EU dictates how its fast start funding will be used

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Bonn, Germany

04 June 2010 Bonn, Germany --- Vanuatu is one of the 11 countries chosen to pilot climate resilience and capacity building projects, funded as part of the European Union’s fast start climate change funding commitment promised in Copenhagen in 2009.

At a side event organised at the margins of the Bonn climate change talks, representatives from five major European nations that have made pledges to the climate change fast start financing briefed delegates on their commitments.

Norbet Gorben of German’s environment ministry said under the Global Climate Change Alliance, the EU was providing €40 million to pilot climate resilience projects in African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states, which includes Vanuatu in the Pacific.

“The first tranche of the funds will be given in 2010. Half of the funds will be targeted at adaptation programmes. We are targeting the ‘smallest of the small.’

“We will build on the national adaptation plans and assist with adaptation practices and provide budget support, said Gorben.

At the same time, the EU has allocated €4.2 million to Fiji, Tonga and Vanuatu for adaptation projects.

“Tonga is looking at land use, while in Fiji the focus is on reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) and Vanuatu on putting together its NAPA database on climate change.

“This assistance will be extended due to demand from 12 Pacific countries, said Gorben.

The European Union insists the funding initiative pledged in Copenhagen is a process of ‘learning by doing.’ Its member states will continue dialogue with developing countries to get to know their needs and expectations better, according to an EU briefing paper.

“Lessons learnt will be very valuable in helping to decide where to direct funding not yet allocated.”

It said experience with fast start funding will be key in shaping the post 2012 climate financing architecture.

The European Union has pledged €2.4 billion annually until 2012 to combat the impact of climate change. This, it says represents a third of the global commitments made by mostly industrialised countries that supported the Copenhagen Accord in 2009.

“Despite the recent economic difficulties and strong budgetary constraints, all 27 member states of the EU contributed to this funding.

63 percent of the EU confirmed pledge in 2010 will go towards mitigation projects while the rest will be for adaptation. A huge bulk of that funding will support reducing emissions from forests.

The EU has also directed that 61 percent of its pledge be distributed through bilateral channels and only 39 percent through the multilateral process including financial mechanisms within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

With governments tightening their coffers in the wake of the global financial crisis, development campaigners are calling for more transparency in the initial stages of climate change funding for developing countries.

Campaigners say they want to ensure climate funding promises are over and above current development aid (ODA), rather than transferred from existing projects.

The finance of climate change mitigation and adaptation in developing countries is a key pillar in the climate negotiations. 

There is a lot of slippery language around ‘new and additional’,” said Rob Bailey, a policy advisor on climate change for Oxfam.

According to the Copenhagen Accord, “this funding will come from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance.”

In the Copenhagen Accord, developed countries agreed to provide vulnerable nations with “new and additional resources” of about US$30 billion for period 2010-2012 to help them with climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Australia, France, Japan, Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States have collectively agreed in the context of an ambitious and comprehensive outcome in Copenhagen to dedicate USD3.5bn as initial public finance towards slowing, halting and eventually reversing deforestation in developing countries.

Climate Action Network (CAN) Europe said the EU has failed to provide clarity about where the €7.2 billion pledged for 2010-2012 for immediate climate finance needs in developing countries will come from.

 

“This unwillingness to be clear about the sources of their fast start finance is only corroborating the grape vine, which contends that a great majority in the EU intend to recycle their ODA commitments and baptise it climate finance,” said Augustine B. Njamnshi of the Pan-African Climate Justice Alliance.

“This lack of clarity is frustrating developing countries, especially those who quickly associated with the Copenhagen Accord with the hope of getting something from the package.”

EU leaders this week in Bonn insisted the money pledged would be ”fresh,” language that does not exclude previously committed development aid from being double counted as climate finance. The lack of country-by-country detail in today’s report deepens green and development groups’ concerns that the commitment made in Copenhagen that funds would be new and additional is not being kept.  In addition, there is not enough detail on how the money will be divided between projects.

“Helping poor countries adapt to climate change impacts and develop in a low carbon way are both equally important,” said Tim Gore, Oxfam International EU Climate Adviser.

