As I am writing this, I am in Copenhagen watching the talks in overtime. They have been running continuously for the past 48 hours as leaders scramble to produce something of substance.
Before reflecting on this outcome, lets go back to the beginning of the COP-15. During the opening of the conference, Christina Ora, a youth delegate from the Pacific, spoke prophetically to the powers of this world outlining her hopes and fears. She stated:

“I am 17 years old. For my entire life, countries have been negotiating a climate agreement. My future is in front of me. In the year that I was born, amid an atmosphere of hope, the world formed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to solve the climate crisis….
In the Solomon Islands, my homeland, communities on low-lying atolls are already being displaced by rising sea levels. Communities have lived on these atolls for generations. Moving from one province to another in the Solomon Islands is not just like moving house. Your land is your identity. It is part of your culture. It is who you are.
I am scared, and so too are the people from these atolls about what this means for our culture, our communities and our identity.
Because of climate change, I am uncertain about what is to come. How can I feel that my future is safe? How can I be sure that my home village won’t disappear in 10 years’ time? How can I be sure that my community won’t have to find a new home? How can I be sure that I will be able to raise my children in the same place that my mother and father raised me? I am not sure. I am scared and worried.
For my entire life, world leaders have been negotiating a climate agreement. They cannot tell me they need more time. There is no more time. I hope world leaders realise this week that my generation’s future is in the palm of their hands.”

These inspiring and unsettling words set a tone of urgency for the Copenhagen negotiations. They reflected the fears of millions of people living on the front line of the impacts of climate change. Climate change is proceeding at an alarming rate and required urgent action.
Copenhagen did not deliver what was necessary.

Let me take you through some of the key moments which led to this outcome.

In the final two days of the conference heads of state, including our own Kevin Rudd, were set to arrive and the negotiators were supposed to hand down some final suggestions for high level negotiation and agreement. In short, the suggested text in both the treaties seemed almost as contested as it was 2 years ago. There were major disagreements and public arguments.

At the end of what was a very rushed and confusing day President Obama emerged and announced the Copenhagen Accord, a non-legally binding political agreement. Within minutes of this press conference finishing the President was being whisked back to Air Force One to return back to America.

As the dust settled from this announcement and people could look at the substance of it, anger emerged as the accord failed to include any concrete or binding measures for emissions reductions. Some scientists at the talks said it would set the world on a path to 3.5 degrees of warming by 2100, which is dangerous and unpredictable. There was some provision for adaptation and mitigation in the developing world worth 10 billion US$ per annum to 2012 scaling up to 100 billion US$ per annum by 2020. However, where this money will be sourced from is not clear, and may come out of previously committed aid budget increases.

Developing nations that had not taken part in the US-led talks responded to the text with fury, saying 25-nation accord was an affront to the consensus principle that governs these UN talks.

In response to this situation, Michiel Schaeffer of Climate Analytics said: “It’s as though the last two years have not happened.”

UN climate chief Yvo de Boer told journalists, “We should have done better,”

A senior European environmentalist, John Lanchbery called the accord “a carefully managed collapse”

US President, Obama admitted in a rushed press briefing “instead of taking one step forward, we may have taken two steps back”.

This is a political failure.
World leaders were able to rally last year and spend trillions to save banks, but here in Copenhagen they failed to do what was necessary.

Leaders have failed to deliver the agreement they promised, the agreement we need to avoid catastrophic climate change that affects everyone, the agreement we need to help those already facing the risks of climate change.

At best, we are now confronted with a deadly delay that means unnecessary tragedy for millions of families. The impacts will be felt in every country, and will fall particularly hard on poor people in developing countries.

The time is now past urgent. The costs of inaction are mounting day by day, costs measured in lives, not just dollars. The science is clear, and we have the means. All we are missing is the will.

My journey campaigning for strong action on climate change here over the past few weeks, and in Australia over the past few years has had its highs, and perhaps more lows. This certainly qualifies as the lowest of lows. However, in reflection there are many positives we can take away from this.

The event set new precedents.
Copenhagen was the largest international negotiation ever.
Never before has civil society engaged so significantly on an international issue. Never before have members from the Global South and Global North come together so strongly to rally for the same cause.

This movement has mobilised millions of people around the globe to demand justice of our national and international leaders for the sake of the poor. It has highlighted the great inequality of our world, and cultivated passion for change.

After a few weeks of rest, we must regroup, reenergise and reemerge as a stronger movement. A movement, that despite momentary weariness, will persevere for as long as it takes to see justice come.
I for one, will be there.

Tracking for you for my last time…probably,

Phil

I feel hopeful.

I feel inspired.

Today Australians, yet again, did whatever they could in their power to remind our Prime Minister, to remind leaders of the world, exactly what is at stake in the climate negotiations. To remind leaders that we, the people of the world, demand to see action on climate change that will ensure the survival of all peoples and all lands.

