Tag: CAN Intervention

CAN intervention: Joint high level segment of COP and CMP - statement from observer organizations, COP20, Dec 11, 2014

Thank you Honorable Ministers and Distinguished Delegates,

My name is Mariela Rumiche and I am speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

In September, the climate change movement made history, and yesterday in Lima thousands of people told world leaders we need to see real world action now to prevent irreversible climate impacts.

Here in Lima, governments must show clear and tangible progress on an agreement that will be finalized in Paris, which must be fair and equitable and accelerate the ongoing transition away  from dirty fossil fuels to 100% renewable energy by 2050.

That transition must begin now; in order to meet 1.5°C we cannot delay action until 2020.

Adaptation and Loss and Damage are equally important. From the typhoon in the Philippines to impacts in my home country of Peru people are suffering from the impacts of climate change already.

Finance is key to deliver on mitigation and adaptation. 10 billion dollars, although a good start, is clearly inadequate to address the challenges we are facing in the near term. Also here in Lima, we must agree for a roadmap until 2020 to reach the absolute minimum 100 billion dollars in new and additional public finance.

Thank you Honorable Ministers and Distinguished Delegates

Organization: 

CAN Intervention: CAN, CJN, Gender, YOUNGO, TUNGO joint intervention in ADP Ministerial, COP20, Dec 10, 2014

I am Lidy Nacpil of Jubilee South Asia Pacific Movement on Debt and Development, and from the Philippine Movement for Climate Justice. As a Filipina, the fight against the climate crisis is a fight for the survival of our people not in the future but now.  The only solace we can get from the annual visits of super typhoons exactly at the time of the Summit of the Conference of Parties is the hope that our tragedies will somehow move governments into more ambitious, more just and fairly shared global actions to confront the climate crisis.

The fight against the climate crisis is a struggle for the rights of peoples across the globe. And it is the people those who stand up for their rights --the rights of workers, the rights of women, the rights of youth, the rights of the poor, the rights of communities, the rights of indigenous peoples –--  they are the people who are targeted, harassed, and killed for standing up,  speaking out, and resisting the system that drives the climate crisis  

Ministers, you must recognize this fundamental fact -- that to avert climate catastrophe, you will need all voices and all hands and that you must do more, here at the UNFCCC but also at home - to protect, respect, fulfill the human rights of all to fully and effectively participate in all levels of decision making

One of the outcomes of the ADP negotiations must be much greater commitments by governments to protect rights-defenders. And we expect the Paris agreement to include clear and direct reference to the need for responses to climate change to advance gender equality and respect, promote and fulfill human rights.

Any agreement that will protect future generations must contain commitments to immediate action with a long term perspective. It must recognize that our planet is held in trust for future generations thus Intergenerational equity is a key principle in tandem with equity between people today.

Intergenerational equity and this obligation to the future means that we must have a long term goal of limiting temperature rise to no more than 1.5C.  We demand that the world begin to immediately phase out fossil fuel and other dirty and harmful energy projects.  We demand a just transition to 100% renewable energy systems as quickly as possible, that are community owned and deliver energy to the 3 billion women and men without access to enough energy for lives of dignity.

We urge parties to make INDCs in accordance with a cost-benefit analysis of climate change that does not discount our future, while addressing gender equality and human rights.

It is because of the rights of women and men that we demand that the Lima decision addresses all aspects of the climate crisis - not just emission cuts. We expect a decision that mandates all countries to make “intended contributions” on adaptation, finance, technology, and capacity building that are gender responsive and include social and environmental safeguards. It’s only through focusing on these issues at the highest level that the needs of impacted women and men will be addressed.

Mitigation commitments of developing countries but be discussed together with finance and technology transfers without which we cannot possibly hope to see the scale of transformation the world needs. Without adequate, gender responsive, safe finance and technology transfers we cannot ensure a swift complete transition and neither a just transition - one that provides decent, lasting, safe and well-paid jobs, one that does not leave the workers out in the cold.