 “However, about twice as much has been allocated for low carbon development rather than adaptation, which means that at the moment, the bulk of the money is more likely to go to larger emerging economies instead of the World’s poorest,” said Gore.

Ms Komai will be covering the Bonn Climate Change negotiations from 31 May – 11 June 2010, thanks to support from Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). She will provide daily coverage of the negotiations via PACNEWS and the SPREP website www.sprep.org, the climate pasifika blogspot, http://climatepasifika.blogspot.com and the PINA Green page http://green.pina.com.fj/

Q&A with Espen Ronneberg

By Makareta Komai in Bonn, Germany for Climate Pasifika

01 June 2010, Bonn Germany - As the world looks to Cancun, Mexico for a possible global agreement on climate change, negotiators from 185 countries are gathered in Bonn, Germany for two weeks to try and put together the building blocks of an agreement to take to Mexico. The Pacific is part of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) negotiating group in United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). 

Makereta Komai of Climate Pasifika talks to SPREP’s climate change adviser, who is in Bonn, to give a brief rundown of preparation for the Bonn climate change talks.

Espen: We started off with preliminary meetings of the Alliance of Small Island States where we went through the different agendas, and discussed concerns that members have with the agenda items. We tried to divide up the group into technical groups like we normally do so that we have a mixture of Pacific, Caribbean and Indian Ocean countries in the different subject matters. Each technical group then went into the issues with a bit more detail and provided feedback to the larger group so we could well be prepared for the sessions. You may have heard different delegations speaking on different areas- for example Kiribati and Cook Islands speaking on adaptation, Micronesia on mitigation issues and so forth. We are starting the work proper as of today and we are going through the agenda of the meeting and providing inputs to the chairs of the subsidiary bodies. Tomorrow we go into the working groups and it will be the same sort of exercise. One of the new things at this session is that the chairs have asked their co-ordinators to come up with draft conclusions before there has been discussion.

Q: Why the change?

Espen: To try and save on time feeling that at least some of the points were well known beforehand and can be reflected. We were generally a little bit surprised by that but we, in retrospect were able to say that these can be done for some topics, especially the issues that have almost been reached by consensus. We could follow that procedure. But there are some other issues that we think that we need to have full discussion before conclusions are put together.

Q: Are these conclusions from items from Copenhagen that had received consensus?

Espen: Those types of issues we can work on are already on the table but there are some issues that we have not discussed for a whole year now. As you know the agenda for Copenhagen had to be compressed so some items that were simply put off are now being looked at during this session here in Bonn. A whole year has passed and there is new information that we feel that there is a need to have detailed discussion before we out down on paper any form of conclusions to those discussions. So there is a lot of procedural things going on at the moment. Not substantial as yet but it complicates things if it’s brought later and we will spend a lot of time trying to address it later.

Q: The draft text before AWG-LCA has some parts of the Copenhagen Accord integrated into it. But there have been lot of criticism on using the Accord as the basis for an agreement, if it’s to be reached in Cancun. What is the position of AOSIS?

Espen: There was an AOSIS submission given in late April. Analysing the chair’s text, you can see that all but one of the AOSIS raised has been included in the LCA text. Off course some of them are in brackets because there are repeated or alternative ideas to what was raised by AOSIS. All the points raised by AOSIS except for one have been accepted. 

Q: Which one is it?

Espen: It’s the one that deals with safeguarding small island states as a for benchmark for any agreement.

Q: Is that at least a plus for AOSIS?

Espen: We have secured the inclusion of all but one of the issues that we submitted. On the issue of the Copenhagen Accord, I think the group is fairly pragmatic on this issue. They are willing to look at the text on its own merits, let’s discuss what’s there and see what it means for us. I don’t think anyone from the group will be adamant that the exact wording put forward has to be reflected in the documents. It’s a negotiation and the group will take a practical view of what is there and analyse it and make sure our key concerns are reflected.

Q: Is AOSIS still optimistic? There is already a lot of predictions that Cancun will be another Copenhagen and this exercise is in futility and an agreement will be only be reached in South Africa in 2011? Is that the feeling of AOSIS?

