At 8.30am, on a Sunday morning, the third and final session of this fourth Ministerial Meeting of the Gleneagles Dialogue began under the robust co-chairmanship of Mr. Marthinus Van Schalwyk (Minister of Environment, South Africa) and Mr. Ian Shugart (Associate Deputy Minister of Environment, Canada).
The Keynote address from Dr Ichiro Kamoshita (Minister of the Environment, Japan) explained that scientific evidence from the IPCC report showed that time was not on our-side. He explained how the Japanese G8 Summit this year will discuss a long-term goal, a mid-term goal for developed countries, and the action of developing countries and how developed countries can support them in developing a low-carbon economy. He explained the importance of a low carbon society, and how he felt that both long and mid-term goals were important in delivering this. Kamoshita said that the reduction potential of available needs to be tallied up – to help this Japan would sponsor a workshop, which from a ground-up level would look at different sectors. Kamoshita, went on to say that the world needed a fair (not uniform), but efficient pathway to reduce global carbon emissions.
Paula Dobriansky, Under Secretary, US Department of State, explained within the concept of common, but differentiated responsibility; a commitment must be made by every country. Any agreed post-2012 agreement needs to be simple and practicable, and flexible, whilst taking into account a wide range of national circumstances and national concerns. She believed the success that occurred in Bali, would not have been possible without the Gleneagles Dialogue process.
Ms. Masnellyarti Hilman, Deputy Minister for the Environment, Indonesia, explained how the CDM process was helping developing countries to adapt and mitigate the challenges of Climate Change, but the system needs to be scaled up. She said that now was the time to stop talking and start acting.
Elliot Morely, GLOBE International, explained how he felt that the Gleneagles Dialogue process had allowed attending countries to discuss areas of agreement; on how to stabilise the climate, whilst allowing for economic growth to tackle poverty. He said globally we needed to increase carbon productivity, by a factor of 15 by 2015; timescales were short, and we need a carbon revolution in a third of the time of the Industrial Revolution. He explained that the Montreal Protocol had shown that the costs of abatement were often less than the original estimates. He concluded by saying there needed to be unprecedented co-operation with governments for any deal to succeed.
Graeme Sweeney, World Economic Forum, explained that the global surge in energy demand would continue to grow, therefore energy efficiency must be centre stage of any solution, and there needs to be an increase in the deployment of renewable technologies. He explained how this was not a easy task, but governments should not forget the role of the consumer, as they needed to explain a low-carbon economy to the voter. A win-win solution was only possible if long-term goals were set, and if there was unprecedented cooperation between governments and the private sector.
Ms. Rajasree Ray, Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Government of India, explained that for India economic growth was most important. She commented that as India did not cause climate change, it cannot therefore be constrained by GHG targets.
Mr. Matthias Maching, State Secretary for the Environment, Germany, said we needed to maintain momentum in the international process, as time is still the most pressing problem. Globally we needed a long-term goal, which must reduce emissions by 50%. Developed Countries needed a mandatory mid-term target of between 25%-40% reductions, and following this there needs to be a cascade of responsibilities.
Mr, Brice Lalonde, Government of France, asked fellow attending Ministers attending, if they had the political will to challenge this problem. In response to the points made by India, he said, some of us here have historical responsibilities, but we all have future responsibilities and capabilities.
Mr. Zhenhua Xie, Vice Chairman of China’s National Development and Reform Commission, explained that he felt that developing countries needed to grow alongside the economics of climate change.
Minister Martin Ferguson, Minister for Resources and Energy, Australia said, time is not on our side and everyone has to pull its weight and front-up to their responsibilities.
Mr. Jos Delbeke, European Commission, said that within any agreement there needed to be verifiable emissions data, so people can have trust and faith in the system, as good data has helped to improve the function of the CDM. Good data is the cement to ensure that any agreement/treaty gets implemented, and effort must be tied to economic capability (GDP per capita).
Jennifer Morgan, speaking on behalf of the NGO community, said that we need an agreement that will bring out the best from our governments, societies and business. Any future agreement needs to go beyond carbon markets and include technology transfer and intellectual property rights (IPR).
Mr. Halldor Thoreirsson, UNFCCC, finished the session by reminding delegates that we should not see the negotiations and future agreement as a rugby game, but a joint team effort.
