Australia

Tracker: Cara Bevington

Country: Australia

I grew up in the spectacular Blue Mountains, west of Sydney, but now fulfil the great Australian stereotype of calling Bondi beach home.

For the past two years I’ve worked as a campaigner for Oxfam Australia, and I absolutely love it! I’ve worked on an international Make Trade Fair campaign, a domestic campaign, Close The Gap, lobbying for health equality between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, and now most of my time is dedicated to campaigning for climate justice.

Coming from the land down under I think I can safely say that I am travelling the furthest out of the adopt-a-negotiator team to make my way to Bonn, Germany. It’s also going to be a significant journey in another sense. I’ve never been to one of these international meetings before. I’m neither a scientist nor a policy maker. But I know, without a doubt, that climate change is the defining challenge of our time and as global citizens we have both the power and responsibility to do something about it. Climate change is already having devastating impacts on our physical environment as well as the communities who inhabit it.

What do I hope to achieve being a part of the adopt-a-negotiator team in Bonn? A crisis as deep and threatening as climate change presents us all with choices and opportunities. We can cross our fingers, leave it to others, and hope it will all work out for the best. Or we can be active agents in our social, economic and environmental world, prepared to act, together, for the common good.

I’ll be tracking the Climate Negotiations from an Australian perspective on the site www.aclimateforchange.org as well as www.adoptanegotiator.org

Norway takes the lead! Who will follow?

English / Français / Italiano / Swedish / Português / German / Japanese / Simplified Chinese / Traditional Chinese

English :

Today is a great day for ambition in these climate talks. One of the most northern countries of the World, Norway, has announced that they will reduce their emissions by 40% by 2020 on 1990 levels. At this date, it’s the biggest commitment announced by an Annex 1 country. And the first that comes anywhere close to what the science demands Compared to the targets (or lack of) from countries such as USA or Canada, this target is very significant.

This is why we have to encourage this country and to spread the word about this! Norway has show that we can be ambitious in these negotiations. They have decided to break ice today, to avoid their glaciers melting and to avoid seeing more and more devestating climate consequences around the world.

Thanks to us, the tracker team, you can live and look at this exceptional time as if you were there with. Send this link round, speak about that with the politicians you know and encourage your country to follow Norway’s lead and be more ambitious.

The fight against climate change needs courage and ambition.

Français :

Aujourd’hui est un grand jour pour l’ambition dans ces négociations sur le climat. Un des pays les plus nordiques de la Planète, la Norvège, a annoncé qu’elle allait réduire ses émissions de 40% pour 2020 avec 1990 comme année de référence. A présent, c’est le plus important engagement annoncé par un pays de l’Annexe I. Et le premier qui se rapproche le plus de ce que la science exige et comparé au manque d’ambitions d’autres Etats, cette objectif de réduction est vraiment significatif.

C’est la raison pour laquelle nous devons encourager ce pays et diffuser l’information à ce sujet. La Norvège montre que l’on peut être ambitieux dans ces négociations. Ils ont décidé de briser la glace de ces négociations, pour éviter que leurs glaciers ne fondent encore plus et que les conséquences des changements climatiques ne deviennent toujours plus importantes partout sur Terre.

Grâce au travail de l’équipe, vous pouvez vivre et regarder cet exceptionnel moment en direct, comme si vous y étiez. Faites tourner ce lien, parler de cela aux personnalités politiques que vous connaissez et encouragez votre pays à suivre la Norvège et à devenir plus ambitieux.

La lutte contre les changements climatiques a besoin de courage et d’ambition.

Italiano :

Oggi è un grande giorno per le ambizioni di questi negoziati sui cambiamenti climatici. Uno dei paesi più sviluppati al mondo, la Norvegia, ha annunciato che ridurranno le loro emissioni del 40% entro il 2020 sulla base dei livelli del 1990. Fino ad oggi è il più grande impegno mai annunciato da un paese dell’Annex 1, e soprattutto è il primo che si avvicina a quanto effettivamente richiede la scienza.

È un passo di fondamentale importanza, se si considera quanto fatto ( o non fatto ) da altri paesi come gli Stati Uniti o il Canada.

Questo è il motivo per il quale noi dobbiamo incoraggiare questo paese, e dobbiamo far sapere a tutti quanto hanno appena fatto i norvegesi. La Norvegia ha dimostrato che si può essere ambiziosi durante questi negoziati. Loro hanno deciso di rompere il ghiaccio oggi, per evitare che i loro ghiacciai si sciolgano e per evitare di vedere sempre più importanti conseguenze dei cambiamenti climatici nel mondo.

Grazie a noi, il team dei tracker, tu puoi vivere e assistere a questo evento eccezionale come se fossi qui. Fai girare questo link, parlane ai politici che conosci ed incoraggia la tua nazione a seguire quanto fatto dalla Norvegia e magari diventare anche più ambiziosi di loro.

Swedish :

Idag är en stor dag för ambitionen i dessa klimatförhandlingarna. En av de mest nordliga länder i världen, Norge, har meddelat att de kommer att minska sina utsläpp med 40% fram till 2020 under 1990 års nivåer. Vid denna tidpunkt är de det största åtagande ett Annex 1 land tillkännagett. Samtidigt är de det första Annex 1 land som kommer någonstans i närheten av vad vetenskapen kräver jämfört med målen (eller brist på mål) från länder som USA eller Kanada, därmed är detta mål mycket betydande.

