I’m still holding my breath – the positive mood here in Bonn seems to have continued over the past week.  What started as tiptoeing around issues, discussions limited to process, Parties sounding each other out after the mistrust injected into the negotiations in Copenhagen, has progressed to something quite different.  There’s a dance going on in the plenary rooms.  It isn’t an easy dance, not a flowing waltz, not a foxtrot of perfectly timed steps between two long-time partners.  But nevertheless, there is movement.

The negotiators are sharing ideas, exploring areas of mutual agreement, and still sometimes deciding to disagree.  As yet however, there is no real negotiating happening.  Instead, is an awkward show, with some trust returning, but a dance which is flirtatious and non-committal.  A kind of first date dance.

We’ve been enthused to see synchronised steps on financing to support developing countries tackle the impacts of climate change.  There is wide acceptance that financial support is urgently needed and that transparent reporting on any funding pledges made is vital.  The European Union set the tone at the end of last week with a well attended side event to freely discuss their pledges and intentions for immediate funds for developing countries.  We are now hoping that other donor countries will follow their lead, and quickly – and maybe even outdo the move. 

Yvo de Boer, the outgoing Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC said this week that little progress can be made toward an international treaty until wealthy industrialized nations commit to deliver the $30 billion pledged in Copenhagen to assist developing nations. We fully support Yvo that “Cancun will only deliver, if promises of help are kept.”  Christiana Figueres, due to take over Yvo’s role after this meeting, echoed this by declaring that “fast-start finance is the key to unlocking Cancun”.

The new text from the Chair of the Long-Term Cooperative Action track is due to appear tomorrow, which will include elements of climate financial support.  Unfortunately this will only be a ‘non-paper’.  A ‘non-paper’ is one in which Parties will talk about the issues, dance a few more steps, but will not be able to start real negotiations until at least the next meeting in at the beginning of August.  Despite the positive atmosphere, we must admit we are getting impatient again – are we moving fast enough?

First dates are fun but they can only last so long.  Time to ramp up and do away with the left feet.  Come on Figueres – bring on some Costa Rican Swing!

Please do let Rachel know what you think!

- Cara & Phil (tracking from afar)

So here we find ourselves again in Bonn for the second round of climate change negotiations since Copenhagen. The end of day two. The first day of European Summer. The clouds have lifted, the rain of the past few days has ceased, the streets are filled with bicycles and people taking evening strolls. And as a colleague of mine reflected, there is a calm and gentle breeze a-blowing in Bonn this evening. Things seem, well, quietly positive.

Wise words from Albert Einstein, "Life is like riding a bicycle - in order to keep your balance, you must keep moving."

It was, however, a slow and dull start to the week on Monday. For most participants, this was the first time back to the UNFCCC scene since departing Copenhagen with heavy hearts and exhaustion. There should have been a buzz in the air to pick up where things left off and continue to strive for the global deal so urgently needed. But instead, the Hotel Maritim seemed filled with slow moving conversation, slow moving people, and significantly tempered expectations about what can be achieved in Bonn and for the remainder of the year. One Australian delegate commented ‘the mood here seems really flat, everybody just seems really tired’.

There was also a sense of an impending doom, with rumours flying a plenty that countries were not happy with the new negotiating text – that some didn’t like it because it used Copenhagen Accord language too much; others didn’t like it because used Copenhagen Accord language too little; that some were going to block working on the text and demand a new one. A sense of groundhog day lurked in the cobwebs of the Maritim.

However, on day two, it seemed that all this was pure speculation. Six hours of statements from most countries stretching late into the afternoon, and the feared explosion over the negotiating text did not eventuate. Most statements held a positive view of being able to work with the text and there was a certain sense of willingness to cooperate and move things along.

Yet, as negotiators sit in plenary in Bonn, things are happening across the rest of the world, starkly reminding us of the urgency with which countries need to reach a deal. The northern parts of India are suffering through a record heat wave pushing thermometers to nearly 50 degrees and setting new temperature records. Meanwhile, Tropical Storm Agatha has ravaged South America, forcing the evacuation of tens of thousands and taking over a hundred lives in flooding driven by heavy rains.