The conference is not over – there is still time to show this commitment, to show that you listen to your people,  to show that you do hear the almost twenty thousand people marching in central Lima today. You can still take a decision here to see climate change as more than just emission cuts but also about  the rights of women and men. You can still take the decision to include adaptation, finance and technology as mandatory elements of your contributions to the future agreement.

We also urge you to put the issue of pre-2020 actions at the top of your agenda in Lima.  Targets in 2025 will be too late if we continue with the weak proposals for the next six years - you face a political and physical imperative to drastically change direction on immediate climate action.  We must move away from a talk shop format and transform the pre-2020 process into solutions-based collaborative forums that look to the needs of women and men for greener jobs, energy access, clean and healthy communities, and control over their own energy systems. All these are possible if there is commitment at the highest level to seeing real outcomes on pre-2020 action, and ensuring transfer of finance and technology.

We also demand a commitment to revisit and revise ways to scale-up your 2020 targets until you bring them into line with what science and justice requires. We demand an agreement on a finance roadmap that shows when, how, and how much finance will be available to tackle climate change in the South. And we expect discussions on clear and concrete proposals to start a global energy transformation away from the fossil fuel era, and into renewable energy. All of these issues are on the table, and actions on these issues are being called for - by the science, back in your capitals, out there in the streets, and in here.

The climate crisis is about real people -- women and men, girls and boys – across the globe.  Their rights, their survival, their future should guide your decisions in Lima.

CAN Intervention: CAN with CJN, Gender YOUNGO and TUNGO in High Level Ministerial Dialogue on Finance, COP20, December 9, 2014

Hello, my name is Blessing Mutiti and I am speaking on behalf of the youth, ENGO, gender and trade union constituencies.

We want to stress the importance of climate finance for all our constituencies and the people we represent. Many of those who are most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change are least responsible for causing it. So providing climate finance is a legal and moral obligation of developed countries - those countries who have the greatest responsibility and capacity.

Without adequate, new and predictable finance, developing countries will not be able to contribute towards mitigation, nor will they be able to adapt. Finance is crucial for supporting those countries and their communities in proactive adaptation to climate impacts, and for ensuring that the transition we are asking all countries to make is a just one.

The recent UNEP adaptation gap report gives an indication of both the scale of finance that we need for adaptation in Africa alone and how quickly that scale increases if we fail to mitigate adequately. Strong commitments to climate finance from developed countries are necessary for progress in these negotiations, but also – just as importantly – for the impacts this finance has on the ground, for real people.

Like some of you have mentioned, we also welcome the recent pledges to the Green Climate Fund, an important institution that has the potential to be groundbreaking in its operations. The GCF, if it lives up to its principles of country ownership, direct access, gender sensitivity, stakeholder engagement, and supporting transformational rather than incremental change, is precisely the institution we need to face up to the climate crisis.

However, these pledges to the GCF are only a starting point of what needs to be a long-term financial commitment for developing countries beyond the initial resource mobilization period. $10 billion is a good step, but it is nowhere near the actual needs in developing countries. If spread over the four years of the GCF’s initial phase, this is only $2.5 billion per year, compared with the $100 billion a year expected by 2020, much less the hundreds of billions of actual needs. So we need something more here in Lima – namely, a finance roadmap leading up to 2020 and the promised $100 billion per year.

Developing countries need predictability. To make concrete national mitigation and adaptation plans, these countries must know what level of support will be available. Furthermore, they - and we! - need political assurance that the money will actually flow. A lack of clarity in climate finance since the end of Fast Start Finance has eroded trust and slowed progress in these negotiations. The same thing could happen if the GCF pledges are not followed up with specific, quantified indications of what finance will flow in addition to the GCF money, as well as after the GCF’s initial period.

A finance roadmap, in which countries give concrete, quantitative indications about how much finance will be available each year until 2020, would go a long way towards reassuring us all that finance will be available to address the climate crisis with the decisiveness it requires, for both mitigation and adaptation, with additional financing needs for implementing a loss & damage mechanism. This roadmap should include targets for the aggregate public finance that will be available for developing countries each year, scaling up to the $100 billion goal for 2020.