Today, hundreds of people flocked to Federation Square in Melbourne at lunchtime to ring bells of hope. As this was happening, a group of people up in Brisbane held a candle vigil outside of Rudd’s electoral office.

It was there that Wanita Limpus from the Kiribati Australia Association handed over a powerful message on behalf of her brothers and sisters of the Pacific. She presented a bunch of tropical flowers to an electorate office staffer with the message: “Dear Kevin, Life or Death for the Pacific?”

In Melbourne, comedian Frank Woodley took a different tack. He quoted the A-team’s Mr T saying that he’d had “enough jibba-jabba” from world leaders and called on them to act. Now. In Copenhagen.

Friday night (Australian time) history will be made. Leaders of the world have the opportunity to set us on an exciting new path. We know that the time for talking is over. People around the world want action on climate change. As tracker Phil said in his last blog post: “what will happen is still anyone’s guess. Heads of states have the power to make these large decisions very quickly.”

Keep sending your messages of hope. Now is the time to keep the movement strong, to keep the movement hopeful.

Via twitter to @KevinRuddPM

Sign our letters to Rudd and Wong asking them to lead in Copenhagen

Join more than 11 million others and let the world know you are ready for climate action.

People gather outside Kevin Rudd’s electoral office in Brisbane with their messages.

Candles at the 'Vigil for Survival' held at the new NGO space

I have now been officially shut out of the negotiations.

To cut a long story short, the UNFCCC allowed too many registrations for this event (around 3 times the venue capacity). Over the past few days they have been reducing the number of people allowed in the centre… as you may have guessed, it is the NGOs (this includes, universities, environmental groups, development agencies, youth constituencies, unions etc.) that have been shut out. Of the over 15000 who were registered, only 7000 were allowed in on Tuesday and Wednesday. I was lucky to be amongst this group.

But then, the UNFCCC took things a few steps too far and has only allowed 300 NGO people in the building for the final 2 days. Yes, that’s right, 300 people. At last count, I think Australia had 3 NGO representatives on the inside (which is more than our quota).

My perspective on this is that some cuts were practically necessary, however, 300 is quite frankly a scandal. There are around 5000 media here who have received very little restriction and around 10,000 government representatives (some countries have over 500 registered attendees).

Whilst, I do not consider my role in the process essential, I know many people from other organisations who provide critical support to developing countries. Most of these people have been blocked out.

The UNFCCC and the Danish Government have made a grave error

Civil society has been sidelined.

The integrity of this process has been degraded.

Today….

The events of today have been mixed. I am growing tired of the speeches by heads of state which take 5-15 minutes each and have been going for the past 24 hours. There are over 100 heads of state here…. You do the maths. There are glimpses of inspiration and courage, however, for the large part this is an exercise in repeating known positions.

We have, however, been hearing in the past few hours though that there has been some positive movement. Some of the key progressions are:

-New drafting groups have formed with Ministers

-The United States has signalled its support for a 100bn US$ per annum fund for mitigation and adaptation in the developing world by 2020

-Prime Minister Kevin Rudd publically supported the possibility of the Kyoto Protocol continuing

In other news, Australia has been awarded its first ‘Fossil of the day’ award from Climate Action Network, an award for countries who are perceived to be impeding the negotiations. This was awarded as a result of revelations that Australia has been pressuring Pacific Islands States to lower their demands.

Stay tuned to the adopt a negotiator website for all the updates over the next 24 hours. And, don’t believe everything you read in the Australian media. I have been following it on line and have found that often it is not reflecting what is actually going on here (I am sure this comes as no surprise!).

What will happen is still anyone’s guess. Heads of states have the power to make these large decisions very quickly.

And… I would like to thank all of you who have sent messages of support over the past day. You will be happy to know that I did get a solid 7 hours sleep and am as ready as I will ever be for tomorrow (if your reading this in Australia that’s your today)

Tracking for you, for one final day,

Phil.

Ps. Take action on our sister site A Climate for Change!

Let me just have a moment of honesty with you all. I am tired, really tired. 12 long hard days have taken their toll on me and many others in this process. People are frustrated, confused and despairing at the direction these talks are taking.

To paraphrase George Woods, the Climate Action Network Australia coordinator here (who may I add is doing an amazing job):

“There have been all sorts of wildness here today, in the negotiations and in the NGO community. People with passes were refused entry because of the growing number of spontaneous and unpredictable protests springing up. There is a lot of frustration — protestors and other NGOs have been treated badly by police, security and the UN, everyone has been confused about who is allowed to do what, and the UNFCCC process has hit a dark moment, with a great deal of uncertainty about whether an effective and binding agreement can be secured.”

Oh dear.

So far in my blogs I have avoided going into detail around the different negotiating streams and texts… for the simple reason that it is confusing!