Det är därför vi måste uppmuntra detta land och att sprida ordet om detta! Norge har visat att vi kan vara ambitiösa i dessa förhandlingar. De har beslutat att bryta isen i dag, för att undvika att glaciärer smälter och att slippa se fler och fler klimatkatastrofer runt om i världen.

Tack vare oss, tracker teamet, kan du vara med och se på detta som om du vore här. Skicka denna länk runda, tala om det med politikerna du känner och uppmuntra ditt land för att följa Norges exempel och vara mer ambitiös.

Kampen mot klimatförändringarna behöver både mod och ambition.

Portuguese / Português :

Hoje é um ótimo dia para os países mostrarem ambição na rodada de negociações sobre mudanças climáticas aqui em Bangkok. Um dos países localizados no extremo norte do planeta, a Noruega, anunciou a redução de suas emissões em 40 % até 2020, baseado em níveis de 1990. Até o momento, esse é o maior compromisso anunciado por um país desenvolvido (Anexo 1). Também é a primeira vez que um país se aproxima do que a ciência recomenda. Se compararmos com as metas de países como os Estados Unidos e Canadá, esse anúncio é muito significante.

Temos que apoiar esse país e espalhar a boa notícia! A Noruega mostrou que podemos ter ambição nas negociações. Eles decidiram quebrar o gelo hoje, para evitar que suas geleiras derretam e que muitos outros eventos relacionados às mudanças climáticas aconteçam pelo mundo.

Graças ao trabalho dos “negotiator trackers”, você pode viver esse momento como se estivesse aqui com a gente em Bangkok. Espalhe essa mensagem por aí, converse sobre o assunto com políticos que você conhece e encoraje seu país a seguir a liderança da Noruega e ser mais ambicioso.

A luta contra as mudanças climáticas exige coragem e ambição!

German :

Heute ist ein wichtiger Tag in den Klimaverhandlungen in Bangkok: Ein großer Tag für ambitioniertere Ziele, denn: Norwegen gab heute bekannt, dass es seine C02-Emissionen bis 2020 um 40% senken will - basierend auf dem Level von 1990.

Das sind rund 10 Prozent mehr als das bisher maximale Ziel der EU - und das ehrgeizigste Ziel eines Annex-1-Landes überhaupt. Außerdem ist Norwegen damit das erste Annex-1-Land, das auch nur annähernd an die wissenschaftlich längst erwiesene Notwendigkeit herankommt: 40% werden hier gefordert, um tatsächlich unter 2 Grad Erderwärmung bleiben zu können.

Deshalb müssen wir mehr dennje das Handeln von Norwegen positiv begrüßen und alle anderen Länder entsprechend unter Druck setzen, dem positiven Beispiel zu folgen. Eindeutig ist doch: Wenn es Norwegen möglich ist, so zu handeln, kann sich kaum noch eine andere Industrienation herausreden! Wo ein Wille ist, da ist ganz offensichtlich auch ein Weg.

Deshalb müssen wir jetzt gemeinsam am Willen arbeiten! Und wenn du das hier liest, dann leite die Nachricht bitte an deine Freunde weiter, lass es sie wissen und sorge dafür, dass deine dich vertretenden Politiker einen mindestens ebenso starken Willen zeigen! Frag nach und schreibe deine Politiker an - z.B. direkt in deinem Wahlkreis. Wenn du nicht weißt, wie du handeln kannst, gibt es bei www.oxfamklimahelden.de außerdem viele Tipps und Aktionen.

Japanese :

今日という日は、最近の気候変動会議における野心が見られた素晴らしい日です。世界でも北方に位置する国、ノルウェイが、2020年までに、1990年比で40%の排出削減を行うと宣言しました。これまでにAnnex１(先進国)から出されている目標のなかで最も大きな約束で、科学の要請に最も近いものです。アメリカやカナダの目標（もしくは彼らの貢献の欠如）に比べると、ノルウェイのこの目標は非常に重要なものです。

私達が、この国を応援し、それを世界に広めようとするのは、ノルウェイが、私達は今日の交渉の場において野心的な行動をとることができると示したからです！彼らは今日、交渉という固まった氷を解かすことを決めたのです。それは極地の氷が解けるのを防ぎ、世界中で起こりうるよりひどい気候変動を防ぐためです。

私達トラッカーチームによって、あなたはまさにこの場にいるかのように、このこれまでに類のない瞬間を感じ、見ることができたと思います。どうかこの出来事をより多くの人に、政治家に伝え、自分の国がノルウェイに続き、より野心的になるようにしてください。

気候変動との戦いには、勇気と野心が必要です!

Chinese :

Simplified Chinese (for the Chinese mainland)

经过多日漫长的全球气候变化问题的讨论后，我们终于等到一个震奋的消息，终于有国家勇于作出承诺：其中一个位处世界最北端的国家挪威，刚宣布会在2020年前减少排放40%温室气体 (对比1990年的水平)。直至目前为止，这是一众发达国家中最强而有力的承诺。40%这个幅度也是最贴近科学报告中倡议要达成的目标，比起美国、加拿大等发达国家那些骚不到痒处的目标 (甚至不曾提出)，挪威这个决定可谓极具代表性。

我们一众追踪气候谈判会议的监察员为挪威愿意许下这样重大而具建设性的减排承诺予以最大肯定，并会大肆宣扬这个讯息，希望有更多国家加入挪威的行列。挪威的决心证明了我们实在可以于协助减排的行动中提出雄心万丈而实际可行的计划。他们排除万难，为的就是要阻止冰川继续融化，避免因气候变化而造成更多后果堪虞的情况。

