the fruit trade so he went out to work at four o'clock in the morning. So he wasn't there through breakfast and all that sort of stuff and then in the evenings he'd come back and kept and then he'd be up for supper and we'd say supper but that would only be it and mostly he wasn't involved with sort of the running of the family and stuff like that. So did he have much involvement in you in terms of you growing up? Very little, I think, which is quite sad. But you know, you know those questionnaires that you get, you know, if your father was pleased with you how would he show it if he was sad with you or whatever and had come out with a list of blanks mostly because he wouldn't be there to show any of those things. Which makes me sad. A realization now that he wasn't connected. No. But that's the way it was. He was busy off, you know, earning the pennies and doing the things that blokes do. So he wasn't really connected to whether I did things or didn't do things. Maybe that in a way is a bit of a problem. Maybe if he had a bit more connected I might have had somebody to do them for. That's what I meant to say when one of my options about talking to your fellow about how can we both get on these met? No, because my fellow isn't representative of my dad. No, I know he isn't. No, but I mean his behaviour, he's not like him. He's not distanced like that. So that wouldn't be the same. Except you could talk to him then. And he might listen to you. He might. Maybe that's the difference, Rowena. Rich. That you're projecting onto your fellow. What's his name? Jules. That you're projecting onto Jules what you expect from your fellow. It doesn't sit right. I hear what you're saying. I understand the point, but I think, actually, you're right but in the opposite way than you think. I think I would like to be able to project that father onto him, he refuses kind of thing. Why would you want to project an absent father? The distance element is more familiar to me. I don't like to be smothered. I don't like that feeling of somebody being clingy and kind of all over you. I prefer a better distance. Of course, with a father that is distant that would make sense. Yeah, it does. But it's a trap, isn't it? How can you get the intimacy that type of caring and support that you want when someone's distant from you? Because it's all the sadness you have just then. What are you thinking of your father? How can you have that intimacy and that support without perhaps feeling the sadness of the absence? I don't feel sad at the time. I don't feel sad at the time. No, I mean, I saw it. I've seen sad since. But that's a hindsight thing. I didn't feel sad at the time. It was just the way it was. No, I mean now. You look sad. Yeah, I'm sad now. But the connection between my father and my father just doesn't gel. It doesn't work. I couldn't talk to Jules and get him to behave like my father or even the opposite. It just doesn't fit. But he's acting differently from your father. That's what I mean. Yeah, of course. So the question for me is do you want him to act even more differently and be more intimate or do you want him to be more absent just like your father was? Yes, and that's the trap. Why is this trap?  And you deserve to be someone who would meet you that way even though you may feel uncomfortable and want to go back to the script of your father as part of you, but it desires to be different. I know that about you. It makes sense, but I couldn't slot Jules into that slot. It wouldn't work. Because? Well, he's the wrong sort of personality to slot into that. He just wouldn't fit. He's not a copy of my father in any sort of way. If you have the absent here and the intimacy's there, where would you fit? There's the absent father just like your dad and then there's a very intimate father maybe like your fantasies or what you've been working towards in therapy where would you fit? In that whole... Well, I don't want that. I would prefer that. I'd feel more comfortable with that. But Jules doesn't fit into either slot. Okay, on the spectrum, where does he go? There's Nor, that's the absence and there's 100, the intimate. Okay, his desire puts him this end. My desire would prefer him to be at that end. So there's a... In reality... In reality, there's a clash. Okay, where is he then, in reality? Put him on this Nor to 100 graph. Where is he? He's more at this end of the scale than that end of the scale. Maybe 80 or 80. If this is 100. Yeah. From the point of view of what he would like I'd put him somewhere around 90. Point of how it actually is. How it actually is, is nearer sort of 60. So it's about 60, in reality. Yeah, it's more than halfway but that's because of his desire rather than mine. So in reality it's about 60. Probably. Yeah, let's run with that. Let's run with that. It's difficult to quantify. We can run with 60. Okay. Can we? Alright, yeah. Yeah? Okay. Are you happy with that? Or would you like it to be different? Would you like him to change or you to change? Or would you like... Are you happy with that 60%? I'd prefer to put him on a completely different scale. You are wonderful at not answering the questions I asked. Okay. Are you happy with that? No, I'm not. You're not happy with that? No. Okay. Okay, right. So what would you like to change it to? Okay, if I had to run with that scale then I'd prefer to change it to the other more towards the distance. Where would you put it? 40. The other side of 50. Okay. Is that what you're working towards in the relationship? I would like to be able to work towards that, yes. But there's kind of a presumption about what you just said which doesn't necessarily apply. What do you mean? Well, if there's only one person working then... No. How come? There's a presumption... I've got an act of curiosity for you. When I had you talked about your father I could experience in the here and now that you were getting sad. Yeah. About that absence. Yeah. So how come you would want to be in a relationship with someone and work more towards that? Whatever. Okay. It's kind of encapsulated in a phrase I quite like which is somebody that has your best interests at heart. Now even when my dad wasn't that physically I was always aware that he had my best interests at heart and the rest of the family as well, not just me. He