But, if you will spare me just a small moment of your time I will some of explain some of it here so you can grasp what is happening.

There are 2 different treaties being negotiated here. Yes, that’s right two.

The first is the Kyoto Protocol (KP). At the moment this treaty is set to finish in 2012 and they are trying to extend it further. But…because this treaty does not involve the US (and also doesn’t place binding emission reductions on the major growing economies such as India and China) they are also negotiating a second treaty. This second treaty, which would involve the US, is called LCA or Long-term Cooperative Action.

Now, you will have heard in the media a lot about countries trying to kill the KP. If KP did end and the LCA agreement did pass this would be called a ‘one-track’ treaty. However, developing countries generally do not want the KP to end because it is arguably stronger than a potential LCA treaty and provides more protection for developing countries. So, this then leaves us with what is call a ‘two-track’ treaty with both LCA and KP.

For the past two years countries have been negotiating the texts that would comprise these treaties. This has been broken into several smaller groups to work on specific sections of each of the treaties, such as adaptation, mitigation, finance, forests etc. These texts have been notoriously long and complicated with numerous different options within the text.

During the past ten days the different groups tried to bring all this text together. They have tried to find consensus. They have tried to find common ground. They failed.

Yesterday the chairs of the two working groups were supposed to pass on the proposed treaty text to the Ministers and Heads of State to finalise over the next 2 days.

Amidst much confusion these meetings were scheduled for 5pm then postponed till 6pm then 7pm then 8pm and so on and so on as negotiators grappled (behind closed doors of course) with what their final proposals would be.

The final KP plenary started at 11pm and finished after midnight.

The final LCA plenary started at 5am and finished at 730am.

The Australian negotiating team looked really tired this morning.

Meager offerings

In short, the text in both the treaties seems almost as contested as it was 2 years ago. It seems just as complicated…and there are still far too many different options within it. Today, I have not met a member of any country delegation that was happy with either of the texts. There has been dissent and there has been public argument.

It is these texts that have now been passed onto Ministers and Heads of States. It is still possible that they will be able to bring it all together…. But to be honest it is unlikely. There are MAJOR disagreements both between countries and within negotiating country groups.

This I hope, provides some idea of what has been happening here. I encourage you all to check out the other blogs on AAN to hear different stories and perspectives on all the days action (and inaction!). Also, you should take action on A Climate for Change to tell Australia’s leaders to increase the ambition of their targets.

I have many thoughts and reflections on this process, however, I will reserve these for a later date as this blog is already too long and I need sleep…. Which is of course, contingent upon me leaving here.

Tracking for you in Copenhagen, T-minus 48 hours.

Phil.

Rally in Copenhagen on Global Day of Action | Hannah Ireland

The Ministers have arrived and head of states (aka. Prime Ministers and Presidents) are on their way.

As I am writing this, however, the talks have stalled. This is because, in short, everybody thinks that everybody else is not doing enough. Oh the irony.

The different streams of negotiations have been suspended and restarted several times now, but be assured (or unsettled depending on your perspective) that there are ‘informal’ meetings continually running.

In contrast to this, December 12 provided us a ray of hope with action from all around the world. The pressure is mounting from all directions.

Violence?

I am sure you have all seen the media about violence in Copenhagen. It has been a little disheartening for many of us here as the vast majority of action as been peaceful.

In fact, of all the ‘violence’ that was reported on December 12 in Copenhagen charges have been so far only laid on 3 people…. (mind you, to get this number they had to arrest almost 1000 people). So…. Just to put those numbers straight, tens of thousands marched (the police estimated 100 000), and 3 people have been charged.

If only the media was more interested in the substance of this convention.

Australia’s walk against warming!

I would like to personally congratulate all those in Australia who attended the walk against warming. In a positive twist, a few people from delegations from the Global South, asked me about the marches in Australia. They have been encouraged about your calls for justice.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu gave an inspiring speech to a few hundred of us just outside the convention centre.

Watch this video to hear his speech (I can promise that you will not be disappointed!)

What are we asking for?

As we head into, what is beginning to look like a very chaotic final week I thought I would spend some time outlining what we are actually asking from a global deal.

The essentials checklist as outlined by Climate Action Network available online (http://www.climatenetwork.org/) includes:

-A commitment to keep warming below 2 Degrees Celsius
-this requires reducing greenhouse gas concentrations to 350 ppm and ensuring global emissions peak within the 2013-2017 period

-Industrialised countries as a group must reduce emissions by at least 40% below 1990 levels by 2020

-Developing countries must be supported in their efforts to limit growth of their industrial emissions

-Emissions from deforestation and land degradation must be reduced to zero by 2020

-Developed countries need to provide at least US$195 billion in public financing per year by 2020, in addition to aid commitments for developing country adaptation and mitigation

-An adaptation framework that immediately and massively scales up predictable and reliable support for developing countries

-Copenhagen outcomes must be legally binding and enforceable

This is the week we have been waiting for.