在此亦感谢一班默默耕耘的气候谈判监察员，为大众带来堪称这世纪最重要会议──一个关乎全球气候、人文及经济的会议之最新消息及现况解读。我们恳请大家把这个连结传送给您的亲友、同事、伙伴、议员、政治家，引发大家进一步关心这个迫切而影响深远的议题，并鼓励您所属国家效法挪威，一起为改善气候变化而身体力行。

让我们拿出勇气，作出实际有力的行动，力拼气候变化！
Traditional Chinese (for Hong Kong)

經過多日漫長的全球氣候變化問題的討論後，我們終於等到一個震奮的消息，終於有國家勇於作出承諾：其中一個位處世界最北端的國家挪威，剛宣佈會在2020年前減少排放40%溫室氣體 (對比1990年的水平)。直至目前為止，這是一眾發達國家中最強而有力的承諾。40%這個幅度也是最貼近科學報告中倡議要達成的目標，比起美國、加拿大等發達國家那些騷不到癢處的目標 (甚至不曾提出)，挪威這個決定可謂極具代表性。

我們一眾追蹤氣候談判會議的監察員為挪威願意許下這樣重大而具建設性的減排承諾予以最大肯定，並會大肆宣揚這個訊息，希望有更多國家加入挪威的行列。挪威的決心證明了我們實在可以於協助減排的行動中提出雄心萬丈而實際可行的計劃。他們排除萬難，為的就是要阻止冰川繼續融化，避免因氣候變化而造成更多後果堪虞的情況。

在此亦感謝一班默默耕耘的氣候談判監察員，為大眾帶來堪稱這世紀最重要會議──一個關乎全球氣候、人文及經濟的會議之最新消息及現況解讀。我們懇請大家把這個連結傳送給您的親友、同事、夥伴、議員、政治家，引發大家進一步關心這個迫切而影響深遠的議題，並鼓勵您所屬國家效法挪威，一起為改善氣候變化而身體力行。

讓我們拿出勇氣，作出實際有力的行動，力拼氣候變化！

Climate negotiations are only mopping the floor when we need to fix a leaky roof.

I think that I have written before about the “bubble” that is the UN climate negotiations.

It’s an incredibly strange scenario to be in - you are mostly confined to the one building for the 2 weeks of meetings, eating the same food, seeing the same people everyday. You very quickly start to talk in a strange codex peppered with the hundreds of acronyms that make up the negotiating text. Water cooler conversations are soap opera-esque in that we are continually talking about who said what, and who might say what – but unlike soap operas there’s little sign of love.

Today is the penultimate day of the talks, tomorrow we will walk out of the Bangkok conference centre for the last time. When we leave there will be just one week of scheduled negotiating time left before we reach Copenhagen.

I wonder what feeling I will leave Bangkok with, what feeling Australia’s lead negotiator – Louise Hand - will leave with, what feeling NGOs and government delegates from all over the world will leave with?

Will we leave with a sense that we did everything we possibly could and more to work towards the global agreement that must be signed if we are serious about avoiding a humanitarian and environment catastrophe? Or will we leave concerned about the short road to Copenhagen?

I have been walking through the bubble with a heavy heart for the past few days. The negotiations are moving so slowly – while there has been some positive forward movement on a number of technical issues - like adaptation and technology - we have seen absolutely no movement on the key issues that not only will make or break these talks, but define the future of our planet.

The negotiating block of most of the world’s developing countries and small island states, the G77 and China are worried that developed countries are trying to squirm their way out from the commitments that they have already agreed to under Kyoto. The international youth held a press conference yesterday passing a motion of no confidence, they are scared that with the current lack of ambition and leadership from developing countries that we simply are not going to make it.

While all of these conversations happen within the UN, the real world continues to swirl around us. People across Asia have been devastated by horrific environmental disasters over the past week. From flooding in the Philippines and India, to tsunamis and earthquakes in the Pacific.

While the storms currently ravaging East Asia and the Pacific are not necessarily attributable to climate change, they should act as a powerful reminder of what is at stake in the global climate talks in Bangkok.

Scientists predict that rainfall and tropical storms in East Asia are likely to become more intense as a result of the changing climate. Some scientists have also recorded an increase in intensity in tropical cyclones in recent years.

What I find so frustrating is that we know the science, we know the reality of human experience, but we are acting in such a way that suggests we are ignoring what we know to be true.

Earlier this week, the World Resource Institute, one of the world’s pre-eminent climate research bodies released a report showing that commitments made by developed countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, when added together, fall far too short of stabilising global temperatures at a level that averts dangerous climate change. This knowledge is not new – the UNFCCC and AOSIS came out with similar statements and figures during the Bonn talks earlier this year.

Emissions reductions are the single most important thing we can do when it comes to tackling climate change. Clement, who stars in the video above, says that there is no point even taking about adaptation if we are not serious about emission reductions.

Clement, an Oxfam Humanitarian Officer and part of the government delegation for Malawi puts it like this: “At the moment we are living in a house with a leaky roof, but all we are doing is mopping up the puddles of water that are forming on the floor. We must climb onto the roof, and fix the leek at its source.”