was doing his bit. It's just that his bit wasn't connecting with us particularly. So you were sort of connected? There was a feeling of being a part of it, yes. So it's a kind of benign looker over of whatever's going on. I spoke to my cousin David who's about ten years older than me who his father was not there from a very early age for him and he treated my father as his main father figure and I spoke to him only a few years back and I said what was it like and he said well he was great and he had a wonderful sense of humour but he was distant. That's how my father was, he was distant. You get the feeling of him looking off into the distance in a sort of romantic sort of looking off in the distance sort of a way. But I could identify with what my cousin said. I understood where he was coming from. I didn't mean to say he didn't feel loved and it didn't mean to say that he didn't love my father and I think that was the same for all of us in slightly different ways. So I guess that as a role model means that somebody who wants more intimacy is actually kind of uncomfortable. You seem to have stopped. I seem to have stopped or you seem to have stopped or we've both stopped. Okay I stopped and you're not saying anything in return. Well do you like me to say something back to the start? I don't know where to go with that or any further with that. Oh I can see that. Can I come to a full stop? Yeah. And is that the same in your relationship with Jules? Sort of a full stop? No. That you want more absence and he wants more intimacy so nothing goes. No that's just a constant battle. Or you constantly battle. I think like Jules is more like my mum in fact. But coming back to the original thing I don't think I'd pervericate because of my dad. So although he wasn't there and it would have been nice if he had been there and it would have been nice if he'd have been somebody that I could have done things for I don't think it was him that I was pervericating because of I think it's more likely my mum. I get the feeling that you want me to say more but I don't know what to say. No. I was just thinking about you and how you were this intimacy, absence, spectrum and how my friend is who would be if I was to be with you. How do I want to encourage you all? Support you. Ask her how you're getting on. I didn't get that you see. I would want to battle. I would be absent.  She still does. She does it very well. She'd look after us physically well but she wouldn't emotionally connect in that way. As long as we were going to school and doing the right thing and she wasn't getting any flack from the teachers about not doing our homework or something then that was always fine with her world. She didn't really, she didn't want to know what we were doing, how we were doing. She has her own sort of potted image of each of us and who we are and how we are which she still carries and it could be completely wrong. In most cases it is in fact completely wrong but that potted image hasn't changed over the years at all. It's like a caricature. So it would have been nicer if there'd have been more connection there. I think also, I mean, I learnt very early on to be how much I could get away with. I learnt to be rebellious because there was no point doing work if nobody was ever going to check up on you. Nobody was going to ever ask you what that French declension was. There was no point in learning it.  That she actually spent some time sat down with all of us but obviously me particularly. Stay with you. That she would sit down with me and show an interest in what we were doing. So show an interest in me, mother. I've done some pretty good things here. Show some interest in me. Spend some time. Spend some time with me. Spend some time with me, mother. I've done some really interesting things here. Just come and spend some time with me. I didn't want to have to ask her. I said make a demand. Okay. Talk about asking. No, I would prefer her to have spontaneously asked me. That was the problem. She didn't, did she? No. Which is why I'm suggesting you make a demand of her. But you're right. It wouldn't work as well. I mean, yeah, maybe if I had a done, she might have done for a bet. So you don't think she would have listened? She probably would have for a bet. She would have perhaps paid a lot of service to it. But she wouldn't really have been interested. Well, would you like to have her go or perhaps we should talk to her? How come she wasn't interested in her daughter? Well, we could have a go, but I'm fairly sure I know what the answer is. What would the answer be? Well, because she would just be too busy. She would be doing whatever jobs she had to do, making supper. So if you shouted really hard to her, what about me? Spend some time with me. How come you're not spending time with me? Do you think she would stop being so busy? Probably. But she'd have wriggled out of it if she could have done. But if she hadn't wriggled out of it, if she'd have been feeling generous that day, yeah, she'd have come and she'd have sat down. And I don't know, work with me on something. But beyond that, she wouldn't come back later on and say, how's it going or what's happening next? Or the next day she wouldn't particularly say, how did that go? I don't think she ever really paid much attention to whether we did any work or not, other than, as I say, she knew it was okay if she didn't get complaints. Distanced, very distanced. So what you really needed was somebody to pay attention with you. Let's play some time with you.   Those sorts of phrases. Too busy for you. So my option, way back, one of them was, how can you and Jules both get your needs met, do you remember? Very likely. Good job, everybody, because I remember. Good job, you've got a good memory. That seems to be one of my favourites at the moment. How both of you can sit down together and talk about how you can belong together and how you can support each other. It would be a way forward, I think. That would be quite good. Now, one thing that my fantasy is with you is you're likely to give up pretty quickly. Is that true? Hmm... It depends what you mean by give up. Your father was obstinate. Your mother gave up pretty quickly. See, you haven't got models of somebody who'd stayed with you. Well, I've been with him 20 or...