After this meeting in Bonn, there will be only two weeks of negotiations left before countries arrive in Cancun, Mexico in December. A gentle breeze today is nice, but will it be good enough to get us on track to curb emissions and respond to the challenges of climate change? For now we will savour the mood, but things must get moving. And here’s hoping the wind doesn’t change direction.

Stay connected with all the latest Australian news and actions on our sister site A Climate for Change.

Yours, Cara & Phil

A lot has been written about last December’s Copenhagen climate summit, frustration has been expressed at the lack of progress. Against the disappointment and the frustration of these negotiations you and I know that climate impacts continue to have devastating affects on people’s lives around the world.

While Copenhagen clearly didn’t deliver the global deal our world needs, 2010 does offer us some opportunities to ensure that the limited progress and commitments that were made do reach fruition.

One key area for progress, which will help re-build trust in the international process to fight climate change, is climate finance.  At the Copenhagen Climate Summit, world governments pledged to create a ‘Climate Fund’ worth $100Bn per year by 2020 to help developing countries act. This money could help the most vulnerable communities avoid the worst impacts of global warming.

But at the moment this Fund is little more than a name and number.  UN negotiators must now agree where the cash is going to come from, how those who need it most will access it, and that the money delivered is above and beyond existing aid commitments.

Just this morning, aid agency Oxfam International released a report “The $100billion questions” which details how this large sum of money can be generated without squeezing extra cash from taxpayers. It also addresses how this money should be spent in order to ensure that it reaches those communities most vulnerable to climate impacts. The solutions are there, what we need now is government action. Read Oxfam Australia’s media release.

This time around neither Phil nor I are on the ground at the meetings. Instead, we will be tracking the negotiations remotely, getting information from our key contacts as well as talking with the Australian government. We’ll be updating you as news comes to hand. And we’ve secured some on ground reporting from guest bloggers who are in Bonn; Georgina Woods (Climate Action Network of Australia) and Rachel Coghlan (World Vision Australia). And of course you can stay up to date here on Adopt A Negotiator.

While it may seem to some that the climate movement has lost some momentum, we know that climate change wont wait while the world negotiates. It’s our role to get back on the horse and let our the government and our negotiators know that Australians still want to see action. Write you ask for action below and we’ll make sure it gets to the Australian negotiating team.

Tracking for you,

Cara (and Phil)

PS. Check out our sister project UN Climate Trackers on A Climate for Change.

What was it then? 

From the 9th till the 11th of April all nations came together to meet in Bonn to continue the talks that happened (for lack of a better word) in Copenhagen. This was the first chance since Copenhagen people could come together under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to take stock of where the international negotiations on climate change were up to.

Where is it up to I hear you ask…

Well, in true UNFCCC style the meeting closed with two marathon closing meetings that ran into the early hours of the morning. To top this all off, the closing statement read by granada was read in the form of a poem, yes thats right the climate negotiations closed in rhythm and rhyme!  

In terms of content the meeting was largely technical, deciding on when the next meetings would be, for how long, what texts would be negotiated etc. etc.

However, this meeting did signal some of the broader issues that will need to be resolved before Mexico (the next Copenhagen …. so to speak).

The elephant in the room is The Copenhagen Accord. This is the agreement that was controversially stitched together at the last minute in Copenhagen. The Copenhagen Accord is NOT legally binding, it is NOT ambitious, and by virtue of these two facts it is certainly not fair to the most vulnerable on earth who stand to lose the most.

What I don’t think has been well communicated is that this ‘Accord’ has only been ‘noted’ by the UNFCCC meetings. It has not been formally accepted in the UNFCCC process and it appears as if it will not be. The main disagreement which surfaced at this Bonn meeting is that the US wants this document to be the main agreement where as others, namely developing countries, want only parts of this text to be taken forward.

So here we are… back to the texts. Text negotiations are not all bad, however, I confess that I am anxious to see some real fruit come of all this meeting and talking. Its not like the atmosphere has decided to stop accepting greenhouse gases until we come to a decision. Nor can we rely on Icelandic volcanos to keep erupting and filling the atmosphere with ash that reflects sunlight.

