ECO is wondering how much more clarity this process needs. Amongst many others, the UNEP and the World Bank have pointed out that while there is still a chance to restrict temperature rise to two degrees centigrade, we are not on track to avoid dangerous climate change. ECO thinks that there is no disagreement about that.
It is crystal clear: there is not enough ambition.
So where are we on next steps to address this issue and agree on essential and urgent mitigation action? Well, the Umbrella group seems to be telling us that there is no need to worry because they are making progress – they have a proposal for a new process! Yes, the Umbrella Group is proposing to clarify the pledges under 1(b)(i) and have suggested a two year programme to do so.
ECO would like to get a couple of points in this proposal clarified. You’re saying you need more time to talk? And that there will be no agreement of common accounting rules here?
Surely a bit of common accounting for 1(b)(i) pledges would allow the mist to clear and help Parties to check comparability of effort? Just set out a carbon budget for 2020. If you think there is no need to compare apples and oranges, you could just check the number! And a little hint – we have a tried and tested way of comparing pledges – you know, under the KP... Now that would help everyone understand what’s what. And if the Umbrella Group signed up then that would sort the eligibility issue too.
At this point a couple of lines from a song spring to mind: a little less conversation, a little more action please. Now that’s a song we should all be singing...