Here in Bangkok, the focus of the Australian delegation has been to get the “rules” for emissions reductions sorted, eg how will emissions from forests be treated, what is the role of technology transfer? They are not prepared to talk about targets until the rules are laid down.

While this may sound pragmatic, in the context of these talks it is like spending hours mixing a filling for a pie without any regard for making the crust that holds it together.

While the “rules” are important – what we need to see first and foremost is high level ambition. We have the technical knowledge – what we don’t have is the ambition.

Why is ambition lacking? An article published in Grist today suggest that this is not due to a lack of leadership from key politicians, it’s a lack of pressure from civil society.

While I don’t want to take Rudd and our key Ministers off the hook – but it’s time for us to step it up so they have no choice.

Kyoto Protocol: Still Under Threat

Last week I questioned whether or not we should add the Kyoto Protocol, the world’s current agreement to tackle climate change, to the endangered species list.

Let's not add the Kyoto to the same box as this cute Red Panda

This week I am calling for the committed survival of the principles and commitments that Annex 1 countries made under the Kyoto Protocol. Because not only are they under threat, it appears they are on their way out.

Fifteen years ago, rich countries, based on scientific evidence, historical responsibility and economic capability agreed they would take the lead in tackling climate change.

In 2007 in Bali, Australia signed up to the Kyoto Protocol and alongside wealthy countries of the world they reaffirmed that their commitments would be greater than developing countries and different in nature. That they would take deeper emission cuts, and provide money for developing countries in their efforts to address climate change.

But, here in Bangkok, less than two months out of Copenhagen, where we need to see the world come together and agree to a global climate change deal, wealthy developed countries are unpicking the threads of those agreements.

The commitments and principles made under the Kyoto Protocol are under threat.

In a meeting with the Australian delegation earlier this week, one of my NGO colleagues questioned Australia’s position on the continuation of the Kyoto Protocol. Our lead negotiator clearly stated that she did not want to get drawn into the sensationalised “killing of Protocol” debate, she said that there were more important things for the negotiators to spend their time on. However, she did firmly state that Australia was committed to uphold the commitments they have made under Kyoto Protocol.

At first I thought this was a sensible approach, and I felt sure that behind the closed doors of bi-laterals that Australia would be clearly affirming their commitments to the Kyoto Protocol to all of the concerned parties.

But, over the past few days listening to the interventions from Australia, and other wealthy countries in the sessions here in Bangkok, I am not so sure.

Australia’s not the only country saying they want Kyoto to continue. The EU, Japan, New Zealand and others have stated they do want to see the protocol continue. BUT, and yes it is a big BUT, it is clear in the proposals they are making to the UNFCCC that this is not so black and white.

Developed countries are pushing back on the “common but differentiated” responsibilities that they agreed to. They (with the notable exception of Norway) are pushing back on making the level of emission reductions that science, historical responsibility and economic capability demand. They are skirting on their financial obligations to support developing countries (Australia in particular has been very quiet on this issue). And they are trying to force the G77 and China (which represent more than 130 of the world’s countries) to take actions that would be unfair considering the gaping holes in rich country commitments.

What we must (at the very very least!!) see from countries that are party to the Kyoto Protocol are commitments in line with what they have already agreed to. While a discussion on what each country’s fair share is essential, this must start with what rich countries are prepared to commit. Not, what they want to see developing countries do.

Right now, Australia has an emissions reduction target of 25% by 2020 based on 2000 levels. Problematically this has a shopping list of conditions attached to it – not least of all action by developing countries.

Now is not the time for the principles and commitments made under the Kyoto Protocol to be dropped, or weakened. Now is the time to build upon what we already have.

Negotiators must realise that the best rhetoric in the world won’t by itself build a single wind turbine, save a single acre of rainforest, or help a single village respond to the impacts of climate change.

As the lead negotiator for Sudan said: “saying that you are taking the lead does not mean that you are doing it.”

The time is now for rich countries, like Australia, to stop talking about being a leader on climate change, and actually be one. This includes ensuring the Kyoto not only stays alive, but is enhanced.

UPDATE: Together we’ve asked Australia to put their money where their mouth is, what’s their response?

Firstly, I want to send a HUGE thank you to everyone who has thus far supported our rallying call asking Prime Minister Rudd to step up to his rhetoric of climate leadership and take action on climate finance.

In the past week, more than 1000 Australians have sent an email to Rudd (cc-ing relevant Ministers Swan and Wong) letting them know we are tracking their moves throughout all the international climate talks happening this year, and we want to hear the Australian government break their silence on climate finance.

It’s not too late to send off yours if you haven’t already, in fact, the timing couldn’t be better, we need sustained pressure!

Right now in Bangkok, the UN climate negotiations are moving at a snail’s pace. Or in the word’s of our lead negotiator Louise Hand, they are like “a walk in the park, and we need to pick it up to a sprint.”

One of the issues that will get us on track to the sprint, is significant movement on climate finance from wealthy developed countries (read: how much will they contribute, where will it come from and who will get it?)

I’ve talked about why climate finance is so critical in past blogs, so here’s just a quick look at the headline points:

Climate finance is a cross cutting issue in the negotiations. Pick an aspect of climate change, and developing countries need cash to deal with it. Adapting to the impacts they are already facing, continuing to develop on a low carbon economy, meeting emission reduction targets, implementing new technologies, and on and on and on.

Developed countries are pushing developing countries to make commitments to reduce their emissions from business as usual projections. Developing countries are very weary of making commitments until they are clear about the level of support they will receive to do so from the wealthy countries who have overwhelmingly contributed to climate change (fair enough I say!)