In my assessment, this meeting wasn’t so much a step forward as it was a stand still and a look around while we contemplate whether we will actually try to DO SOMETHING!

No more, no less?

Amidst this frustratingly slow process, the Australian Government in all its splendor has announced it will do no more and no less than other countries (see our last blog: http://adoptanegotiator.org/category/australia/). Now that is the ambition we have all come to know and love.

Sparing you my ruminations about the domestic political context in Australia, I think we all agree that Australia needs to STEP UP AND TAKE A LEADING ROLE on climate change (or at the very least take some serious action).

Even if our government aint acting, you can TAKE ACTION and call you local MPs office and let them know that you are watching them and think Australia needs to step up and take a leading role this year… this federal election year. Follow this link for a full list of Australian MP offices with phone numbers: www.aph.gov.au/house/members/memlist.pdf

It’s not too late. There are still four more meetings before Mexico.

Tracking for you,

Phil & Cara

PS. Make sure to check out our sister Australian site www.aclimateforchange.org

Here’s why.

Much has been written about the disappointment of the UN Climate Summit in Copenhagen, commentators across the globe criticised it for being a talk fest with no real action. Opposition leader Tony Abbott gleefully embraced the fact that the meeting was unable to produce a global climate agreement to argue against an emissions trading scheme being established in Australia.

What has seldom been mentioned is the fact that within just a few months, the outcomes from the Copenhagen meeting has driven governments across the world to do more to tackle climate change, not less. Read on…

Last week the Deutcshe Bank released their latest Global Climate Change Policy Tracker. It states that over 80 countries around the world have submitted emission reduction targets or carbon “action plans” covering more than 80 per cent of global emissions and 90 per cent of the global economy. While we still have a long way to go to secure a safe climate future, these commitments should not be sneezed at. (Check out the US Climate Action Network’s useful table “Who’s On Board with the Copenhagen Accord?”)

While Rudd and Abbott have recently come out with the mantra that Australia will do “no more no less” than the rest of the world when it comes to tackling climate change, it is abundantly clear that we are doing less.

We’re investing less.

According to a report released by the Pew Centre, China overtook the US and the rest of the rich world for the first time in clean energy investments last year. China invested $AUD 37.3 billion, a far cry from the $AUD 20billion by the US and in another league entirely from Australia’s $AUD 1.1billion. Australia even ranked behind developing countries such as Mexico, Turkey and India, to name a few.

We’re not playing our fair part in reducing emissions.

Australia is one of the worlds biggest per person emitters of climate change causing gases. But, we submitted to the UN post-Copenhagen one of the most disappointing pledges to reduce our domestic emissions. Erwin Jackson from The Climate Institute wrote in his blog that Australia “continues to free ride on global efforts to reduce emissions by keeping a 5 percent emissions reduction target on the table… It would have been helpful to global momentum, if Australia had lifted this 5 per cent “floor” in its target range to at least 15%.”

Why is Australia lagging behind?

Whoever we want to direct blame at it is clear that right now Australia is in danger of being a global laggard on climate action. While some in Australia continue to raise misconceptions that action on climate change has stalled, this risks our future prosperity. The world is not waiting for us to act. Why should we wait and let our competitors for jobs and investments get further ahead?

This weekend government representatives from all over the world will again meet at the home of the UN Climate Secretariat in Bonn, Germany, to amongst other things decide on how they will work together this year. What will their objectives for 2010 be? The outcomes from this meeting will give us important indicators as to how the world will work on climate policy this year.

There will be six international negotiator trackers on ground at the meeting hailing from Brazil, Canada, France, Italy, the UK, and the USA. You can get their latest blogs, tweets and video updates. As your Australian Climate Trackers we’ll also be in close contact with the international co-ordinator of the Climate Action Network of Australia who will be in Bonn to bring you news of the Australian delegation.

We’re not going to pretend that this meeting will be exciting. But we do know that it’s significant. That’s why we’re back and questioning why is Australia being a global laggard on climate action? If we’re currently doing so poorly, we can only improve…. right?

Comment on this blog and let us know what you think the Australian Government needs to do this year.

Tracking for you.

Cara & Phil

PS. You can also find this blog on our sister site A Climate for Change

How do we plan on doing that?