Aloha and welcome to Cooper Union. What's happening with human rights around the world? Today, it's an exciting time to meet with Yves LaDor as we're looking at the human right to a sustainable environment. At this time, we see many meetings happening around the world. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature just wrapped up its first meeting in a while at Marseille, France. Just yesterday, the UN Human Rights Council launched its 48th session with the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michel Bachelet, speaking about the human right to a safe, clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. And we know the UN General Assembly is also launching. And we have unprecedented times around the world where the climate crisis is in full rage. Yves, could you tell us what it was like to be last week in Marseille and what some of the issues were? I know you concentrated a lot on environmental human rights defenders. Hello, Harjosh. And thank you for having me here from Geneva. And indeed, it was interesting to be in Marseille last week. Although there was some frustration because usually these IUCN, the World Conservation Congress are a great opportunity to meet a lot of people coming from the field, from all over the planet. And of course, because of COVID, that was not possible this time. So that was really very frustrating. And a number of people were just able to participate remotely. But it was important to have this meeting. IUCN needed to have this meeting to elect new officers and to take new directions for the next cycle of the four coming years. So in that sense, it was very interesting. Indeed, we were able to have some interesting development. A motion was adopted for the protection of environmental defenders. It's an issue which really has taken a lot of heat, I would say over the last years. Unfortunately, because the situation of people who are getting engaged for the protection of the environment in many places in the world is becoming worse. And actually the human rights organizations are witnessing that the most severe conflicts are the most difficult trends, precisely affect the people who are active in the environment. And that's a new trend, I would say, since the last five years, something like that, or perhaps a bit even more. But it's always increasing. And again, this year is a record year in terms of people murdered because of their involvement in or the defense of the environment. Right now we are, for example, witnessing a closed down, a shutdown of all of the environmental organizations in Belarus. So there are really a number of issues there. So it was great that the IUCN took up this issue. There was actually a very moving moment during the assembly with a moment of silence, with a flower on the tables, one flower for each of the environmental defenders that was counted as disappeared last year because of their activities. Of course, the number is a bit not totally sure, but it was a very important signal and people were made a minute of silence, waving their flower, a very moving moment. And of course, I mean, this was important for the whole of the conservation and environmental community. We were able also to have a very important event between two commissions of the IUCN, the one on international environmental law and the one on the commission on environment and social policy, the CEPS. And the two together joined their efforts to talk about this question of environmental defenders. It was the really first time they were doing this together. And we can expect that both of them will continue to work together in the coming years on this issue. So it's great to have IUCN on board on this issue because it comes as a compliment to what has already been triggered in the Human Rights Council that you were mentioning before, and which has started its 48th session just yesterday. And in 2019, the council had adopted a very important resolution, which is called the Resolution of 4011 on the protection of environmental defenders. And that was a success reached by Norway, who speared, led all of these negotiations. And it was adopted by consensus in the Human Rights Council, which is quite an achievement. And it remains the main instruments. And I would say actually now we have the second instrument with the resolution of the IUCN. And these are the first instruments that environmental defenders, that means just behind, it's not a status. Environmental defenders mean people who are, normally people who are just getting involved for the protection of the environment and who are, who have to bear with negative consequences because of this very basic involvement, which is a very basic human rights. So it's good to have these instruments. Of course, what we see is say that it seems very weak when we see what people have to challenge and have to face when they are in the field. But it's very important to have these recognitions. And behind this also mobilizes institutions, mechanisms, develop a network of solidarity. So it's a whole process, which is in progress right now. That's why, for example, the two commissions of the IUCN coming together is quite an important event. And finally, we were able also to have a training session with a number of people coming in. It was the first time that a number of organizations who had never worked together before came together and developed a program. And we learned a lot from each other's experience. And it was the first step. We are looking forward to continue such an experience and to continue to work with the different networks existing in the field and to develop these solidarity networks in order to try to protect as much as possible the people who are attacked. And of course, to try to prevent having such developments. Oh, that's an excellent point. And it really is a situation we've seen growing more and more where people, everyday people are standing up just to protect their environment. And then