Eduardo Durand, Peruvian delegation, on Copenhagen deal (English language)

 

Eduardo Durand, Peruvian delegation, on Copenhagen deal (Spanish language)

 

With just a month to go until the start of the climate conference in Copenhagen, the issue of what type of agreement will emerge from the global conference has risen to the top of the agenda.

 

The final session of official negotiations before Copenhagen ended today (7 Nov) with an emerging consensus that countries are aiming to achieve a political agreement on tackling global warming at the Danish capital.

 

Governments of the US and Denmark as well as the United Nation's most senior climate official all made clear that negotiators were aiming to leave Copenhagen with a political binding deal, rather than a fully binding legal treaty.

 

The UK Government's own ambition is for a comprehensive politically binding agreement at Copenhagen, under the UNFCCC, which also sets out a very clear timetable to a legally binding treaty.

 

A Government spokesperson said 'Not only do we want a new legally binding climate treaty agreed as soon as possible and without delay after Copenhagen, but December’s summit must lead to immediate action by countries to tackle climate change, without waiting years for final legal conclusion and ratification.'

The five days of talks in Barcelona had been dominated by growing speculation over the nature of the deal and what sort of agreement will emerge from the meetings that will start in just 30 days.

 

The clear message that negotiators were aiming for a political agreement rather than a legal treaty was seen by some commentators a sign that countries had lowered their ambitions for the outcome from Copenhagen. Under the headline 'No global climate change treaty likely for up to a year', The Guardian said that the 'stark statements' emerging from Barcelona followed 'weeks of pessimism and represent a significant downgrading of the summit’s goal'.

 

Other newspapers followed suit with The Daily Telegraph saying that a global climate deal was a 'year away' and The Times saying that Copenhagen would 'fail on climate treaty'.

 

But signs that a politically-binding deal at Copenhagen – which would then be translated into a legally binding international treaty that includes all countries - remain positive. On 4 November Nicholas Stern, author of the influential Stern Review on the economics of climate change, said: 'We can and should put together a strong and clear political deal.' Todd Stern, the US State Department’s climate change envoy, agreed, saying: 'We should make progress towards a political agreement that hits each of the main elements.'

 

Speaking at the end of the Barcelona meeting, Yvo de Boer, the Executive Secretary of the UN Framework on Convention on Climate Change, said: ‘Negotiators must deliver a final text at Copenhagen which presents a strong, functioning architecture to kick start rapid action in the developing world. Between now and Copenhagen, governments must deliver the clarity required to help the negotiators complete their work.’

 

Speaking to the House of Commons on 5 November, Energy and Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband told MPs that Copenhagen would set the 'terms of movement' towards a full treaty.

 

'I think the important thing about the agreement we now seek in December is that while it may be a political agreement it must lead, on a very clear timetable, to a legally binding treaty,' he said.

 

Mr Miliband said he was clear the agreement needed to include numbers: both reduction commitments from developed countries and action from developing countries which translated into reduced quantities of emissions.

 

He said poorer countries did not need to state targets for cuts in emissions, but 'real actions which contribute to the kind of peaking of global emissions which I think is a central part of this agreement'.

 

The Obama administration has also made it clear that a political agreement is within reach – but that pace of negotiations are too slow for a legally binding agreement in December. Senator John Kerry, the Democrat who chairs the US Senate foreign relations committee, said on 4 November that there would not be enough time to 'put the language together and flesh out every crossed t and dotted i of a treaty'.

 

There is growing optimism that President Obama will play a major role in Copenhagen. Speaking after a US/EU Summit in Washington on 4 November, EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said: 'President Obama has changed the climate on climate negotiations,' he said. 'With the strong leadership of the US we can reach an agreement that we are working hard toward.'

 

The UN has laid out the four key elements that must be part of an agreement:

• developed countries to take on emissions-cutting targets for 2020;
• emerging economies commit to actions to curb the future growth of their emissions;
• financial assistance from rich nations to developing countries, to help them lower emissions and adapt to the effects of warming; and
• institutions to be set up that will govern the system.

 

The UK Government’s aim remains for comprehensive politically binding agreement at Copenhagen, under the UNFCCC, which also sets out a very clear timetable to a legally binding treaty. This agreement would be ambitious, effective and fair. As the Road to Copenhagen document said in June an agreement at the Danish conference will allow countries to 'put in place the detailed, practical implementation arrangements following the negotiations'.

 

With Barcelona drawing to a close, the focus of attention will now move to St Andrews, UK, where finance ministers from the G20 group of rich nations meets on 6 and 7 November. Writing in The Independent, Alistair Darling, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, said: 'This weekend, once again, countries must come together to protect the common good.'