Ed Miliband: China tried to hijack Copenhagen climate deal

Climate secretary accuses China, Sudan, Bolivia and other leftwing Latin American countries of trying to hijack Copenhagen.

Ed Miliband has pointed the finger at China over the outcome of the UN climate summit in Copenhagen. Photograph: Anja Niedringhaus/AP

John Vidal, environment editor
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 20 December 2009 20.30 GMT



The climate secretary, Ed Miliband, today accuses China, Sudan, Bolivia and other leftwing Latin American countries of trying to hijack the UN climate summit and "hold the world to ransom" to prevent a deal being reached.

In an article in the Guardian, Miliband says the UK will make clear to those countries holding out against a binding legal treaty that "we will not allow them to block global progress".

"We cannot again allow negotiations on real points of substance to be hijacked in this way," he writes in the aftermath of the UN summit in Copenhagen, which climaxed with what was widely seen as a weak accord, with no binding emissions targets, despite an unprecedented meeting of leaders.

Miliband said there must be "major reform" of the UN body overseeing the talks – the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) – and on the way negotiations are conducted. He is said to be outraged that UN procedure allowed a few countries to nearly block a deal.

The prime minister, Gordon Brown, will repeat some of the UK's accusations in a webcast tomorrow when he says: "Never again should we face the deadlock that threatened to pull down [those] talks. Never again should we let a global deal to move towards a greener future be held to ransom by only a handful of countries."

Only China is mentioned specifically in Miliband's article but aides tonight made it clear that he included Sudan, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Cuba, which also tried to resist a deal being signed.

But in what threatened to become an international incident, diplomats and environment groups hit back by saying Britain and other countries, including the US and Australia, had dictated the terms of the weak Copenhagen agreement, imposing it on the world's poor "at the peril of the millions of common masses".

Muhammed Chowdhury, a lead negotiator of G77 group of 132 developing countries and the 47 least developed countries, said: "The hopes of millions of people from Fiji to Grenada, Bangladesh to Barbados, Sudan to Somalia have been buried. The summit failed to deliver beyond taking note of a watered-down Copenhagen accord reached by some 25 friends of the Danish chair, head of states and governments. They dictated the terms at the peril of the common masses."

Developing countries were joined in their criticism of the developed nations by international environment groups.

Nnimmo Bassey, chair of Friends of the Earth International, said: "Instead of committing to deep cuts in emissions and putting new, public money on the table to help solve the climate crisis, rich countries have bullied developing nations to accept far less.

"Those most responsible for putting the planet in this mess have not shown the guts required to fix it and have instead acted to protect short-term political interests.".

In a separate development, senior scientists said tonight that rich countries needed to put up three times as much money and cut emissions more if they were to avoid serious climate change.

Professor Martin Parry of Imperial College London, a former chair of the UN's Nobel prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said: "Even if non-binding pledges made at Copenhagen are completely fulfilled, there is a 1.5C 'gap' leading to unavoided impacts. The funding for adaptation covers impacts up to about 1.5C, and the mitigation pledges to cut climate change down to 3C at most ... leaving 1.5C of impacts not avoided because of the failure of adaptation and mitigation to close the gap."

The UN climate chief, Yvo de Boer, said: "The opportunity to actually make it into the scientific window of opportunity is getting smaller and smaller."

Tougher climate target unveiled

Reposted from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7673748.stm

Ed Miliband says greenhouse gas target is 'tough but doable'

The government has committed the UK to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by the middle of this century.

Climate Change and Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said the current 60% target would be replaced by a higher goal.

He told MPs the government would not "row back" on green issues in the light of the current economic crisis.

He also warned the big energy companies they face a crackdown on "unfair" pricing policies in his first statement as head of the new department.

Mr Miliband told MPs the government accepted all the recommendations of the report from Lord Turner's Committee on Climate Change.

The target does not include aviation or shipping emissions - but Mr Miliband said they would "play a part" in the government's overall strategy.

European row

It came as European Union leaders agreed to stick to their plan to cut greenhouse gases - despite a surprise demand by Poland and six other member states to drop them to ease the impact on industry struggling with the global credit crunch.

Speaking at the end of a two-day summit, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said: "The deadline on climate change is so important that we cannot use the financial and economic crisis as a pretext for dropping it".

Our children and our grandchildren will really not thank us if we just carry on and let this problem get worse Ed Miliband Climate change and energy secretary

But although all 27 leaders agreed to stick to the aim of cutting emissions by 20% by 2020, Mr Sarkozy acknowledged he faced a tough task in getting a unanimous deal on how to share out the burden of the switch to cleaner energy by the December deadline.

