Canada’s intervention, and other juicy quotes from the last day

Posted on 06. Nov, 2009 by Rosa Kouri in Canada

Highlights from the Barcelona Friday Plenary session:

I kept my ears tuned this afternoon in case the Canadian negotiators spoke during the two final plenaries. Chief Negotiator Michael Martin was present, sitting behind the Canada placard. At around 8:45, near the end of the  session (the second of two that began at 3:00),  he made an intervention.

In the process of waiting anxiously for the Canadian intervention, I did pick up a series of juicy quotes from other countries. Included below the statement from Mr. Martin,  they tell a story of their own.

Canada’s intervention:

Thank-you Chair. Let me begin by thanking you, your vice chair and your college of facilitators for your leadership and your patience this week, as well as the  secretariat for its tireless support to this process.

Mr Chair, Canada is committed to achieving a fair, ambitious, comprehensive, environmentally effective and legally binding agreement in Copenhagen, an agreement that places us resolutely and collectively on a path of low carbon growth and sustainable development.

Such an agreement must have ambitious goals: peaking of global emissions by 2020; and a reduction in global emissions of at least 50 percent by 2050 in order to limit increase in global temperature to less than 2 degrees celsius above pre-industrial levels.

Achieving these goals will require strong leadership by developed countries at Copenhagen through ambitious and comparable mid-term commitments that place their aggregate emissions on a pathway to a reduction of 80 percent or more by 2050.

Achieving these goals will also require clear and transparent commitments to ambitious action from developing countries at Copenhagen, in a manner consistent with their common but differentiated responsibilities and their respective capabilities.

Mr Chair, Canada also believes that in order to achieve an ambitious and comprehensive agreement in Copenhagen all parties will need to bring a renewed spirit of global collaboration to this process.

It is only with a renewed spirit of collaboration that we will scale up the international finance and investment needed to support global mitigation and adaptation.

It is only with a renewed spirit of collaboration that we will be able to accelerate the global development, demonstration and transfer of the clean technologies needed to ensure deep reductions in GHG emissions while also steadily increasing the global supply of clean and affordable energy.

And it is only with a renewed spirit of collaboration that we will be able to strengthen significantly effective global action on adaptation, in particular to respond to the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable parties – the least developed countries and small island developing states.

It is with that spirit, Mr Chair, that Canada looks forward to working with all parties to achieve an historic agreement in Copenhagen.

I thank you

———————————————————————————————————-

Stay tuned for an analysis of everything that happened, and Canada’s role specifically, early in the next week. For now, let’s hear what some other countries had to say today.

India (associated with the G77 and China): To talk about a political agreement instead of a legally binding outcome, to suggest that it cannot be achieved until late in 2010, these prophecies we must dismiss.

Grenada (on behalf of AOSIS): An Agreement is politically and technologically feasible, the only thing remaining is political will. We’ve had conclusions with no conclusions, progress with no progress.

Saudi Arabia: You can’t twist the arm of developing countries anymore, just look at how the WTO fell apart. Saudia Arabia will accept a protocol based on common but differentiated responsibilities.

Soloman Islands (also part of AOSIS): Is the word coordination not a silent statement against all developing countries?

Sudan (representing the G77 and China): There is a significant lack of willingness of some Annex 1 countries to put forward targets.

Session Chair: There has definitely been less progress than expected.

Grenada (on behalf of AOSIS): We’ve been going to COPs for 15 years, and achieved nothing. We need laws.

Solomon Islands (on behalf of AOSIS): We have not seen enough progress.

Bangladesh: Our hopes have been dashed. We draw attention to Annex 1 to meet their commitments. The world is looking to Copenhagen. Right now is the time.

Sweden (representing the Group on Environmental Integrity): We have not seen enough progress.

India (associated with the G77 and China): We are going around in circles: I will show you my targets, if you will show me yours.

Napal: If the glaciers in the Himalayas recede, hundreds of thousands of people will lose their ability to live. The Copenhagen conference seems to be our only hope. We would like to see a legally binding outcome.

Bolivia: You can’t expect developing countries to take on the commitments that should belong to others.

Lesotho (on behalf of the Least Developed Countries): We have not seen enough progress.

Egypt: We still need to define the funds for adaptation, the role of the market, and many other issues. But we should not lower our level of ambition.

Looks pretty consistent, doesn’t it? Until you include this group:

Australia (on behalf of the Umbrella group of nations: includes Canada, Russia, Norway, etc… ): We have seen progress. We have moved forward on several details.

US (on behalf of the US): In our view we have made substantial progress towards an agreement that is both consistent with the science and realizable. The primary purpose of the meeting was to set out the options for Copenhagen. It is clear how committed we all are to reaching that deal. We’re optimistic, but we need to finish the job. The issues are complicated and substantial. We are seeking nothing less than the transformation of our energy system. In order to move forward, we will need further contributions from all parties… We must be aware that the perfect can be the enemy of the good. The deal we are working on is potentially very good.

Were these people at the same conference?

Much love from Barcelona,

Rosa