Now is this time for strong international climate action.

Many of the powers in this world do not want to see a strong deal out of Copenhagen. We must all take action to tell our leaders what we expect from them, indeed, what we demand.

Here are some things you can do right now:

-send a letter to Penny Wong

-check out the Copenhagen toolbox on A Climate for Change and ….get tips on how to stay up to date during the talks, talk to the media and much more!

Tracking for you,

Phil

Post your comments and follow up questions. There may be a chance to have them asked later this week.

Part 1.

Part 2.

Stay tuned…. in my next post I will update you on the state of the negotations and our asks for a global deal.

Tracking for you,

Phil

Leela has been engaged in these negotiations for a long time (far longer than myself) and uses some common (in a UNFCCC kind of way) abbreviations. Before listening, have a look at these definitions.

KP: Short for the ‘Kyoto Protocol’, An international agreement that sets binding targets for the reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions by industrialized countries. At present it finishes in 2012.
G77: A large negotiating alliance of developing countries , including China, India, Africa and many Pacific Islands, that focuses on numerous international topics, including climate change. It seeks to harmonize the negotiating positions of its 131 member states.
Contact group: An open-ended meeting that may be established where Parties may negotiate before forwarding agreed text to a plenary for formal adoption.

Australia needs to play a more constructive role in these negotiations. They need to work much harder bring home a treaty that is fair, equitable and just.

We encourage Australia to support publically support the proposals of Tuvalu and AOSIS (The Alliance of Small Island States).

I also encourage you all to walk with millions of people around the globe on December 12. When you are marching in the Walk Against Warming in balmy Australia, do spare a thought for your sisters and brothers, including myself, marching in Copenhagen in freezing temperatures (and if this week is anything to go by… no sun)

Tracking for you,

Phil

Shipping | Creative Commons

The kind of bunkers I am talking about have the possibility of providing long-term predictable funding for adaptation and mitigation in the developing world. Bunkers in the UNFCCC negotiations refer to emissions from international aviation and shipping.

Now… I know this may seem a bit dry, but exploring the bunker debate and how it feeds into other streams of the negotiations is a really good way of getting a sense of the negotiations. Also, it provides a small window of hope in what otherwise has been a rocky few days.

So…. How do bunkers relate to adaptation? Good question. Bear with me and I will take you through it.

Firstly, as you all know financing for adaptation in the developing world is really important. In Copenhagen so far, wealthy nations (including Australia) have failed to put up significant financing proposals for adaptation in the global south.
In addition to this issue, the global South is looking for long-term predictable funding. As you know governments come and go, and sometimes even leaders, who have very different positions, change (not mentioning any names…. Tony Abbott).
So my point is, even if governments do commit money, it is still subject to the election cycles we have all come to love. How do we deal with this issue I hear you ask?….. in come the bunkers.

There are a range of proposals on the table to place a levee or tax on all international shipping and aviation. These sectors are generally exempt from national emissions counting as the emissions are made outside national boundaries (that could be wrong so please don’t quote me on that… but they are generally exempt).

Now, there is talk that the funds gathered from the taxes and levees from all around the world could go to mitigation and adaptation for the Global South. This would in turn provide long-term predictable funding that is, in large part, immune to the whims of national governments and voting constituencies.

The politics around this though are tricky.
Just today, after some difficulty, they officially established a ‘drafting group’ in the UNFCCC process to create some text on this issue. There was some contention on this issue in the first instance as there are some powers (I will not name names, but I am sure you can guess) that do not want to see any taxes on international aviation and shipping. As I understand it though, in the end, Australia did support this decision.

So, in summary, a levee or tax on all international and shipping could provide long-term predictable financing for adaptation in the developing world that is less politicised and more likely to be sustained.

There is still a long way to go on this issue though.
We are by no means over, or near, the finish line.
In the past few days I have asked questions of a number of the delegation, and in person, the Minister for climate change, Penny Wong, and I could not get clear answers. I suspect Australia is still developing its position (and is no doubt consulting with parties whom it might affect, once again I will leave it up to you to fill in the spaces).

I don’t mean to complicate things further…. But in order to give you a more full picture, there are many other questions around adaptation. If we do manage to find a mechanism that can raise the necessary funds for adaptation, how will it be spent? There are a plethora of different interests that would love to get their hands on billions of dollars of ‘development aid’ which would potentially not be used in the best interest of the poor who need it. More on that later….

For now though, it is late and I must say goodnight (or good morning), and get what little rest I can before another day of shenanigans in Copenhagen.

Tracking for you,

Phil.

Ps. Take action and tell Penny Wong to remember the poor at A Climate For Change