By ensuring that the Australian delegation know they are being tracked globally throughout the various International meetings as well as at home.

Joining me on the Adopt A Negotiator team as the lead Australian tracker, is the young, inspiring and very talented Phil Ireland from Newcastle, NSW.

Phil will be our on ground tracker for Australia  at both the upcoming Barcelona and Copenhagen UNFCCC meetings, while I will take on a slightly different role organising on ground campaigning here in Australia to put extra pressure on our Government.

While there is a bit of change within the Australian tracker team, one thing remains the same, and that’s YOU.  

We couldn’t do any of this without your support. We are working hard to open up the UN climate talks, so that you can monitor what the Australian delegation are up to, put pressure on them, and hopefully influence our Government’s position. We need you to keep up your fantastic work, leaving comments, sharing your questions, re-posting the blogs, inviting your friends to sign up. Without you, we’re simply two people writing for ourselves!

So, who is Phil?

Not many of you would know, but Phil has been working with me on this project from day dot (as have many AMAZING people) . Phil’s been taking a more behind the scenes role, doing outreach and awareness raising about this project, as well as climate change lobbying more broadly.

Phil and I with Louise Hand (in centre) Ambassador for Climate Change and Australia's lead negotiator.

In the recent months, Phil and I have made a number of trips to Canberra together where I’ve been able to introduce him to key members of the Australian delegation.

Not only is Phil up on who’s who of the delegation, and the Australian government positions, Phil has been actively involved in climate change campaigning for many years now.

His passion for justice for the poor, those who stand to suffer most from climate change, has lead him to do such things as, participate in the non-violent blockades of the world’s largest coal port to meeting with the Prime Minister of Australia to advocate for stronger political action on climate change.

In his spare time, Phil works for the non-government organisation TEAR Australia as the policy and campaigns officer and is also a Ph.D. candidate researching how new frameworks and financing for adaptation to climate change can reduce social and environmental vulnerability for poor communities in South Asia.  Phil has so much to offer to this project and I am really excited see it continue to grow and go from strength to strength!!

Phil and I are going to do everything we possibly can to continue to track the Australian negotiators and hold the Australian Government to account. We have a long way to go, but by all of us working together, in our varying ways and in our different pockets of the world, we can contribute to a movement with ever growing momentum to ensure a safe future climate for all humanity and all life on earth.    

PS. Phil will also be blogging on one of our partner sites, A Climate for Change

From Katmandu to Kenya, from Sydney to Samoa.

People across the globe, from all walks of life are uniting with the one call. We demand to see strong action and bold leadership on the climate crisis. And we demand to see it now.

Today I was lucky enough to be at the Opera House in Sydney, Australia for an inspiring day of community action.

Here are the stories of some of the people I spoke to.

You can read more stories from across our globe here.

I was heading to our nation’s capital with some of my fellow youth climate activists for a day long meeting with the Department of Climate Change, and our Climate Change Minister, Penny Wong about, you guessed it, all things climate.

The meeting was for a broad group of Australian youth who are tracking and engaging with the UN climate negotiations to hear, from the government’s perspective, how things are tracking as we tick down to Copenhagen and to share our concerns.

Youth meeting with Minister Wong and Department of Climate Change (that's me on the far left!)

It was an impressive program and seeing the work laid out by the Department made me fully appreciate just how far they have come since their inception just two years ago! But, there was nothing I heard today that made me think, phew, it’s ok, they’ve got our back.

While we’ve seen other countries, like the European Union ratchet up their level of ambition with the recent announcement of a 2050 target of a 95% emission reduction target (in the context of a global deal), Australia continues to lack the level of ambitious thinking and strong leadership that not just the science, but the youth of Australia demand. (Check my brief overview of some of the policy areas we covered at the end of this blog.)

There has been A LOT of talk about a so called lack of political will in the climate debate: read politicians don’t think taking strong action on climate change is palatable to the people who vote them in. So, despite the science, they just don’t ‘have the space’ to make the needed commitments.

Well, I must say, I disagree.

Tomorrow tens of thousands of people, from more than 170 countries will come together to create over 4, 000 events.

