Adopt A Negotiator » Australia
Adopt A Negotiator » Australia
Adopt A Negotiator » Australia
|
|
2009: the year the world found an answer to climate change? Posted: 07 Jun 2009 10:53 PM PDT What an incredible day Saturday 6 June was. More than 500 people gathered along the river Rheine in Bonn, Germany to show their commitment to climate justice by taking part in the largest human exclamation mark, ever. The crowd braved the cold and rain to join together in one massive human sign to make a strong statement to the leaders of the world, YES YOU CAN find an answer to climate change. See photo here. It was an amazing experience to be a part of; from standing in the near empty field at 8am with nothing more than tape measures and red flags, to four hours later being surrounded by hundreds of people in white boiler suites and green hard hats ready to spell out our vision for the world. If you squint hard enough you can spot me in the ‘k’ of the middle tcktcktck! The tck tck tck signifiies that time is running out urges camp everyone to join the movement to prevent catastrophic impacts from global warming. That afternoon, we left the river Rheine to march en masse to the Maritim where the UN climate talks are being held to ensure that the negotiators inside are well aware of civil societies’ demand for a safe and just climate treaty in Copenhagen. As corny as this sounds, even the rain couldn’t dampen our spirits!! We heard from a number of inspiring speakers, check out the short clip from the head of the International Trade Movement from Sierra Leone.
To conclude the day we presented Richard Kinley, the number two guy at the UNFCCC secretariat with a real grandfather clock, to signify to the secretariat and all of the nations involved in the negotiations that the clock is ticking, time is running out to ensure a safe future for our planet and our peoples. Richard’s repsonse? For civil society (that’s you, me and all of our friends) to keep up the pressure on our governments to ensure that they are well aware of our demands for them to play their role in securing the future of our planet for ourselves and for generations to come. To do this you don’t need to take part in a massive human sign, or rally outside the UN negotiations, you can simply send a letter to your local MP, Minister Wong, or our Prime Minister; you can write to newspapers, phone talk back radio, or even design a t-shirt slogan calling for Australia to take strong action on climate change now and ensure climate justice for all. 2009 needs to be remembered as the year the world found an answer to climate change, the year it found the political will to meet the challenge and found hope and opportunity in doing so. An answer to climate change is vital, and together it is possible. Cara       |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Adopt A Negotiator » Australia
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
Inbox too full?  |
|
| If you prefer to unsubscribe via postal mail, write to: Adopt A Negotiator » Australia, c/o Google, 20 W Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
Adopt A Negotiator » Australia
|
The wrap: UN climate talks week 1 Posted: 08 Jun 2009 11:09 PM PDT Hi there, First week of the Bonn meetings have drawn to a close – it sure was been a busy week!! Here’s a snapshot of why we’re here and what has happened in the first week, with a focus on the Australian delegation.  View of the daily plenary session 1. MID TERM TARGETS – emission reduction targets by the year 2020 In short: there is a pretty wide gap between what rich countries are prepared to do on emissions reductions and what science and developing countries demand. At the UNFCCC meeting held in Bonn in April of this year, the G77 plus China (which is the name of a grouping of countries that represents the majority of developing countries) unified their position to call on developed countries to reduce their emissions reductions by at least 40% by 2020 on 1990 levels. The grouping of Least Developed Countries (LDC) and Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) – I think their names are pretty self explanatory! – have unified their position to call for developed countries to cut emissions by at least 45% by 2020. Australia’s position: On the first day of the talks, in the opening plenary Australian delegation called for a “strong outcome on mitigation”, they recognised that “a spectrum of mitigation efforts is needed and that the least developed countries should be fully supported in their efforts.” Clearly calling for a strong outcome on mitigation is a good thing, however, let’s unpack a bit further what Australia means by “a spectrum of mitigation efforts.” Under the present rules of the Kyoto Protocol, only developed countries (also known as Annex I countries) have to undertake binding and quantified emission reduction commitments. In the current negotiating text, Australia has called for a differentiation of mitigation actions among developing countries. To achieve this, Australia has sought to create a new category of developing countries to be included under the Kyoto Protocol rules. Other developed countries have a similar strategy but use different lexicons, the US refers to these as “advanced developing countries”, and Japan as “countries with significant emissions profiles.” Basically, what Australia, and others, are proposing is that developing countries included within the proposed categories would have to undertake additional binding