That’s not to suggest that developing countries aren’t taking action. Indonesia (the world’s third largest emitter) recently announced a national climate change action plan ‘that will reduce their emissions by 26 per cent by 2020 from BAU (Business As Usual).’ Further to that, they have indicated that they will reduce emissions by as much as 41% if a global financing plan is rolled out.

Your messages on finance have been delivered to the halls of Canberra, and they are also being heard by the negotiators here in Bangkok.

Late last week, myself and couple of my fellow Australian NGO-ers (who are totally down pat on this finance issue) met with the Australian delegation’s two lead negotiators on finance, a woman from the Department of Climate Change, Jane, and a woman from AusAid, Deb.

The delegates assured us that the issue of climate finance is “being thought about deeply and addressed at the highest level”, with the Department of Climate Change, the Prime Minister’s Office and Treasury all working on it.

They said were scoping out a number of the proposals that other countries had put forward, and looking to draw out any elements of each of the proposals that they thought were useful, and identify which elements had broad support from other countries. In negotiating language, they were looking hard for areas of convergence and divergence.

The day after this meeting, both Australia and the USA submitted new pieces of text about finance to the chair of the Long Term Co-operative Action working group. (Check out USA tracker Ben’s blog for the Americana perspective).

Australia put forward a proposal which they’ve called a “Facilitative platform” (for the eager beans following the talks from home, you can find it under sub-section 6, paragraph 19, option 10). They got a chance to speak to this proposal earlier this week. While they referred to the need for financing to be “scaled up” and recognized that significant amounts would be needed in the short term for adaptation projects – their text didn’t include a mention on the scale of finance or where it would come from. Rather, just how money could be spent.

I think the Papua New Guinea negotiator summed it up nicely, he thanked the Australian delegation for their constructive start, but questioned why there was no focus on how to mobilize capital, when there was so much focus on how it could be spent? He questioned: does the Australian proposal assume that money does in fact grow on trees?

At the moment, Australia is focused on the interior decoration for a house that is yet to be built, indeed where the block of land is not even yet secured. They’ve jumped to the operationalisation end and skipped right over the essential parts of climate finance which are really at the crux of these negotiations.

The negotiating team here in Bangkok can’t make an announcement on climate finance until they are given the go ahead from Kevin Rudd, right now it seems that Rudd is waiting for the perfect moment to make this announcement. With just over 60 days to go to Copenhagen, and only 3 days left of the negotiations here in Bangkok the perfect moment is now!

Our government has heard Australians speak: we want to see our leaders take strong action on climate change. Australia has proven to be a real broker in other areas of the negotiations. Right now there is a real need for the talks to get an injection of momentum, and a finance announcement from Australia that puts a figure on the table, and some suggested sources, a long with a commitment not to dip into the already stretched and inadequate aid budget could bring the stroll to a fast walk.

When we hear daily from countries about the fact we are negotiating the survival of their island homes, their famers livelihoods, their children’s right to live on the land their parents have always called home it is clear that Australia must step up to their strong climate rhetoric, and put their money where their mouth is.

Send your letter now!

For everyone who has already taken action, THANK YOU, we will be asking you to take your message to the streets soon! A letter to your local paper, call take back radio, send some Monopoly money to the PM - we need to make as much noise as possible on this issue! Stayed tuned.

Thousands take to the streets of Bangkok for climate justice

This morning most of the Adopt A Negotiator team donned bright blue ‘tcktcktck’ t-shirts and joined with thousands of people from across Asia (indeed the world) to march through the streets of Bangkok to demand climate justice.

We began in a large park in the centre of Bangkok and then marched through the busy streets and tourist hot spot, Khao San Road.

The diversity of the crowd truly demonstrated the extent of climate impacts throughout the world, and the amazing ways that people are already responding to the challenge of climate change.

We marched in solidarity with members of the 350.org group from Nepal while they flew beautiful kites, we walked alongside fisher-folk from the Philippines, we chanted with famers from the North of Thailand who carried signs depicting the impact of increased rain on their crops, and we wheeled an hourglass with the world painted on it through the crowds.

The rally ended with musical performances and speeches right outside of the UN conference centre where the climate negotiations are taking place.

Later, when I was out of the sweltering heat and waiting in the café queue for an iced coffee, I chatted with a few of the European government delegates. They said that they had heard all of the noise, and seen the thousands of people rallying out the front of the conference centre.

I asked them why they hadn’t come out to join the rally? They laughed and said that they wished they could have had time out of their meetings to come and join in. So I asked if they couldn’t be there in person, would they join in spirit? Would take on board the message of the thousands of people calling on the negotiators to work towards a deal in Copenhagen that is based upon fundamental principles of climate justice?

To this they replied, “we are working hard in the negotiations to come up with a global agreement to address climate change.” This, I don’t doubt, they are all working very hard. But I don’t feel they answered my question, hard work doesn’t equate with really listening to the demands of the people.

We must continue our message of climate justice, so it flows from the streets and into the negotiations.

More photos here.

The climate must change

What a week it has been. On Friday 2 October the mood in the UN conference centre was weary. The queue in the coffee shop swelled as the bags under most people’s eyes almost equalled the size of the lap top they clung to, as government delegates and observers alike, rushed from one meeting to the next.