Together we will show world leaders the will they have been looking for.

Saturday 24 October will go down in history as the people of the world declare their support for the most important number – 350.

High in the Andes in Bolivia, Indigenous Aymara shamans will hold a ceremony where Chacaltaya, the first South American glacier to completely disappear, vanished earlier this year. 350 cyclists will ride through the streets of Beijing to an eco-hip hop event that will be broadcast around the world. Just a week after President Nasheed of the Maldives held an underwater cabinet meeting calling for world leaders to commit to 350, hundreds of Maldivian citizens will hold a 24 hour underwater relay. Right across the globe, our international team of 12 trackers will each be at events in our own countries.

Here in Sydney I will be joining with hundreds of Australians on the steps of the Opera House to create one of the global ‘3’s which will later join a ‘5’ and ‘0’ created in other country’s to spell out our message. If you’re there, come say hi, I’ll be the one with 350 painted on my face!

If you’re not a Sydney-sider, no doubt there is an event near you. Check out this extensive and exciting list.

Tomorrow morning I am sure I wont need the caffeine hit I did at 4:30am this morning, I will be alive with the buzz of the day!

Tomorrow the world will show our leaders that across the globe, we are here, we are informed, and we want strong action NOW!

Tomorrow we will show them that we will accept nothing less than a fair, ambitious and binding global climate agreement in Copenhagen.

See you there. And then, make sure you do everything you possibly can to ensure your MP knows that you were there.

Cara

And for the policy die-hards, a brief overview of some of the key elements out of today’s Departmental and Ministerial meeting.

Ambition of 2020 reduction targets: while the Government have said that they will reduce emissions by -5% no matter what, they will only reduce emissions by -25% (which is waaay below what science demands) in the context of a global deal.

Finance: Australia has stated numerous times, that they recognise that finance is a central issue to the UN climate talks, but they continue to remain tight lipped about how much they think is needed, where is should come from, and how it should be spent.

With such little time to go, and finance being a clear blockage in the talks, this silence needs to be broken. Lots of other countries (including Mexico, Norway, Tuvalu, the UK, EU and USA) have put proposals on the table, none provide a magic answer but at least they give us something to work with. It’s time for Australian to weigh in on this vital issue.

Adaptation (helping developing countries to cope with the impacts of climate change they are already facing): This is one area that the Australian delegation feel is progressing quite well, and I largely agree with them.

There continues to be a good recognition of the need for the world’s most vulnerable countries and peoples to be prioritised. However, until there is a clear signal about financing, this work can never be realised. Adaptation, no matter how well planned, will never be free.

Legal form (or architecture) of the global climate agreement: The Australian government have put forward a proposal that they are calling the ‘schedules approach’. Basically it’s a table with a number of rows and columns which is designed to capture the actions that different countries are taking on climate change (eg. Their emission reduction target and the actions they will take to reach it).

The approach is designed to be flexible – that is capture the varying activities from a variety of countries; durable – one single tool which will help the world to see who is doing what and will be able to be used continuously over coming years as it provides room for countries to increase their ambition; and to provide certainty – that is, we will be able to see what kind of global outcome it will deliver and in theory it will be able to provide greater market certainty.

The approach is designed to be able to bring countries who have different responsibilities and capabilities like South Africa and Australia, China and the US, into the one agreement without meaning that they all have to do the same kind of actions. Australia and the US would take on economy wide binding targets, and South Africa and China would be expected to take on nationally tailored mitigation actions.

There are a lot of elements of this that just make good sense, and I do applaud the Australian government for putting a significant amount of work into an area that had otherwise been left largely out in the cold in the ‘too hard basket.’ But, I do worry that while this is a good tool, it is not enough to up the political will of stronger action, nor will it provide penalties on developed countries who fail to deliver on what they have promised.

So, as you can see it’s not all bad. But, what we have right now is not the planet saving deal we are demanding. Lots more work to do. Maybe I will need that coffee after all.

I am in full support of everyone being heard, but, more than two hours into plenary, when there were still more than fifteen countries left to speak, I decided to leave. Poor form for a tracker, you may think, when my very role is to follow the negotiations!!

So, why did I leave?