Leveraging of private sector finance should not be counted toward fulfilling that goal. We question the increasing trend of prioritizing public-private partnerships and the ‘transformative’ role of the private sector in combating climate change without equally challenging the fact that private companies are not obligated to invest in social needs and global public good, nor accounting for the ways in which the private sector, especially large transnational corporations, have contributed to establishing the unsustainable development model which drives catastrophic climate change. We affirm that regulation, and accountability and transparency of non-state actors, particularly transnational corporations and public-private partnerships, are critical for achieving sustainable development. Therefore, we urge caution to avoid the casual promotion of public-private partnerships to catalyze action on climate. We call for transparency, accountability and rigorous adherence to the numerous normative rights frameworks and legally binding agreements in the field of sustainable development, which provide the foundation for the work of the United Nations.

In addition to the fact that finance needs to flow, it also needs to flow to the right things. We stand firm that fossil fuels and high-risk technologies that create irreversible damage to our health and the planet must be kept out of a 2015 agreement, and must not be supported by climate finance. If dirty and harmful energy is financed by the GCF or other climate finance channels, the very legitimacy of those institutions will be called into serious question - an outcome none of us want. All climate finance must be provided in the context of the strongest possible social and environmental safeguards and respect for human rights.

We urge you to deliver for the communities, youth, women, workers, and everyone else we represent. Without adequate and predictable finance, there is no 2015 agreement in Paris. Without adequate and predictable finance, there can be no safe, clean energy revolution. Without adequate and predictable finance, there is no just transition to a sustainable future. It is your responsibility to ensure the finance is available for all these things that we all want - and we are committed to holding you accountable to that responsibility.

Thank you.

Topics: 
Organization: 

CAN Intervention in the COP20 SBSTA Closing Plenary, 6 December 2014

Thank you Mr. Chair,

My name is Harshita Bisht and I am speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

There is an essential piece of the Technology transfer, Development and Diffusion puzzle missing in the negotiations and that is the economic, social and environmental assessment of mitigation and adaptation technologies. Our goal is to maximize the flow of technologies based, on the principle of CBDR, from developed to developing countries. But for this to be productive we need to ensure that transferred technologies will not have unforeseen impacts.

Technologies that carry the risk of a global and potentially devastating impact should not be part of any decision or agreement.  We call on all parties to demand that technology assessment be included within the mandate of the Technology Mechanism.

Regarding the negotiations on the Framework for Various Approaches, we welcome the cautioned approach not to prejudge progress towards a future climate treaty. However, this must not come at the expense of avoiding discussions on the nuts and bolts of an accounting framework, which we need to avoid that climate commitments are undermined. We call on Parties to start work on this important element in the ADP discussions as soon as possible.

Thank you Mr. Chair.

CAN Intervention in the COP20 SBI Closing Plenary, 5 December, 2014

Thank you Chair,

I am Carmen Capriles speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

The IPCC has made it extremely clear that the "limits to adaptation" exceed with greater rates and magnitude of climate change. Already there are several examples of impossible adaptation to intolerable and unavoidable risks such as sea level rise, ocean acidification, and loss of territory and biodiversity.

We need to take appropriate steps here in Lima to quickly operationalize the mechanism. First and foremost, let us establish The Executive Committee by agreeing on its composition and modalities of the Warsaw International Mechanism. The ExCom should mirror the composition of the Adaptation Committee as suggested by developing countries and particularly, a representative from the SIDS and LDCs should be included.

The 2 year work plan, based on the proposal by the initial Executive Committee should be adopted here but there is a clear need to include and strengthen its financial and technical support aspects. The 2015 agreement needs to be informed by the latest scientific analysis, which has been endorsed with high confidence by all countries. CAN demands that loss and damage due to reaching the limits of adaptation should be captured explicitly as a separate element in the agreement.

Thank you.

Topics: 

CAN Intervention in the COP20 CMP Plenary on Agenda Item 8, 3 December, 2014

 

Thank you Mr. President,

I am Juliane Voight speaking on behalf of the Climate Action Network.