The afternoon of the end of week one was filled with “stock-take sessions”, one for each of the two negotiating groups (Kyoto Protocol and Long Term Co-operative Agreement). They were aimed at groups reporting their progress back to the chair and determining where the focus of the coming week should lie. As I sat in on the sessions I thought to myself, for all of the hard work everyone has been doing, for all of the lack of sleep and endless meetings, have we moved anywhere? Or are we all sprinting helter skelter on a treadmill?

Sure, some progress has been made tinkering around the edges but there has been no movement on the core issues. This is particularly disappointing, not just given the ticking clock, but given that last week during the New York UN climate summit, we heard statements from various Heads of State, calling for the world to act with urgency to address the mounting challenge of climate change.

As developing countries made passionate statements in the stock-take session calling on developed countries to act with the level of ambition science demands, developed countries continued to restate their current (and largely unambitious) positions.

Here is a comment from Gabon: “While we waste time negotiating in here without any real progress, developing countries are already facing the impacts of climate change. We should not be wasting our time negotiating selfish proposals that are dangerous for our planet.”

Powerful stuff, but apparently not enough.

Australia, amongst other developed countries, restated the same position we have heard for months now: “We are striving towards a strong 2012 outcome…. in the context of a strong global deal will cut our emissions by 25% on 2000 levels by 2020.”

In the context of other countries, Australia’s position isn’t too bad, it’s a bit behind the EU, and bit ahead of NZ (and a lot ahead of Canada, but when your PM prioritizes donuts over climate change you clearly have an issue!!) BUT, in the context of global science and reality of climate impacts, the positions of these countries are weak and spell a blue print for disaster.

The chair of the Kyoto Protocol track finished the session by questioning the delegates where the political ambition expressed by heads of states in New York had ended up? As he certainly couldn’t see it in the halls of Bangkok. He said that it was time for everyone to stop playing an elaborate negotiating game and really get stuck into the core issues, otherwise, come Copenhagen they would simply be a laughing stock with nothing to show for all their hard work.

The statement from Gabon and the Chair are both heartening, but even though I am new to this process, I can say with all honesty that I have heard them before, and they are certainly not new or unknown.

What will it take in order for the reality of human experience and scientific evidence to break through the outskirts of the negotiations and instead shape work on the core issues of targets and finance? Because at the moment, they clearly seem to be missing in action.

Yesterday morning (Saturday) the Adopt A Negotiator team had the absolute pleasure of a meeting with the UN climate change negotiations chief, Yvo de Boer, who we like to affectionately call chief negotiator tracker!! This is what Yvo had something to say about the stock-take session: he called it the “Nirvana of recycling” he said that the statements made on Friday were largely the one and the same as he had been hearing for at least the last 5 years. A time saver for speech writers I suppose, but clearly a frustrating and time wasting loss for the planet.

Thankfully you and I know that these negotiations are not the only actions to save the world from dangerous climate change (although sometimes trapped in this bubble removed from the reality of life it feels like it to me!!)

We, the people of the world, are even more powerful than this negotiating process. No one denies that achieving a global climate deal is a hard task, but to get there we must be at the forefront of demonstrating to our leaders that a safe future is the only future we will accept. No matter what your passion, skills and interest you can do this. Whether you feel at home chatting to your local talk back radio host, marching through the streets, writing music or performing comedy, you can add your voice to the swell of call for truly ambitious climate action.

The climate must change and together we can do it.

Climate change: a gender issue?

It’s the rainy season right now in Thailand, each afternoon the streets of Bangkok swell with puddles as the rains rolls in.

This morning, hundreds of women from around South-East Asia, the Pacific, indeed the world, took to the streets of Bangkok with bright pink umbrellas, posters, signs and drums with the cry: “There’s no climate justice without gender justice.”

As we splashed and danced through the streets of Bangkok with our umbrellas, fisher-folk from around Asia sailed down the main river through Bangkok calling for their livelihoods and rivers to be protected.

The noise, colour and movement was invigorating and inspiring. We stopped traffic, spoke with curious Thai’s and tourists, and most importantly spent at least 60minutes making lots of noise right outside of the UN building where the climate negotiations are currently happening.

Working on the Adopt-A-Negotiator project, and having the chance to work with women from the Global Gender Climate Alliance during the last UN climate talks I attended in June, I felt pretty confident in my knowledge of the gendered dimension of climate change, but my eyes were only opened even further as I spent the 90 minute march chatting with women from all over Asia.

I met a woman the same age as me from the Philippines who had spent the past 4 days working in a call centre receiving emergency calls. She told me of speaking to a mother with a one month old baby who was trapped on the roof of her house because the water levels were so high.

I spoke with a mother from Nepal working on a climate awareness raising project with her community. She was coordinating a project to build people’s understanding and ability of how to best adapt to the impacts of climate change her village is already facing.

As we marched I thought about some conversations I’d had with some friends back in Australia after we had seen Oxfam’s ‘Sisters on the Planet’ films. One felt that a focus on gender and climate change was unimportant compared to the environmental challenge of protecting our physical environment, and another thought that a focus on women was unfair as surely men were affected by climate change too. To some extent I can see the points that they are making, but to me, the evidence is clear.

I would like to share with you an article by Tasneem Essop who works for WWF international (and, has been featured on this site). She writes:

“We cannot consider climate change as a purely environmental issue. The reality is that it will forever change the socio-economic landscape of our world, the continent and our country if we do not act now. Those with the least options have the least ability to adapt to climate change. Gender-based roles and responsibilities often result in limited options for women because women, as primary caregivers still have a reduced ability to earn a living, have less access to land and natural resources and have less of a voice in decision making.