Espen: I think AOSIS is optimistic that we can make progress if we really look at the LCA text, there is a lot of progress made and that has been reflected in the new text. There are some fundamental issues that need to be discussed that are fairly cross cutting. We need to have the time to have full discussion and the political will from all parties to really want to make a deal. We can be optimistic and work on trying to bridge all these gaps to make sure we understand fully the positions of others so that we can come to a compromise solution that is acceptable to the entire membership of UNFCCC. 

Q: Yvo doe Boer talked about the trust and goodwill gap that needs to be fixed here in Bonn. Does AOSIS trust the positions of other negotiating groups, especially those that don’t agree with AOSIS position, like the U.S and other industrialised nations?

Espen: This is an interesting point. I don’t think the issue of trust has been as big an issue for the Pacific and AOSIS, with the exception perhaps of being left out of some negotiations in Copenhagen. In terms of moving us forward, the best way is to have good dialogue on the critical issues so that we can have everyone’s concerns fully reflected. Off course one of the key concerns from the Pacific is that we want to see strong emissions reduction. If the rules are so flexible that you can reach your target by creative book keeping, that’s not really in our interest. We want to see actual, real reductions because that is what’s important. We need to have emissions reduced to a level that safeguard the Pacific and that requires actual, real action in terms of mitigation and also requires proper financing and support for adaptation.

Ms Komai will be covering the Bonn Climate Change negotiations from 31 May – 11 June 2010, thanks to support from Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). She will provide daily coverage of the negotiations via PACNEWS and the SPREP website www.sprep.org, the climate pasifika blogspot, http://climatepasifika.blogspot.com and the PINA Green page http://green.pina.com.fj/

$20 per year will not solve climate change, people’s voices must be heard

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Bonn, Germany

03 June 2010, Bonn, Germany --- Ambassador Pablo Solon, Bolivia’s Ambassador to the United Nations has highlighted his country’s concern over current United Nations climate negotiations. 

And, he said voices of the real victims of climate change are being excluded from the negotiations.

"In April 2010 more than 35,000 people from 140 countries gathered in Cochabamba, Bolivia and developed the historic Cochabamba People's Agreement a consensus-based document reflecting substantive solutions to the climate crisis." Ambassador Solon said.

"We are therefore deeply concerned that the new text proposed as a basis for climate change negotiations does not reflect any of the main conclusions reached in Cochabamba. We made this proposal in line with UN rules, by the April deadline, but still they have not been included." Ambassador Solon said.

"Proposals from Cochabamba have been side-lined but every single element of the so called 'Copenhagen Accord' has been included, even though it was not recognised by the United Nations. This means that on finance we are only considering $100 billion a year to respond to climate change - just $20 per person in the developing world - to solve climate change. It's clear that climate change impacts are not going to be dealt with for just $20 per person." Ambassador Solon said.

"We urge the UN to embrace the conclusions reached by social movements, indigenous peoples and international civil society in Cochabamba. It is both undemocratic and non-transparent to exclude particular proposals from the negotiations, and it is imperative that the United Nations listens to the global community on this issue critical to humanity." Ambassador Solon said.

"In total 18 different ideas were excluded, including 50% emission cuts for rich countries by 2017, a 300ppm greenhouse gas stabilisation target, a proposal for a declaration on the Rights of Mother Earth and a new, realistic assessment of finance needed to fight climate change." Ambassador Solon said.

"There cannot be an equitable, transparent, and inclusive negotiation process, nor true solutions to the urgency of the climate crisis, if the UN negotiating text ignores the voices of the peoples of the world that the negotiators should be representing." Ambassador Solon said.

Ms Komai will be covering the Bonn Climate Change negotiations from 31 May – 11 June 2010, thanks to support from Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). She will provide daily coverage of the negotiations via PACNEWS and the SPREP website www.sprep.org and the climate pasifika blogspot, http://climatepasifika.blogspot.com

AOSIS reiterates its call for legally binding outcome

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Bonn, Germany

03 JUNE 2010 Bonn, Germany --- The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) on Tuesday called on climate change negotiators from around the world gathered in the German city of Bonn to recommit to achieving an ambitious outcome in Cancun, Mexico later this year.

This goal is consistent with the Bali Action Plan and has become critical in the protection of Small Island Developing States (SIDS), the most vulnerable countries in climate change.