Tracking the climate talks, just not to the repetitive end.

Well, it was clear that nothing new was going to be said. Without wanting to ignore the shades of grey in between, I was confident that the plenary would continue to be roughly two groupings of countries, the developed and the developing world, stating their different sides of the one “climate” coin.

To me, it seems that for developed countries, like Australia, climate change is approached as if it is a purely a technical issue, a divide up of who needs to do what, how they will do it, and with what tools.

Developing countries take the issue a little deeper. They are concerned with questioning, what has caused climate change? Why has climate change continued to increase? Are we all affected in the same way? And, who has the responsibility to act? They want climate change to be addressed as an issue of justice.

These differing sides played out largely like this: In the closing plenary many developed countries restated their “commitment to a global outcome in Copenhagen,” followed by a restatement of their un-ambitious emission reduction commitments, and then a call for developing economies (namely, China, Brazil, India, South Africa and Mexico) to “do more”.

On the flip side, developing countries, lead by the G77 + China and Least Developed Countries (LDC) negotiating blocs, called on developed countries to uphold the commitments that they made under the Kytoto Protocol – and then re-affirmed in the Bali Action Plan – that they would “take the lead” on tackling climate change.

The lead negotiator from Lesotho, like many delegates from the developing, world took the opportunity to remind other negotiators just exactly what is at stake here: “the failure to combat climate change will increase poverty in my country, and right across Africa. The rights of my people, the rights of people from the most vulnerable countries, are compromised by climate change. We must act now.”

I find these statements incredibly sobering and powerful. What I can’t understand is why these statements, these facts, don’t move those countries who have contributed the most to the climate problem and who have the greatest economic capacity to respond, to really take the lead on climate action?

As I sat in the final plenary, I was struck by the similarity to what was being said here in Bangkok, to what I heard back in Bonn in June, and in August. This made me question – if we are still having the same conversations, have we moved at all on this so called road to Copenhagen?

While there was some minor progress in Bangkok, namely some cautious consolidation of text, (tidying it up, removing repetitions). It seemed that Bangkok, rather that propelling us forward in these negotiations, really laid down the demarcations for the major political battles, or potential roadblocks, that must be tackled over next sixty days as we tick down to Copenhagen.

Read my insights on what these are below, or check out this short video featuring George Woods, International Coordinator for Climate Action Network Australia.

On the major battles front, there are three key questions that have thus far not been answered (though they were thrown around to some extent in Bangkok). Each of these roadblocks need to be addressed, and quickly:

1. What will be the level of Annex 1 ambition for emissions reductions?

While Norway came out with their new emission reduction target of 40% by 2020 during the Bangkok meetings to great applause, by and large the emissions reductions suggested from various Annex I countries are entirely un-ambitious and seem to have little regard for science.

Many targets remain unclear, due to vague (and often unfair) shopping list of conditionalities attached to the offers (including Australia, the EU, New Zealand and Japan); as well as questions around the base year (that is, what year emission reductions should be measured from). Australia measure’s its base year from 2000, rather than the internationally agreed 1990. While this doesn’t translate to a huge difference in emissions: 25% on 2000 levels = 24% on 1990 levels, it does make it confusing and leaves one to question, what other creative mathematics will Australia employ?

At the moment, according to the UNFCCC secretariat (though this is yet to include Norway’s new figure), it’s estimated that the combined Kyoto parties’ ambition is between 15 and 21% below 1990 levels by 2020. This is clearly still outside the Bali range, as well as what science demands (25-40% cuts by 2020). When you add the United States into this mix, the aggregate Annex 1 target has been estimated by AOSIS to be 11-18% reductions by 2020. Even less inspiring.

Alongside a lack of big picture ambition, there continues to be debate around a number of small, but essential areas. So far, it seems we can’t have ambition nor agreement. Countries can’t seem to find a common position on:

i) By what percentage will countries need to reduce their emissions at home and how much of their emissions reduction target will they be able to reduce overseas? (Known as domestic vs. offset);

ii) Should a mid-term review be scheduled, if so, for when? to place the mid-term review (there is a new IPCC report with all of the latest science coming out in 2014. So it would seem sensible to have schedule a review for then, though some countries are pushing for a 2020 review.

iii) Should quantified emission reduction or limitation obligations (which have the ‘roll off your tongue’ acronym of QELROs) be expressed in terms of tons or percentages?