commitments to reduce their emissions. Why has Australia proposed this? The Kyoto Protocol divided the world between rich industrialized nations that were given emissions targets (Annex 1 countries) and the rest. But the world has changed since Kyoto was first signed. Some non-Annex 1 countries have become newly industrialised, and are now richer than some Annex 1 countries such as Romania and Ukraine. To this, developing countries respond that while nobody on the planet – rich or poor – can afford for their economies to follow the same “business-as-usual” development path, the Annex 1 countries who have a greater historical responsibility and greater economic capacity to respond to climate change should take the deepest emissions cuts, and support developing countries, who have not historically contributed to the problem to continue on a clean development pathway. In the first week, Annex 1 Parties argued that the “numbers” discussion should be directly linked to other issues such as the flexible mechanisms (that earn them offsets from non-domestic sources) and land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF). To this developing countries stress the strong scientific impetus and historical responsibility of developed countries for deep cuts by Annex 1 Parties. My prediction for week 2: the number crunch will continue. 2. FINANCING I’m sure you’ve heard the saying that money talks, and that statement is as true as ever here. Agreement on the level of money which will be made available to assist poor countries adapt to a changing climate and cut their emissions in crucial for building trust between countries and moving negotiations forward. Analysts have suggested that if the talks stall, it will most likely be over money. Developing countries, backed by the UN, argue that they will need hundreds of billions of dollars a year to adapt themselves to climate-related disasters, loss of crops and water supplies, which they are already experiencing as temperatures around the world rise. Yet so far, rich countries have pledged only a few billion dollars and have provided only a few hundred million. Developing countries are calling for clear commitments from rich countries on the scale of finance that will be available to support them to mitigate and adapt to climate change, before they make commitments about how much they will be able to reduce their emissions by. While Australia acknowledges that developing countries (in particular the least developed countries) will need significant financial contributions to support them to mitigate and adapt to climate change, they have not come forward to say what scale of funding they would generate nor under what mechanisms it should be channelled. Louise Hand, Ambassador for Climate Change, has stated her position that funding should be generated through both the public and private sector. This is very worrying. While the private sector may be may be able to provide some important financial contributions to a mitigation and adaptation fund, there is no way that it could generate the scale of money that is required in the short time frame that is required. The public sector must generate the majority of financing. During the first week of the talks in Bonn, we heard two proposals put forward on financing, one from Mexico and one from Norway. The Mexican proposal calls for countries to pay amounts into an international fund according to a formula reflecting the size of their economy, their greenhouse gas emissions and the country’s population. This would ensure that rich countries, which have the longest history of using of fossil fuels, pay the most to the fund. However, the fund is proposed to operate on a pledge approach, rather than a binding contribution. This would be problematic, as it is likely that the funds would be committed but not delivered, as we have seen in the past. The Norwegian proposal calls for an auction or selling of emissions allowances as a way to generate the huge sum of money needed to finance mitigation and adaptation activities. The benefit of the Norwegian proposal is that it raises large amounts of revenue automatically. My prediction for week 2: the bills for fighting climate change will be large, but the bills for letting climate change go out of control will be much larger. More on adaptation, forestry and land use to follow soon. - Cara Looking forward to constructive talks in week 2 (yes my glass is half full!) PS. For those of you wanting to learn more about what is being discussed at these talks, check out these two news bulletins that are produced daily: Earth Negotiations Bulletin , Third World Network and for the die hard fans, there is always the live web cast straight from the meetings. |
      |
Adopt A Negotiator » Australia
|