Mr Miliband also stressed the importance of sticking to climate change commitments despite the economic downturn.

He told MPs: "In our view it would be quite wrong to row back and those who say we should, misunderstand the relationship between the economic and environmental tasks we face."

'Tough but do-able'

He said he wanted to achieve a cross-party consensus on climate change, but added: "We all know that signing up to an 80% cut in 2050, when most of us will not be around, is the easy part.

"The hard part is meeting it - and meeting the milestones that will show we're on track."

Mr Miliband also announced that the government was ready to legislate to force energy companies to introduce fairer pricing for customers with pre-payment meters if they would not do so voluntarily.

He also signalled new help to encourage small-scale electricity generation though technology such as home-based solar panels and wind turbines.

He told the Commons the Energy Bill would be amended to introduce a "feed-in tariff" to guarantee prices for micro-generation projects which are able to supply electricity to the national grid.

It's like telling everyone you're going on a calorie-controlled diet but not counting cream cakes Steve Webb Liberal Democrat

Speaking later to BBC News, he said the 80% target was "tough but it is do-able" and could be met through measures including renewable fuels, nuclear power and individuals "doing things differently".

He said changes to the climate were "happening much quicker than we anticipated or even feared a few years ago" and it was "right to step up the pace".

"Our children and our grandchildren will really not thank us if we just carry on and let this problem get worse. The costs that they will face will be all the greater if we do that," he added.

Airport expansion

In a letter to Mr Miliband, Lord Turner said the tougher target would be "challenging but feasible", and could be achieved at a cost of 1% to 2% of GDP in 2050.

He also said a cut of 80% on 1990 levels by 2050 should cover all the major greenhouse gases - not just carbon dioxide - and all sectors of the UK economy, including shipping and aviation.

But because of practical problems in allocating emissions of international transport to the UK, they should not be included in the Climate Change Bill's five-yearly carbon budgets, he said.

Instead the overall target should be "at least 80%", with greater reductions in sectors covered by the bill if aviation and shipping did not make sufficient cuts by the middle of the century, he said.

But Lib Dem climate change and energy spokesman Steve Webb said Mr Miliband's decision not to include aviation and shipping in the 80% target made a mockery of his commitments.

"It's like telling everyone you're going on a calorie-controlled diet but not counting cream cakes.

"As we saw when the government gave the green light for Stansted expansion, there is a huge gap between what ministers say on climate change and what they actually do."

Shadow climate change secretary Greg Clark, for the Conservatives, welcomed Mr Miliband's announcements.

He said: "The choice between aggressive and ambitious action on carbon reduction and a successful, powerful economy is, in fact, not a choice at all - they are one and the same."

Mr Miliband's statement was also welcomed by environmental campaigners, including the RSPB, World Development Movement, WWF and Christian Aid.

Friends of the Earth executive director, Andy Atkins, said his group was "absolutely delighted" but added: "We cannot leave the cuts in aviation and shipping emissions to chance.

"The government must listen to the concerns of the public and majority of MPs who want to see a law that covers all the UK's emissions."

97 months left

• Comment is free

But October marked an unprecedented opportunity for the US and UK to tackle climate change

Comments (37)

• 
• • Andrew Simms
  • guardian.co.uk,
  • Saturday November 01 2008 20.00 GMT
  • Article history

October was a month that creaked and cracked. The insurance industry, already deeply implicated in the international financial crash, was battered by the fall-out from hurricanes Ike and Gustav. Their bill is estimated to be around $30bn (£18.2bn), far higher than predicted, according to Lloyd's of London. To show that God has a dark - you could call it "carbon black" - sense of humour, in the same month the oil giant BP's quarterly profits of £6.4bn cracked another record high, while Shell's rose to £6.6bn.

The sky creaked in another way too. Relentless coverage of global warming, a deluge of green corporate claims, legislative flurries and a redesign of government departments should suggest progress on climate change. But the figures tell another, worrying tale. Far from going down, the global growth rate of carbon dioxide emissions is spiking upwards.

Findings from the Global Carbon Project this month showed that the global average percentage rise since the year 2000 is now over three times higher than the previous decade, rising again significantly in the last year. These growth rates are now worse than the worse case scenario used by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to model potential global warming.

Levels of carbon in the energy mix for both rich and poor countries are also going up.

Government confusion here in Britain was captured by two stories. In one, Ed Miliband, new minister at the new Department for Energy and Climate Change, announced the government's commitment to cutting emissions by 80% by 2050. In the other, the Evening Standard reported that "ministers are planning to water down EU pollution curbs in order to allow Heathrow airport to expand". Attempts at satire prove redundant. And the heat on the government over Heathrow is rising.