Currently up to two billion people live in extreme poverty worldwide (which means they live on less that $2 a day). Two thirds of these are women. The reality is that climate change will worsen existing poverty, particularly in developing nations that are heavily dependent on natural resources.”

Obviously, women are not just victims of climate change. But are also powerful agents of change in their roles as consumers and citizens. Twirling umbrellas through the streets of Bangkok with women and men from all over the world bought this home to me today.

It can be hard to stomach or even fully comprehend how vast the problems of climate change can be, especially since terms like ‘sustainable energy’ and ‘clean environment’ can feel like such intangible concepts. Maybe a lesson for us all is to consider the personal impact of climate change on real people.

Within the negotiations, country delegates from Africa, small island nations, South American nations amongst others have all made passionate pleas for countries to act in the interest of their survival. To act to protect their people, their cultures, their homes. What will it take for these stories to not only be listened to, but heard?

Has Japanese “icon” The Kyoto Protocol joined the endangered species list?

Sitting here in Bangkok in the midst if the UN climate change negotiations, it’s so very easy to get caught up in all of the acronyms, the climate in-jokes, and the endless talk where nothing seems to really be said. But, there is one pretty big issue that has cropped up over the past few days, the future of the Kyoto Protocol.

The Kyoto Protocol had a very rocky entry into the world, and it looks like it may be leaving in a similar way.

Let’s start at the beginning….

The Kyoto Protocol entered into the world in its namesake in Japan waaay back in 1997 (the year I started high school!!), under the auspices of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Because of the need under international law for a set number of countries to ratify the convention, it didn’t enter into legal force until 16 February 2005 (a rather lengthy 8 years after it was first written). For the eager beans out there, the protocol text is available here.

To put it simply, the Kyoto Protocol it is the international community’s current plan to prevent dangerous climate change by reducing global emissions of greenhouse gas. Kyoto is far from perfect but it is still important. It has some pretty significant weaknesses (namely it is darn un-ambitious, not in line with current science or the changed global landscape, and the USA have not ratified it) but none the less, it is a plan.

The existing Kyoto Protocol is set to “run out” in 2012, so the negotiations happening right now are trying to nut out what a post 2012 global climate change agreement, that will protect our futures, should look like.

Currently there are two key negotiating groups at the UNFCCC: one working group is negotiating further commitments under the Kyoto Protocol after the first commitments expire in 2012 (this group is mostly made up of wealthy developed nations minus the USA). The other working group is negotiating for long term cooperative action after 2012 that will include countries and sectors that are not covered under Kyoto (this group includes the USA, non-Annex 1 or developing countries, and emission intense industries like aviation and shipping).

One (of the many) million dollar questions that has been bubbling beneath the surface for a while now is, how will commitments be made? Will we amend the Kyoto Protocol, make a new treaty altogether or end up with two treaties?

On the surface, creating one new treaty sounds like the most sensible option, one agreement that binds developed countries to take strong action, including the USA who have not ratified Kyoto, and that incorporates developing country emission reduction and adaptation plans. This is the approach that the Australian government, amongst others, favour.

But, a number of developing countries are becoming increasingly concerned that developed countries want “to kill Kyoto.” Seeing as a number of countries have not fulfilled the commitments they made under Kyoto, developing countries want to see the Kyoto actions in the new global agreement be enhanced, not re-written. They fear that by doing away with Kyoto any new agreement will be weaker, not stronger.

To me, this sounds like a classic “don’t throw the baby out with the bath water” case. If so much hard work was put into creating the Kyoto Protocol, let’s not simply do away with it, but build on its basic framework and create something more ambitious and broader in scope that addresses the scientific imperatives of climate change.

While a conversation about the relationship between an enhanced Kyoto Protocol (or a successor Protocol) and the outcomes under the ‘long term cooperation action’ group are essential, to me it seems that developed countries signaling they want to do away with Kyoto will only add to a sense of mistrust amongst developing countries.

At this stage of the negotiations, less than 70 days to Copenhagen, it is more important than ever that the negotiations don’t get caught up in issues of mistrust, but rather we concentrate on building upon the basic framework that is already in place.

TAKE ACTION: Ask PM Rudd to break his silence on climate finance

I am sure that you are familiar with the saying “another day another dollar.” Well, when it comes to international climate talks, it is only ever seems to be another day…

TAKE ACTION NOW

One of the biggest barriers in the run-up to Copenhagen is how much financial support developed nations should give poorer nations to combat the problem of climate change. There’s little convergence amongst nations on how much money’s needed to address climate change, where it comes from, and who gets it. Sure - these are loaded questions, but it’s essential that we get some movement on them – and fast – as time is simply not on our side.

Climate change is already here. Drought, flooding, storm damage, tidal surges and coastal erosion are damaging fisheries, crops and water supplies. Developing countries who have historically contributed least to climate change are the ones being hardest hit by its impacts.

That’s why developed nations, such as Australia, who have contributed the most to the current climate crisis, have a responsibility to assist poor countries both to adapt their emerging economies and to assist them deal with the climate impacts.

This kind of commitment in captured both in the Kyoto Protocol as well as the Bali Action Plan – to international documents which guide the current round of talks. Yet world leaders (including our Prime Minister) still made little progress on the issue of climate finance at last week’s G20 and UN Climate Summit.