Posted: 10 Jun 2009 07:41 AM PDT … Kristin Tilley*, one of the key negotiators on the Australian government delegation here at Bonn. I sat down with Kristin to ask questions that you, the readers, had asked. We ran out of time to get through even half of my list, so more to follow soon. 1. How do you think the talks are going so far? Since the last Conference of the Parties (COP) in Poznan last year there has been both a shift in mood and pace. The key reason behind this is that we have moved from talking about high level aspirations to getting into the detail of the text, and what it should include. Clearly, there is a big expectation for this meeting, as this is the first meeting where we have had negotiation text on the table to discuss. However, as this is a major document, with many new and interlinked ideas, the negotiations haven’t moved as fast people may had hoped, more time has been spent on reading and clarifying of the text. 2. What’s going to be the biggest challenge to ensuring we reach a fair and just climate change agreement in Copenhagen? The biggest challenge is getting agreement by 192 countries, which all have varying interests and national circumstances. We’re here to overcome a global challenge, but each country is looking to ensure that their contribution to the global effort doesn’t represent an unfair share of the burden. And all countries wish to continue to develop economically, in particular poorer developing countries who are facing additional challenges such as poverty and lack of energy supply. If certain countries push their individual priorities too hard the talks face the risk of breaking down which means that we won’t end up with any agreement in the near term. We must continue to work towards an outcome which secures long-term, united action. 3. A number of developing countries have called upon developed countries to commit to an aggregate emission reductions target of at least 40%, what is Australia’s response to this? Our Prime Minister has committed Australia to an ambitious domestic reduction target of 25% on 2000 levels by 2020 in the context of an ambitious global outcome. We hope that this will encourage the discussions to continue to move forward on the road to Copenhagen. Australia recognises that developed countries must lead global efforts. But all countries must contribute, in line with their national circumstances, to this shared challenge. Every country has different economic, social and environmental circumstances. This means that the different numbers can represent similar levels of effort. 4. If you could ask 1000 Australians to do one thing to be constructive and help Australia to be effective in these negotiations, what would you suggest they do? I would encourage everyone to make their concerns and wishes for climate change known to the government. Our government has been voted in by the people and listens to the voices of the Australian public. You heard it here first, keep the questions and comments rolling. I would love to hear what you think. Your tracker, - Cara *Kristin has worked within the International team at the Department of Climate Change (formerly the Australian Greenhouse Office) for the past four years, and has attended a number of UN climate change talks |
      |
|
The world needs to change, and you can help Posted: 09 Jun 2009 09:07 AM PDT I think you’ll agree with me when I say that Australia needs to do two things at the current UN climate talks in Bonn, 1. strengthen our greenhouse gas pollution reduction target and 2. commit our fair share to a help developing countries reduce their own emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change We are yet to see the Australian government make any such progressive steps. Get involved today, send a letter to Senator Penny Wong, calling for Australia to commit to do their fair share and be a global leader during the UN talks in Bonn.  We need to change more than lightbulbs While you do that, I’d like to share a story with you. Yesterday, Yvo de Boer, the head of the UNFCCC secretariat ( the top guy around here who coordinates all of the negotiations) held a briefing for NGOs. He gave his reflections on how he thought the talks were going so far, and then threw it to the audience to ask questions of him. In our red t-shirts, it didn’t take long for Yvo to see the many waving hands of the negotiator trackers. Anna, our UK tracker got to ask a question on our behalf… “What’s the one thing that we should ask people in our home countries to do to push these negotiations along to ensure a safe and just climate deal in Copenhagen?” Yvo’s answer? Make lots of noise, well, I paraphrase. Basically Yvo said that civil society can, and should, play an essential role in these negotiations by lobbying their governments to take strong action. The only way we are going to get a deal in Copenhagen that is fair and just is if there is so much pressure in every country that governments realise that they simply have no other choice than to come to the table with better offers. It is our responsibility as citizens to let our decisions makers know what decisions we want them to make on our behalf. So I hope that you have stopped reading my blog, and you’re on the phone/ drafting a letter/ inviting key Ministers over for cup of tea to talk about the role you want to see Australia play in securing a safe and just climate future for us all. It may just be the most important cup of tea you ever have. The world needs to change, and you can help. Take action now, send a letter to Senator Wong - Cara |
      |
Adopt A Negotiator » Australia
|