The Kyoto Protocol has many elements that we find important precedents for the 2015 Agreement.

  • Its framework allows long term viability, having commitments that can be updated at the same time in every commitment period
  • It has a robust MRV and common accounting system allowing for comparability of effort and clarity of commitment and effort
  • It defines common accounting rules and the basket of gases and common global warming potentials for them, that are counted towards the economy-wide reduction commitment, increasing comparability and ensuring ‘difficult’ emissions are not excluded
  • It has a compliance system
  • It has economy-wide, quantified absolute emissions reduction commitments for developed countries

The KP set the benchmark on these types of commitments for developed countries. And there should be more ambition, and no backsliding, in the 2015 Agreement.

The KP established market mechanisms, which have left lots of challenges in their wake. These mechanisms need to be reformed to go beyond offsetting to provide net mitigation at the global level, IF any use of market-based mechanisms is assumed at all in the post-2020 regime.

We call upon all Parties that have not yet done so, to ratify the amendments for the second commitment of the Kyoto Protocol.

Thank you Mr. President.

CAN Intervention in the COP20 ADP Opening Plenary, 2 December 2014

Thank you Co-Chairs,

My name is Aissatou Diouf and I am speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

The work to be done here in Lima is the most important platform to ensuring an ambitious outcome in Paris on all levels. 

In workstream 2 Parties must ensure the TEM mandate is reformed to address the mitigation gap as well as focus on means of implementation, to move away from discussion mode to actions.

Decision text on INDCs must include a process to assess the adequacy and equitability of proposed INDCs in an ex-ante ambition assessment and equity review prior to COP 21, which should involve civil society participation.  The INDCs should not just be based on mitigation, but should include provisions on finance and voluntary provisions on adaptation.  CAN calls for a much greater role for civil society, local civil society and other stakeholders to be encouraged and empowered to assist in the development of a nations’ INDC.

Within the 2015 agreement, CAN calls for long term global goals of phasing out all fossil fuel emissions and to phase in a 100% renewable energy future with sustainable energy access for all, as early as possible, but not later than 2050. In order to achieve this there needs to be adequate scaling up of finance through a global public finance goal. 

Thank you. 

CAN Intervention in the COP20 COP/CMP Opening Plenary, 1 December 2014

 

Spanish Version

Gracias Sr. Presidente, 

Mi nombre es Alejandra Watanabe y hablo en representación de Climate Action Network.

Lima necesita tomar medidas concretas para fomentar la confianza que garantice la acción climática y un resultado exitoso en 2015. 

En septiembre, más de 400 000 personas marcharon en Nueva York para decirle al mundo: “Necesitamos más Acción Climática ahora”. Un mes después, el IPPC ratificó este llamado. Algunos países han realizado anuncios climáticos muy alentadores para sus metas post-2020 y otros deberían seguir su ejemplo antes de marzo 2015. 

Celebramos la capitalización inicial del Fondo Verde para el Clima (GCF), pero esto no debe distraernos de un DESAFÍO MAYOR: escalar el financiamiento HASTA el periodo 2020 y MUCHO MÁS ALLÁ, dentro del nuevo acuerdo incluyendo una meta de financiamiento público. 

El perfil del acuerdo de 2015 será definido por 3 resultados clave que necesitan ser alcanzados en Lima: la ambición pre-2020, los requisitos de información para las contribuciones nacionales previstas determinadas (INDCs) y los elementos del acuerdo.

Para el Grupo de Trabajo 2, las discusiones necesitan ser traducidas en acciones reales y estas deben ser complementadas por una hoja de ruta global de FINANCIAMIENTO al 2020 para alcanzar $100 mil millones. 

Para las INDCs, necesitamos ciclos de contribuciones de 5 años, con el primer conjunto de contribuciones para el periodo 2020 – 2025. Estas deben ser evaluadas y revisadas desde el inicio para que cumplan con lo requerido por la ciencia y los principios de equidad, y en caso necesario, escalarlas a un mayor nivel. 