because of that being targeted by their governments and corporations, I think was it Southeast Asia and Latin America were the highest numbers in the most recent aspects? Or what are some of the statistics regarding that situation you're sharing on environmental human rights defenders? Well, yes, the statistics say that's the biggest number are in Latin America, but we have to be careful. I mean, it's important to continue this way. That's one of the aspects we want to continue to work on because we are very far from having the real numbers and the good statistics because a number of issues and a number of cases are not reported. Let's not forget that you have so many local communities or indigenous peoples' communities who are defending their small pieces of land and who are targeted just because of that and we never hear about it. So I would say that one of the issue, I mean, it's very true that there are very huge problems in Latin America. That's absolutely true. On the other hand, it also show that you do have a number of mechanisms, human rights commissions, net solidarity networks and so on who collect this information and put in reports. So in a way, I would say that probably in Latin America, most of the cases are reported. When in many other continents, that's not the case yet. So that's why I'm always very, very careful about finger pointing any continent because I'm afraid that there are a number of situations which are not reported and that's why the statistics in a way are biased but precisely the more we're able to join networks together, the more we're able to have this information flow, the better we will be able to report on these issues. And of course, what we would like to see is these reports becoming useless. I mean, becoming empty. We're not running after the numbers far from that. We'd like this not to exist but at least it's extremely important that the realities is reported. And that's also the efforts in the coming years. And for example, the special rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on the protection of human rights defenders is very keen to keep an eye on these issues. And because as I said, it is one of the worrying trend. Of course, unfortunately, you have women defenders being attacked just because they are defending women's rights, LGBT defenders and so on, children defenders also. And that's an issue which does relate a lot with the environment because we have so many of these climate youth movements or other environmental youth movements. You have also very important youth movements involved against the plastic pollutions and other things. And then you do see that some of them are at least harassed. We do have a number of cases where you see that young people mobilizing in their schools or in their universities are targeted in their studies because of that involvement, which is one way, one type of harassment. So we have to see the variety of situations and to try to cover them correctly. And to make sure, I mean, it's particularly worrying when we think about the youth being targeted because of course it has an impact on the long run. And they are the ones who will have to bear the cost for the longest period of the mismanagement of the planet right now. So yeah, this is a very worrying trend and it is part of the issue of environmental defenders. Yes, and we're working here with Fridays for the Future in Hawaii, around the Pacific and the US. And we see that an alarming rate. We saw also at one of the important meetings, an amazing voice of one of the islands disappearing from the Solomon Islands, Kalei Island. And there you see youth standing up because then their homeland is actually under the waves. So it's definitely great to see the youth standing up, but it's definitely an area we need to concentrate on. As we look at that, I know it was also brought up a lot by the Indigenous Environmental Network looking at keeping the carbon in the ground by all the actions that they're taking. And I know there are some of the targeted individuals that you see in the US, in Canada, also a lot of action in Southeast Asia. So environmental human rights defenders are really being seen everywhere around the earth. Yes, yes. Yeah, yes, yes very much. No, no, it's very popular. We do have an issue with this name of defenders and we're aware of that. But on the other hand, you have to put a name on the situation. You cannot just say, oh, just everybody and so on. So, but again, I mean, it's very clear and that's for all of the situation of human rights defenders. You're a human rights defender when you just step up for your rights and the right to live in a clean and healthy environment is a fundamental right. And that's what we hope to be seen as and confirmed by the Human Rights Council in this session that started yesterday. Yes, maybe you could share a little bit more. Why is this resolution for the global recognition of the right to a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment so crucial maybe can explain those steps of safe, clean, healthy and sustainable and what that will then mean for many people around the world? Yes, well, it's in a way, I would say, well, it's all the symbolic. It is a very important, I mean, it's not done yet. So I don't wanna say we're gonna have it at the end of the month. We're fighting for that. And actually to be very clear as we're talking with the Hawaii audience, we need you to call on your government to do the right choice. And I'm not sure they're following the good path. We have heard from the US unpleasant signals. I could put it like that, saying that they don't think there is such a right to live in a clean, healthy and safe environment, which I have a lot of problems to understand and especially with the current administration. I mean, if ever you think because I know that the director of the EPA has said that climate change is a human rights issue, then if that is true, of course, to live in a