It was a victory, but not a straightforward one when, after relentless pressure, the government announced that greenhouse gas emissions from aviation and shipping would finally be included in targets for the climate change bill. The quirk comes from the fact that not all emissions are the same. It is unclear whether the government has understood that the full global warming impact of emissions from aviation can be up to five times greater than their headline carbon figure. Because of the particular chemistry of emissions from planes, and where and how they enter the atmosphere, tonne-for-tonne of carbon, aviation emissions are far more damaging than those from road, rail or sea.

Elsewhere in the international system, however, there were glimmers of bolder visions. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) announced a new green economics initiative. It adopted the moniker of a "green new deal", echoing the report of the same name published in July. At the UNEP launch the head of UNEP, Achim Steiner, lambasted what he called the "totally inadequate" response of public policy both to climate change and a range of other ecological crises. The environment secretary Hillary Benn, sitting to his right, just about managed to keep a straight face.

Last month saw another more literal cracking, of sea ice. According to research from the Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling at University College London, in some areas Arctic sea ice was up to one fifth thinner than usual for the time of year.

It's now 19 years since the Berlin wall came down, drawing the line under the old Eastern bloc. For all its brashness, triumphalism and smug self-satisfaction, finance-driven capitalism has managed to reign supreme for fewer than two decades before falling apart.

No one is more synonymous with the era of financial liberalisation than Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the US Federal Reserve. Under cross-examination by the US House oversight committee his words were heavy with the pathos of shattered illusion and hubris brought to earth, "I discovered a flaw," he said, "in the model that I perceived is the critical functioning structure that defines how the world works."

But in the aftermath, in Britain and the US, there are intriguing possibilities. Following nationalisation of much of the finance sector, two governments formerly wedded to light touch, or even absent regulation, find themselves owning, in effect, great swathes of their countries' economies – banks, homes, buildings, infrastructure and much else besides. Gordon Brown said that now is a time of new and innovative thinking. He is now in a direct position to influence the investment policies and revolutionise the energy use and efficiency of much the economy.

It may be that governments still entangled in the habitual rhetoric of free markets, are embarrassed by their new, unaccustomed role. It could be that, having outsourced the exercising of power to the market place, they feel unpractised and not sure what to do. But the climate clock is still ticking – even speeding up. And, they now have an enormous opportunity to do what democratically elected governments are meant to do – take responsibility and protect their people from disaster.

• Andrew Simms is taking the global temperature each month as he counts down the 97 months before the world enters a new, far more perilous phase of global warming.

MPs rebelling over climate bill

The government has committed to an 80% cut in carbon emissions by 2050

source: BBC

The government is fighting to head off a backbench rebellion over its plans to exclude aviation and shipping from the UK's greenhouse gas targets.

They are being left out because there is no system for sharing responsibility for international emissions.

Fifty-six Labour MPs are demanding the sectors be included, enough to defeat Gordon Brown when the Climate Change Bill goes to a Commons' vote next week.

Campaigners say it is "unfair" to give the sectors "special treatment".

Friends of the Earth said a climate change law which left out emissions from planes and ships was like "a drink-driving law that doesn't count whisky".

'Acid test'

Last week, Climate Change and Energy Secretary Ed Miliband announced a government commitment to an 80% cut in carbon emissions by 2050.

But that did not include emissions from international flights and shipping after the government-commissioned Turner Report said it would be too difficult to share out responsibility for the gases they produce between different countries.

Rebel MPs now say they want that decision overturned.

They want an amendment to the Climate Change Bill to state that if emissions from aviation and shipping continue to grow, the government must compensate with extra CO2 cuts elsewhere.

This law is a world first - we now need to make sure it's world-class Nigel Griffiths MP

BBC environment analyst Roger Harrabin said he understood ministers may be about to concede that principle, but will insist there is still uncertainty about how to account for international emissions.

The amendment was tabled by Edinburgh South MP Nigel Griffiths, who said he was "very encouraged" by discussions he has had with Climate Change Minister Joan Ruddock.

'World first'

"Addressing issues of aviation and marine shipping emissions is now the acid test of the government's aim to achieve a genuine reduction in CO2 emissions," he said.

"This law is a world first - we now need to make sure it's world-class."

Friends of the Earth executive director Andy Atkins said: "Giving special treatment to the shipping and aviation industries is unfair and doesn't make sense.

"Ed Miliband has promised he will deal with emissions from planes and ships, but voluntary commitments are not enough.

"This pledge needs to be set in law - only then will the public have confidence that this and future governments are going to deliver."

Tougher climate target unveiled

Ed Miliband says greenhouse gas target is 'tough but doable'

The government has committed the UK to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by the middle of this century.