Climate finance: potentially the biggest block of all

2. What scale of finance will be provided for non-annex 1 parties to enable them to undertake adaptation and emission reducing activities, what mechanisms will raise this finance, and what institutional arrangements will deliver it?

I know that I don’t need to go into detail here, you, dear readers, are not only up to date with the latest on climate finance but many of you have taken action, calling on our PM Rudd to break his silence on climate finance.

But, it can’t be said often enough that finance has the potential to make or break these talks. Tackling climate change will be expensive, no one denies that, but it is small change compared to the amount spent by wealthy countries during the Global Financial Crisis, and without money to address climate change, we simply wont make it.

3. How will the two negotiating tracks – the further commitments under the Kyoto Protocol track and the long-term cooperative action convention track – come together?

These are the questions that used to keep just the enviro lawyers awake at night, but now they are on the forefront of most people’s minds: Will there be a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol alongside a new treaty? Will there be a new instrument (or treaty) that supersedes Kyoto?

This has become a highly contentious issue that has divided the G77 + China group and the European Union, Australia, the US and others this session. I have written not one, but two blogs on this topic.

These three are my “hot to watch” predictions for the coming few months, and the areas where we need to see some real action before we get to the two weeks of the Copenhagen talks. This “real action” will need to come in the form of political leadership from those who have been elected to lead their country’s. If the government delegates who attend these meetings are really going to negotiate, they need the green light from their bosses, Ministers and Heads of State first.

So, Bangkok UN climate talks in a nutshell? The next round of talks in Barcelona are going to be #%*ing busy!!!

In my next blog, I’ll look at “where to from here” – with an outline of all of the major meetings between now and Copenhagen where we must see some significant political shifts if we’re going to get an agreement in Copenhagen.

Speaking for just 90 seconds we gave our demands to the delegates for OUR futures.

Our UK tracker Anna Collins, and Rishi Bhandary from Nepal delivered this speech with passion.

We want to share it with you. We hope you enjoy it – and that these words can continue to inspire action. (Due to UNFCCC regulations, we couldn’t film this wonderful moment, but professional video footage to come soon!)

Rishi and Anna: "the youth are leading, will you follow?"

Delegates, you will remember 6 months ago we asked you how old you will be in 2050?

You seemed to notice, you responded, you bought the t shirt. But this did not translate into action.

My name is Rishi and I hope to be 64 In the year 2050.

Earlier this week, we declared “no confidence” on the road to Copenhagen.

The process has been hijacked by carbon cowboys looking to profit from this crisis; our future is being held hostage to the self-interested dirty delaying tactics of Annex 1 countries.

We have seen the arrogant betrayal of Kyoto Protocol commitments, with the perverse idea that developing countries should or can somehow act first.

History will judge you.

We witness the US deliberately undermine the negotiations by introducing language to merge the Kyoto Protocol and convention processes, tearing out compliance and top-down target setting.

Other Annex 1 countries hide behind the US to avoid their responsibilities; setting disgracefully low targets; with deceptive offset measures that amount to no real emissions cuts at all.

We will not accept a dirty deal.

– - – - – - – - –

(Anna)

Our stand is clear. Let Norway’s commitment of 40% on 1990 levels by 2020 be the minimum benchmark for real emission cuts, but with no offsets, Indigenous rights based language secured before any discussion of REDD, recognition of climate debt, and targets of 350 ppm and 1.5 degrees Celsius.

History will judge you.

While governments are cautiously calculating their commitments based on what they believe is possible, the youth respectfully remind them that throughout history, political forces can shift rapidly when people rally together for change.

As one of the youngest people in this room, I will spend my life with the decisions you make today.

We have an opportunity to make some of the most profound and positive changes in the history of mankind.

Lets start acting like it.

Young people around the world are doing just that, organizing in our communities locally, nationally, and internationally, and we find our hope for the future in our movements.

We ask, will you join us? It is not too late to do your part.

The youth are leading, please follow.

Because History will judge this.