safe, clean and healthy environment is a very fundamental human rights, especially, and that sometimes when I hear some of these lawyers speaking on these issues, I have the impression that they're still living in the 19th century. They didn't get the point that the environment we are and the destructions we are facing and the fires you have to face in the West Coast or the floods in Germany. And I can't do this whole list because the whole of the Northern hemisphere has been hit in a way or another during the last summer. These are not natural events. They're man-made events. Of course, they are natural process, but all of them have been marked by climate change. If it was not for climate change, they would not have that severity. Yes, of course, you would have wildfires. You always have them, but not of that scale, not of that length. You would have heatwave, but not of that level. So, same thing for the floods in Germany. Of course, they already had some floods but not at that scale. Not at the huge amount of water that was concerned. Not about a rain where basically you have a whole month coming in just an afternoon. That never happened before at that scale. So, these elements, this dimension is a man-made event. So, when we talk about the right to live in a clean and healthy and sustainable environment, it is just made, don't use the environment to kill people, which is exactly what is going on right now. Even if it's not intentional, and of course, we cannot say that the pollution which is causing this is an intentional act, but the reality is there. The way we behave, the way we move, the way we eat and so on, all of this today has an impact on others throughout the planet. It can be your neighbors, actually, whose house will disappear in a flood or it can be people living in a very faraway island. And then in Hawaii, you know what that means. And that will disappear. And I really remember this really moving call from a young person, I think it was from the Fiji, repeating again and again, you know, I'm a human being and I have human rights. I have, and actually his sentence was, I have human rights too, which means there's other youth coming from the Pacific Island. They were feeling that they are not treated by the rest of the international community and by all of the other countries on an equal footage, like if they were people of a secondary level.  That's exactly what they were saying. It was exactly with the same strength. And so it was, I mean, it's really tragic to think that today, this is what we are facing. And I'm sure probably all of you in Hawaii have a much more better feeling than I can have here in Geneva in Switzerland about this. But it was very moving to hear these young people doing such statement. And again, I really think, and I really hope that the US will finally at the end of this month, make the good choice and do not speak out. As some have said, very strongly against the idea of having a right to a clean and healthy environment.  And I think this goes exactly to the opposite of what the current administration has been saying. That is precisely not anymore the way the US wants to behave. So we would like to see this change being really translated here concretely in Geneva while we will have this discussion on the right to a healthy and sustainable environment. Now, why did it make a huge difference? First, until today at the international, at the universal level. I mean, at the world level, which means the UN, this has not been recognized yet when actually at the regional level in Europe with the European Court of Human Rights in Africa with the African Commission and the court in the Americas, not just Latin America but in the whole of the Americas with the Human Rights Commission and Court. Clearly here you have binding decisions from the courts, from the commissions who clearly say yes, you do have a right to live in a healthy and clean and sustainable environment. And of course the definitions in these three regional systems are a bit different from one system to the other. So it would be interesting that in a not too far future there is some kind of a unification or harmonization of these interpretation. And of course we'd like to see also Asian areas having also a possibility to have the same thing. So what we would like to see now is UN to move up to this level. And so this is the very first step. It will open a door for a discussion on how we define this. And this is why you have these four adjectives. Basically they encompass the variety of definitions of this right that you can find at the regional level or at the national level. The Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment, Professor David Boyd repeatedly has described how many constitutions, how many national systems have a recognition of recognitions but you have differences in these recognition. So these four adjectives, I don't wanna get into the legal definition of each of these adjectives. But the idea of having this four adjective is to cover the whole spectrum of these different definitions that exist already today at the national level. Thank you. And it reminds me also of the Pacific Island form in Tuvalu that took place the last one in person where Australia kind of sounded just like what you're worried about the US might sounding like where they said, don't worry about climate crisis you'll always be able to have a place to live cause you can pick our fruit.  We have a right to live with our thriving culture.  