Climate Change and Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said the current 60% target would be replaced by a higher goal.

He told MPs the government would not "row back" on green issues in the light of the current economic crisis.

He also warned the big energy companies they face a crackdown on "unfair" pricing policies in his first statement as head of the new department.

Mr Miliband told MPs the government accepted all the recommendations of the report from Lord Turner's Committee on Climate Change.

The target does not include aviation or shipping emissions - but Mr Miliband said they would "play a part" in the government's overall strategy.

European row

It came as European Union leaders agreed to stick to their plan to cut greenhouse gases - despite a surprise demand by Poland and six other member states to drop them to ease the impact on industry struggling with the global credit crunch.

Speaking at the end of a two-day summit, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said: "The deadline on climate change is so important that we cannot use the financial and economic crisis as a pretext for dropping it".

Our children and our grandchildren will really not thank us if we just carry on and let this problem get worse Ed Miliband Climate change and energy secretary

But although all 27 leaders agreed to stick to the aim of cutting emissions by 20% by 2020, Mr Sarkozy acknowledged he faced a tough task in getting a unanimous deal on how to share out the burden of the switch to cleaner energy by the December deadline.

Mr Miliband also stressed the importance of sticking to climate change commitments despite the economic downturn.

He told MPs: "In our view it would be quite wrong to row back and those who say we should, misunderstand the relationship between the economic and environmental tasks we face."

'Tough but do-able'

He said he wanted to achieve a cross-party consensus on climate change, but added: "We all know that signing up to an 80% cut in 2050, when most of us will not be around, is the easy part.

"The hard part is meeting it - and meeting the milestones that will show we're on track."

Mr Miliband also announced that the government was ready to legislate to force energy companies to introduce fairer pricing for customers with pre-payment meters if they would not do so voluntarily.

He also signalled new help to encourage small-scale electricity generation though technology such as home-based solar panels and wind turbines.

He told the Commons the Energy Bill would be amended to introduce a "feed-in tariff" to guarantee prices for micro-generation projects which are able to supply electricity to the national grid.

It's like telling everyone you're going on a calorie-controlled diet but not counting cream cakes Steve Webb Liberal Democrat

Speaking later to BBC News, he said the 80% target was "tough but it is do-able" and could be met through measures including renewable fuels, nuclear power and individuals "doing things differently".

He said changes to the climate were "happening much quicker than we anticipated or even feared a few years ago" and it was "right to step up the pace".

"Our children and our grandchildren will really not thank us if we just carry on and let this problem get worse. The costs that they will face will be all the greater if we do that," he added.

Airport expansion

In a letter to Mr Miliband,

Lord Turner said the tougher target would be "challenging but feasible", and could be achieved at a cost of 1% to 2% of GDP in 2050.

He also said

a cut of 80% on 1990 levels by 2050 should cover all the major greenhouse gases - not just carbon dioxide - and all sectors of the UK economy, including shipping and aviation.

But because of practical problems in allocating emissions of international transport to the UK, they should not be included in the Climate Change Bill's five-yearly carbon budgets, he said.

Instead the overall target should be "at least 80%", with greater reductions in sectors covered by the bill if aviation and shipping did not make sufficient cuts by the middle of the century, he said.

But Lib Dem climate change and energy spokesman Steve Webb said Mr Miliband's decision not to include aviation and shipping in the 80% target made a mockery of his commitments.

"It's like telling everyone you're going on a calorie-controlled diet but not counting cream cakes.

"As we saw when the government gave the green light for Stansted expansion, there is a huge gap between what ministers say on climate change and what they actually do."

Shadow climate change secretary Greg Clark, for the Conservatives, welcomed Mr Miliband's announcements.

He said: "The choice between aggressive and ambitious action on carbon reduction and a successful, powerful economy is, in fact, not a choice at all - they are one and the same."

Mr Miliband's statement was also welcomed by environmental campaigners, including the RSPB, World Development Movement, WWF and Christian Aid.

Friends of the Earth executive director, Andy Atkins, said his group was "absolutely delighted" but added: "We cannot leave the cuts in aviation and shipping emissions to chance.

"The government must listen to the concerns of the public and majority of MPs who want to see a law that covers all the UK's emissions."

But the National Housing Federation warned that unfair energy pricing would continue under Mr Miliband's plan.

A spokesman said: "It is excellent news that Ed Miliband has quickly come to the conclusion that the prepayment meter rip off is unacceptable.

"But even with the measures he envisages, prepayment meter customers will still pay as much as £88 more than others - as Mr Miliband seems to have accepted the argument by the energy regulator Ofgem that a premium for maintaining the meters is acceptable."