El acuerdo de París debe incluir una meta a largo plazo para eliminar progresivamente las emisiones provenientes de combustibles fósiles, así como impulsar la inclusión de energías renovables al 100% en la medida de lo posible pero tomando como límite el periodo 2050.

Gracias. 

English Version

Thank you Mr. President,

I am Alejandra Watanabe speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network. 

Lima needs to deliver bold confidence building measures to ensure climate action and a successful outcome in 2015.

In September more than 400,000 people marched in New York City to tell the world, ‘More Climate Action, Now’.  One month later, the IPCC reaffirmed this call. 

Some countries have made encouraging climate announcements for their post-2020 targets and others should follow suit before March 2015. 

We welcome the initial capitalization of the GCF, though it shouldn’t distract from the bigger CHALLENGE of scaling up finance UNTIL 2020, AND ALSO BEYOND, within the new agreement including a public finance goal. 

The contours of the 2015 agreement are going to be defined by 3 key outcomes to be finalized in Lima: pre 2020 ambition, information requirements on INDC and elements of the agreement.

For workstream 2, discussions need to be translated into real action and this action should be complemented by a global 2020 FINANCE roadmap to get to the $100 billion.

For INDCs, we need 5 year cycles of contributions with the first set of contributions from 2020 – 2025. Before these are finalized, they need to be assessed and reviewed for scientific adequacy and equity and scaled up if found inadequate.

The Paris agreement must include a long term goal of phasing out fossil fuel emissions and phasing in 100% renewable energy as early as possible but no later than 2050.

Thank you. 

Organization: 

CAN Intervention in the COP20 SBI Opening Plenary, 1 December 2014-not delivered

Thank you Co-Chairs,

I am Neoka Naidoo speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

IPCC AR5 highlights the urgent need to scale up adaptation and that limits are being surpassed. There has been notable progress related to the institutional set up for adaptation and loss and damage. The roadmap for developing countries to reduce vulnerability of their populations through the development of National Adaptation Plans is getting clearer. The recent pledges for the Green Climate Fund have provided a much needed boost, though the money must actually flow.

However, needs on the ground are much higher than what is currently on the table.  The expected 4 degree increase by the end of the century, according to the current emission reduction trajectory, paints a devastating picture for poor people and ecosystems. In Lima, Parties must ensure that adaptation becomes a central and integral element of the 2015 agreement including a link between expected levels of global temperature increase based on collective mitigation ambition and the support provided to poor countries and communities, recognizing human rights. We also expect progress with regard to support and guidelines for non-LDCs to prepare National Adaptation Plans.

Efforts to operationalize the loss and damage mechanism must be undertaken through the adoption of an ambitious 2 year work plan with both technical and financial capacity to address loss and damage affecting vulnerable populations, countries and ecosystems.

Thank you.

 

Topics: 
Organization: 

CAN Intervention in the COP20 SBSTA Opening Plenary, 1 December 2014-not delivered

Thank you Chair,

I am Vositha Wijenayake speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

As Parties will deliberate on the Framework for Various Approaches (FVA) we would like to stress the following:

An FVA must be seen in the context of the 2015 agreement and must not prejudge the work of the ADP on the 2015 agreement.

Before establishing an FVA, experience with existing carbon markets needs to be taken into account. The vast majority of CDM and JI offsets come from non-additional projects. Experiences with JI show that even with sound accounting rules, low quality offsets can lead to higher global emissions than if commitments were met purely domestically.  

The use of market mechanisms under a new agreement must under no circumstances undermine mitigation targets and it must not threaten sustainable development and human rights.

Therefore, only countries with ambitious domestic mitigation commitments, in line with the 2C degree target and equity principles should be eligible to participate in international markets. Moreover, the use of internationally traded units has to be supplemental to domestic mitigation efforts.

All internationally traded offsets have to meet environmental integrity standards as set out in Durban to ensure that traded units are real, permanent, additional and verified.

Robust and comprehensive accounting rules must be established to avoid double counting and to enable achieving net atmospheric benefits.

Thank you.

 

Organization: 

Pages

Subscribe to Tag: CAN Intervention