We want you to stop using cold today. And I think that is that call you do hear from the youth but also from humanity saying, I am a man, I am human. I have these rights and recognize that. And just to let you know on the United States side the US is of course running for the human rights council. So at the State Department meeting that took place last week before the human rights council session open as you said Monday, we were bringing up those issues and definitely applying the pressure. So we'll continue doing that. And also with the election having at least one or two side events in the general assembly which also is launching this month. And also when Biden speaks next week on International Day of Peace on the 21st to make sure that they know that civil society is in line with the rest of civil society around the globe. And we've recognized the right to a clean, safe, healthy and sustainable environment. Yeah, thank you, George. We'll make sure also on our side that we carry the voice of the, I mean, the signal, the voice of the US civil society and indigenous peoples organization too. And because of course the voice of the State Department as we heard it does not really reflect some of the very important movement existing in the country, including actually at the state level because I know that you do have some state legislation which are much more progressive and that does recognize this right. So in a way there is a contradiction and I would say a bad representation of what the US is when you hear this very, very conservative and I would say inappropriate positions from the State Department. Yeah, it's always concerning when the US, especially a new administration comes in that we think is fully supportive but then at the UN doesn't recognize those rights to economic, social and cultural rights and the environmental aspects that they claim at home. And so we do hope that is the case and you are correct. At the state level Hawaii of course with its unique role does recognize the right to clean and safe environment also water and those are aspects that existed due to the decolonization process but also for people demanding recognition of that indigenous cosmology that existed prior to contact that does exist. And also based on your inspiration with the work that you've been doing with Orhus as well as Kazoo Hawaii also looked at adopting the Orhus Convention and taking that on. So it's not quite the Pacific but that's one of the things hopefully we can conclude with on our conversation is looking at how we could work with civil society around Oceania and introduce legislation for the Pacific Island for more for the regional body because that was brought up recently at a diplomacy training program and wanted to share that people were very excited about seeing what is Kazoo has done and why that's a positive aspect and also how that also feeds in even to the important work on climate change and human rights at the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change that will be happening in Glasgow later in November. Well, that's very interesting. Yes, thank you very much for this information. And another element as you were mentioning the Orhus Convention I mean Orhus being the name of the Danish city where it was adopted and I think that was in 1998, I hope I'm right. I should be. But then this convention on access to information, public participation and access to justice and environmental matters which are basically what we call the procedural rights in the field of environment. Indeed, it is quite important and it's great that today it is complimented by the Kazoo agreement. But what is quite interesting is in the coming meeting of the parties of the Orhus Convention next October in Geneva, we will be able to greet a new member which will be Guinea-Bissau from another continent. And this is great news because and we know that there were other countries like Mongolia and there were also some discussions about other countries, perhaps from the Pacific. You know, I don't know. For example, New Zealand could very well joined. And so that would be really interesting to see these instruments continue its development as Kazoo agreement is one type of development but it is open to global ratification. So other countries can just come in and are already welcome to join. So I think we are returning point here and this is a very, very positive move. So we'll see how things will happen in October. We still have to wait for the meeting of the parties to take place. But I mean, we are very confident that Guinea-Bissau will be a new member. And this is really opening a very new interesting chapter of the convention. No, it is exciting the way you're sharing what's going on on the ground at the community level of the national capitals but also global civil society and those regional aspects because together all the pieces come together. The Human Rights Council will be meeting. You do note that it's important for us to put public pressure on. And could you maybe share the process of how the resolution will be introduced and then where it will go and how it could conclude on October 8th? Yes, well, the resolution is proposed, is put on the table by the group of countries. It's what we call a cross-regional group. So it's a group composed of Costa Rica for the Americas, Switzerland for the Western part of Europe, Slovenia for the Eastern part of Europe, Morocco for Africa and the Maldives for Asia. And this group of five countries are proposing this very simple, actually a very simple resolution which is basically recognizing the principle of the right to a healthy and sustainable environment. And as you said, it's a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment with the four qualifiers. And so we will have what we call informal negotiations in the coming week where the different, all of the countries, not just the members of the Council but also the observers. So that's pretty open, like the General Assembly. We'll have possibilities to make comments. And of course, whatever we hope is at the end of the day to have a consensus. Now, consensus is getting more difficult to reach in recent times. A number of the superpowers are a bit more playing around with this as they did before. I would say a decade ago, it would of course go by consensus. Today you see that you have a bit more of these tricks being played. And we saw that recently on the question of