Unlike the UK and the EU, the Australian government has yet to make any significant public announcement on climate finance. While Treasurer Wayne Swan and Climate Change Minister Penny Wong both agree that there is “a close relationship between progress on finance and a global deal on climate change”, the Australian government is yet to formally put a proposal, or an amount, on the table.

British PM Gordon Brown and the European Union state that $AUD100bn and $AUD165bn, respectively, would be needed annually by poor nations by 2020 to tackle climate change.

This may seem like a lot of money, but not when you compare it to the $4 trillion spent by developed countries on the financial crisis so far, or the $1.3 trillion of annual global military spending.

Right now, climate finance is a particularly sticky point in UN climate negotiations. Unless there’s action, the talks are likely to remain in gridlock.

Developing countries have spoken: it’s unfair for rich countries to expect them to agree to limit their greenhouse gas emissions, until developed countries commit to provide significant financial investment to help them.

The Australian negotiating team here in Bangkok are not able to move on climate finance until the Australian government come out and formally announce their position.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd could play an important role to help boost much needed trust and kick start these stalled negotiations. If he’s to do this however, he must make an announcement on climate finance.

Many commentators on the international climate negotiations say that this type of tangible action has the potential to move the climate negotiations forward. Is it really too much to ask Rudd to put his money where his mouth is?

With just 69 days to go to Copenhagen, the clock is ticking…

TAKE ACTION NOW

We want to send a strong message to Prime Minister Rudd from the Adopt-A-Negotiator project, we want to let him know that thousands of Australians are watching the international negotiations and urging the Australian government to play a leadership role. You can play an essential role by adding your voice to our letter to the Prime Minister asking him to break his silence on finance. I will play my role by ensuring that he gets the letters.

Many questions make for one clear answer

It’s 10pm here in Thailand, I’m sitting perched with my lap top on my knees balancing a cup of green tea as I swat away mozzies.

I have just re-typed this opening sentence about 12 times.

I have – what’s known as – writers block.

Of the worst kind.

There are so many thoughts flying around in my head that I don’t know where to start. What essential info do I need to cram into the next 500 words (which I am told by blogging experts is when you, my friends, will stop reading) to fulfill my role as your climate insider?

Do I blog that today was the first day of the latest round of UN climate negotiations?

Should I mention that this is the first time this year that the negotiations have been held outside of Europe, and in the Global South, where we are already seeing some of the most dramatic affects of climatic change?

Would it be useful to link to a photo blog documenting the floods currently devastating Manila in the Philippines? Where many people have died and 330,000 more have been displaced.

Should I paint a picture from this morning’s opening plenary during which the Prime Minister of Thailand, the UN climate chief, the Danish Climate Change Minister, a long with many others, addressed the negotiators? They collectively urged them to use the coming two weeks to achieve as much as possible: “Our children and grandchildren will never forgive us unless action is 
taken. Time is running out, we have two months before Copenhagen,” said Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva of Thailand.

Or would it be better to take a step back and share with you some of the international political context surrounding the talks? The disappointment from the G20, where Heads of States and Climate Ministers did not take the opportunity to make significant progress on the essential issue of climate finance.

Should I also include a mention of one my recent blogs looking at the Major Emitters Meeting, the UN Climate Summit and New York Climate Week which all took place within the past 10 days?

Or, would you like to hear about what we need, expect and hope to see happen over the next two weeks of climate negotiations in Bangkok?

Need: serious movement from wealthy developed nations. We need to see higher emissions reduction targets be announced, the ones we currently have simply aren’t in line with what science calls for. And, we need to see adequate finance on the table to support developing countries. These two elements are crucial to a deal, but sadly it’s highly unlikely to see any positive developments here in Bangkok.

Expect: What is firmly in the realm of possibility is that the draft negotiating text - which is currently bursting at the seams – be reduced to something that is manageable, and which isn’t as confusing as the 181 or 199 odd pages we currently have (depending on which version you use). We can expect negotiators to work hard to decrease the length text and ensure it has more areas of convergence than divergence. But, this may involve some intense lobbying to ensure that all of the good ideas, all of the climate solutions, remain within the text, and all of the bad ideas gets taken out. By the end of Bangkok we need to see no more than a 50 page draft text which can lay the ground work for a Copenhagen agreement. (And, note to all delegates, this can’t be done the uni student way, by decreasing font and margin size).

Hope: is a beautiful word. We hope to see some real progress, and refreshed negotiating mandates coming from Heads of States so that the negotiators can really get down to business as we past the 70days to Copenhagen mark.

After all of this, I know I have some left off some important and interesting points (like Australia’s increasing work on what the legal form of a new climate treaty should look like, more to follow on this).

But, what I do know, is what we need to do with this information.

We must act.

While our government delegations work hard inside the UN conference centre, we must work hard too. We need to keep up the pressure on our decision makers (in this case PM Rudd & Climate Minister Wong) so they know that we wont accept anything less than Australia as a active and ambitious player on the global climate field.

Why do we need to pressure them? Well, they are the bosses of the negotiating team here in Bangkok, the team can only go as far as Coach Rudd and Wong task them. And right now, frankly it’s not far enough.

You don’t need me to tell you what pressure looks like. I want you to tell me what you have done, are doing and will do, to translate your climate passion to climate action. Please share with me your plans, so next time I have writers block I can simply look to you for inspiration.