Vivienne Westwood has joined an Amnesty International campaign demanding that Shell uses its profits to clean up the Niger Delta.
The designer has called on the public to sign an e-petition to the oil company's chief executive Peter Voser.
Her involvement follows claims from Amnesty that leaks and spills from Shell’s pipelines have devastated the livelihoods of millions of people in the region, impacting air quality and water and food supplies.
"Shell make billions of pounds of profit each year. It is a profit that is being subsidised by the poverty and ill-health of the people of the Niger Delta," she said.
"For decades Shell have ignored repeated calls to clean-up the mess they have left behind. A mess that they are responsible for. A mess that has blighted the livelihoods and health of thousands upon thousands of people.
"Shell need to get around the table and put a proper cost next to the liabilities they are responsible for and fund new structures to ensure the life and health of the people of the Niger Delta are protected once and for all."
The issue of oil spills in the Niger Delta is the subject of a high court case in which the oil company is being sued by some 11,000 inhabitants who say their lives were devastated by spills which destroyed their fishing grounds, caused long-lasting ill health and polluted fresh waters.
SPDC, a Shell-run joint venture between the state oil firm, which holds 55 percent, Shell, with 30 percent, EPNL, with 10 percent and Agip, with 5 percent, admits responsibility for two spills that devastated the Bodo fishing communities in the delta, a labyrinth of creeks and swaps.
Company reports about the total amount of oil spilled differ considerably from the claims of Amnesty and the local community.
A Shell spokeswoman said it was not appropriate to comment while the spill was still the subject of litigation, adding that efforts to clean up had been hampered by insecurity in the Bodo area of the Niger Delta and by oil theft that had caused even more oil to be spilt since.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article