human rights and climate change which was quite unpleasant because it was really a whole game because a country, one of the superpowers has for a vote but at the end even abstains at the end of the vote. So basically it was like if we had a consensus. So it's a bit of a bad political game. So I hope we won't have it this time. But anyway, whatever the way it will happen, it is pretty clear that you have a huge trend, that you have a huge support, that you have a majority of states who have already these rights in their own legal systems. So it's a pretty logical issue to just recognize these rights at the level of the Human Rights Council. So we hope that these different informal negotiations will lead to the final adoption without a vote in October. So in a way, if it happens well, there will not be a lot to look at because the resolution will be introduced and then we will ask, is there a vote? No, nobody has asking for the floor and then it will be adopted. That's what we're hoping to have. Now there might be some discussion then you might have a small vote or a small discussion that could be the place, that that could happen. But we're basically hoping to have something unnoticeable in a way, but of course we will have, we will notice the stuff afterwards with the great party because it takes years that the civil society and a number of organization, indigenous peoples organization too, are asking for this global recognition because it's going to send a very clear signal. And the very first one is that it recognizes that people have a right to get involved on environmental matters. Let's not forget that at the international level, environmental international law is a law just between states and there's no access for people in these matters. So what it says is, yes, people have a capacity and a right to get involved, which was already a bit confirmed with the Aureus Convention or the Escazu Agreement. And you have this also, there was also in the preamble of the Paris Agreement, you had also such a recognition. But it was just in the preamble, not in the rest of the text. So we're going one step further now and having a very clear recognition of that. And I think it does bring some strength in terms of legitimacy for all of those who are active in this field to say, wait, this has been recognized by the international community. So now we should stop discussing about are we legitimate to act for the environment? Yes, we are. Let's see how we can do it in an efficient way. And I think afterwards this will help also in terms of helping states to put their activities and their actions together to have a more sense of, like a common standard, the former special rapporteur on the human rights and the environment, Professor John Knox, quotes Mrs. Roosevelt talking about a common standard of achievement. And I think it's a very good description of what it is. It gives a direction where all states should be trying to have a joint achievement. So it gives a purpose, it gives a direction.  And I think this will trigger some kind of a movement and further conversation among states, among civil society organizations. And it'll be a very good opportunity to bring business on board. And by the way, it's very interesting to say that, to see that we do have business. The B team, which is a very interesting grouping of trade unions, very big in transnational corporations made a very interesting statements at one of the last events on this issue, saying how much they totally support the recognition of these rights at the UN level. So it's quite interesting because they say, I mean, in a way saying, this is not the issue anymore. The next step today to be discussed is how do we implement it? How do we make it effective? That's what we need to do right now. So in a way we really have to go forward and stop having this discussion whether, do people have a right to act for the environment? Yes, of course. Let's move now to the next step. And even business is saying that. So this is quite an interesting move. That's perfect. And that's really where we can head. We know it's, the General Assembly will start. We know it's gonna be taking place in New York. We know they've had storms that were record numbers that were normally 500 year storms within two weeks canceling any coming back festivities from COVID showing the interconnectedness of all these crises that we're facing today. And we know the General Assembly will also look at these issues. And then we get ready to go to Glasgow as you're saying and focusing on those implementations with the nationally determined contributions. Look forward to continue the conversation Eve maybe then and also to hopefully celebrate at the end of this 48 human rights council session. Thank you so much for making time and appearing today. Thank you, Josh. Thank you for having me.


Ukrainian forces in Bakhmut suffer 7.9 times fewer casualties than Russians. Alexei Danilov, Secretary of the Ukrainian National Defense and Security Council, has stated that Russian losses in the battles for the city of Bakhmut over the past six months have amounted to almost 23,000 soldiers while Ukraine's losses are 7.5 times lower. Danilov said it in an interview with Italian news agency Corriere della Sera. Danilov was asked why Ukraine held Bakhmut. He replied that Ukrainian forces had to defend their cities as, without Ukrainian resistance, Russia would have won the war. Starting from the 1st of September when Moscow began using convicts as mercenaries in Bakhmut, 22,816 people from the Russian side have been killed. Our losses were 7.5 times lower. We have no right to abandon our cities, he said. The Wagner Group mercenaries and their prison recruits played the leading role in Russia's 10-month-long assault on the city. According to multiple accounts, Ukraine also took many losses in Bakhmut. Multiple soldiers fighting there described a brutal environment with a very high chance of death or injury.