You can negotiate about the climate, but you can’t negotiate with it Posted: 11 Jun 2009 12:31 AM PDT Send Senator Penny Wong this letter asking her to be a climate champion  Oxfam campaigners inside the UN climate negotiations, spell out their message to delegates It’s day 9 of the 10 day UN climate talks in Bonn, while no one would deny that it’s been a busy week, it feels like we are moving forward at a snail pace. In the words of a great Australian: it’s like being flogged to death with a wet lettuce leaf, or as some may prefer to say, we have reached a political gridlock. I’m all for politeness, but climate change negotiations are no place for: “no really, you first.” We need to see developed countries, who have largely contributed to the problem, and who have the resources to respond to climate change take strong action, and fast. Instead, what we are seeing at the talks is a gridlock over who will do what and who will pay. Rich countries won’t commit to the emissions reductions science demands to avoid dangerous climate change, nor put an adequate figure on the table to support developing countries. Rich countries want poor nations to make firm commitments to reduce their emissions, but poor countries won’t make such commitments until they know the level of support they can expect from rich countries. Think this sounds a bit crazy? Me too. The time has come for this gridlock to be broken. A report released today by Oxfam International offers a solution to this gridlock, Hang Together or Separately? – How Global Cooperation is Key to a Fair and Adequate Climate Deal at Copenhagen, outlines a fair way to deliver the emissions cuts which the science says are needed to avoid catastrophic climate change. The report’s proposals include a new Global Mitigation Finance Mechanism which would use money from the sale of carbon permits to enable developing countries to reduce poverty and progress development whilst contributing to global emissions reductions. Sounds pretty good to me. Check out the media release, and media coverage the report has got. We need to see Australia become a champion of global climate change solutions, rather than continuing to feed into the gridlock. Climate change is already having devastating affects on the lives and livelihoods of millions of people around the world. There is simply no time for delay. We must get a safe and just climate treaty in Bonn – our lives depend on it. Send this letter to Senator Wong Share the Delay Kills photo with your friends Your tracker, Cara Wet lettuce flogger aficionado |
      |
Adopt A Negotiator » Australia
Adopt A Negotiator » Australia
|
|
Posted: 12 Jun 2009 03:11 AM PDT It’s the very last day of the UN climate talks. It’s 11am and I am sitting in the back of the main hall where the last plenary for the Ad Hoc Working Group for Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention, or as it’s called around here AWG – LCA.  The change we need There was a certain buzz in the halls this morning – and not just because security has been revved and everyone ‘beeped’ on their way in. This is the LAST CHANCE for nations to ensure that their vision for climate action is accurately recorded within the negotiating text. Australia just had the floor to state that the shared vision text will shape the success of any 2020 agreement. An obvious, but vital point. The agreed upon shared vision will be like a blue print for global action. Developing countries are lobbying hard to ensure that the shared vision text appropriately captures the need for ambitious and urgent action, and provides clarity to the term historical responsibility. But, there is a real concern that the shared vision text may be watered down by rich countries so they can later find a loop hole from taking the kind of strong and urgent action they have the responsbility to take. More to come, Cara PS. The Global youth came out in force this morning to remind the delegates of the importance of their job ahead…  Camels take action on climate change |
      |
|
Posted: 11 Jun 2009 11:27 AM PDT Again I sat down with Australian delegate Kristin Tilley, to chat through some of the questions that you, the readers, had asked…. 1. Do you have a negotiating mandate for here in Bonn? 2. On June 8th, 2009 The Age (Melbourne newspaper) printed an Op Ed by Ian Dunlop, the former head of the Australian Coal Association. Ian argued, that if Australia is to have a strong negotiating position for Copenhagen, “it should be aimed at the peaks, not the foothills.” It is clear that many Australians feel that a 25% reduction target is not good enough – what’s your response to this? 3. What industries has Australia identified should be invested in to move towards a safe climate future? 4. How will Australia support the level of technological innovation and transfer that is required to support developing countries transit to a ‘low carbon future? Can the government transfer Intellectual Property for new, clean technologies to developing countries? We believe that Intellectual Property rights play vital role in driving innovation in technology forward. As governments rarely own the IP for new technologies, this can’t simply be transferred to other countries. It’s therefore important for developed and developing countries to work cooperatively with each other and with the private sector to develop and deploy clean technologies. 5. How do you (personally) respond to climate sceptics? There you have it folks. While the negotiations here in Bonn are drawing to a close, you’re engagement in these issues does not need to stop here. Keep asking the questions, keep pushing our government to take on board the political will to be an international climate leader and take STRONG emission cuts and put NECESSARY financing on the table to support developing countries to both mitigate and adapt. With respect and hope, |
      |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Adopt A Negotiator » Australia
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Inbox too full? |
|
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 |