The job of the Inner Governmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, is to assess the science on climate change and produce summary reports. Interestingly, when we look back at their past reports, it turns out the IPCC is much more likely to underestimate than overestimate climate impacts. But before we get into that, let me give you some background. The IPCC is organized by the United Nations. Since 1990, they've produced five reports. Each report is actually a series of books, almost a thousand pages. The books cover the physical science, the impacts adaptation and vulnerability, and the mitigation of climate change. The IPCC include climate models from more than 20 different climate laboratories around the world, each with their own supercomputers. Each lab's model is written independently from the others. They come from China, Norway, the United States, Canada, France, Australia, Germany, Korea, Russia, Japan, and the United Kingdom. The IPCC puts the report through a rigorous review process where each sentence is scrutinized. It produces a report that all authors agree on and that the governments of the member countries agree on. Because of this process, the IPCC reports tend to air on the side of being conservative. Here are three examples of the IPCC being conservative. First off, they've tended to underestimate how much greenhouse gases we'll emit. In fact, the carbon dioxide concentration and emission rates measured in the last few years indicate that we are currently on the worst case scenario path. This suggests that the IPCC should adjust its scenarios to give a better sample of future emissions in order to imagine a worse, worst case scenario, which it has done for its most recent reports. The second example is Arctic sea ice decline. The area of ice covering the Arctic ocean has been getting pretty small at the end of summer these days. Whenever this bright white ice melts, it reveals a darker ocean surface underneath it. Dark ocean water absorbs more sunlight, making the system even warmer, and melting even more ice. This is an amplifying feedback. If we graph the Arctic ice area at the end of the summer each year, we find it's decreasing much quicker than any climate model projected. This signifies that all of the climate models have underestimated the strength of this reinforcing cycle. The last example is sea level rise. Measurements indicate that sea level rise is accelerating faster than projected by climate models. Most recently, the IPCC estimate was 60 percent below the observed trend. When the fourth report of the IPCC came out, scientists studying glaciers had begun to report that the flow of ice discharge to the ocean was accelerating. Some glaciers were accelerating, others were not, and we didn't really know why. Giant meltwater lakes and drainage holes called mulans were observed on the Greenland ice sheet and fears were that the water might be getting to the ground, lubricating the ice sheet and its glaciers and causing it to accelerate its melt. Rather than include the dynamic ice melting process and their sea level rise projections, the IPCC scientists decided they didn't have enough information to include this effect properly, so they left it out entirely. This is a good example of their airing on the side of caution. One study has taken a more thorough look at the IPCC projections, looking at new scientific findings after the IPCC reports came out. What they found was that the new scientific findings were more than 20 times more likely to be worse than what the IPCC predicted. There were a few examples where the IPCC overestimated climate impacts, but overall the cautious approach of the IPCC means it's been systematically underestimating climate impacts. Why is this? Another study suggests that the IPCC and climate scientists in general tend to be conservative in their predictions because they're airing on the side of least drama. In other words, scientists underestimate the threat of climate change because they're worried about being accused of alarmism. One myth distorts the evidence for IPCC reports. That myth is that the IPCC and the impacts projected by the climate models are alarmist, exaggerating the danger of global warming in order to cause needless worry. This myth uses the technique of conspiracy theory. Some people believe the scientists of the IPCC are conspiring to trick people about the effects of global warming. This myth also uses cherry picking. It uses isolated examples where the IPCC overestimated climate impacts, but we've learned that the most data points towards the IPCC tend to underestimate climate impacts. They are the polar opposite of alarmist. In reality, the IPCC is 20 times more likely to underestimate rather than exaggerate climate impacts.


The size of the pattern is also important, so this pattern was built up over many months, so it was really significant. So I don't know if you know this, but short term, if you see that on a five-minute chart, it's no big deal. Not that many people are seeing it for a start, because how many people study five-minute charts, so you're not going to get a big reaction of it. So the longer term the chart for me, the more important the pattern or the candle formation, the more significant it is. So when I'm seeing this on a weekly chart, this big pattern build, build, build for months, I'm like, wow, if this actually plays out, it's going to be really significant.