AOSIS is concerned with the consistent lowering of expectations for Cancun in recent weeks. These negotiations commence at the end of the Pacific cyclone and at the start of the Atlantic hurricane seasons, both of which bring death and destruction.

In the face of press statements that seek to dismiss the importance and ambition of Cancun, the chair of AOSIS, Ambassador Dessima Williams, stated: “We need the most ambitious, comprehensive, legally-binding and just outcome to secure commitments.”

“Such ambition remains our mandate and we continue to honour the wisdom and political call of our leaders,” said the Grenada diplomat, referring to the 2009 Declaration of the AOSIS Heads of State and Government. 

AOSIS maintains that these ambitions are well founded in science and in the experiences of the small island states and others around the world.

In the ensuing six months since Copenhagen, emissions may have increased in some parts of the world and overall environmental conditions may have worsened.

A Global governance architecture for managing climate change remains of great urgency and requires compelling action to stem climate change deterioration for everyone, but especially for small island states.

"The Copenhagen meeting may have postponed an outcome for at least a year, but it did not postpone the impacts of climate change," said Yvo de Boer, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Two working groups will meet during the Bonn gathering, with one focusing on a new negotiating text and the other concentrating on emissions reduction commitments for the 37 industrialised countries that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol for the period beyond 2012.

Taking action now to avoid the adverse effects of climate change is the least cost alternative to protecting everyone and to ensuring economic sustainability.

Ms Komai will be covering the Bonn Climate Change negotiations from 31 May – 11 June 2010, thanks to support from Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). She will provide daily coverage of the negotiations via PACNEWS and the SPREP website www.sprep.org and the climate pasifika blogspot, http://climatepasifika.blogspot.com

Pacific countries fight to keep Kyoto Protocol to safeguard the Adaptation Fund

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Bonn, Germany

03 June 2010 Bonn, Germany --- Most Pacific Island Countries are fighting to keep the only legally binding agreement under the United Nations Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)  - the Kyoto Protocol alive to ensure that the Adaptation Board serves its purpose.

The Fund, established under the Kyoto Protocol was set up to finance concrete adaptation projects for developing nations that are vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change.

It has become evident from two years of climate change negotiations that rich industrialised nations want to kill off the Kyoto Protocol.

During the failed Copenhagen global climate change talks in 2009, the charge against developed countries was led by China and Group of 77 nations, one of the most influential negotiating groups within the UNFCCC. They accused Australia, the European Union and the United States for pushing for a post-2012 pact that allows more flexible emissions reduction that could lead to states wriggling out of meeting tough and binding emissions cuts.

Kyoto currently binds 37 industrialised nations, except the United States, to greenhouse gas emissions targets during 2008-12 but developing nations are not obliged to meet hard, economy-wide targets and won't agree to such targets in any new agreement.

Cook Islands lead negotiator on adaptation - Pasha Carruthers said the Adaptation Fund is the only guaranteed and predictable financing mechanism for vulnerable states, most of them in the Pacific.  

“We like the way the Board is structured because it’s more representative of developing countries than any other financial institutions under the Convention.

Currently, Fiji is one of the two representatives from Small Islands Developing States serving on the Adaptation Board.

“We are also advocating that the share of proceeds from the Clean Development Mechanism is not enough and that it be extended to other sources.

In May last year, the World Bank as a trustee of the Adaptation Fund completed the first sale of certified emissions reductions (CER), earning USD$18.7 million. This was earned from the sale of 1.13 million CERs.

As of August 2009, funds available to developing countries to assist with adaptation projects was USD$8.99 million.  This estimated to go up to USD$480 million by 2012, according to the Fund’s Annual Report 2009.

Two percent of the proceeds from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) project feed the Adaptation Fund revenue pool.

Under its funding policy guidelines, the Fund is specific with its requirement. It will only consider ‘concrete’ project proposals that address the adverse impacts and risks posed by climate change.

It’s understood that Solomon Islands is the only Pacific Island Country and also a member of the Least Developed Country that has submitted a project proposal for inaugural funding from the Adaptation Fund.

Speaking during the Ad hoc Working Group Long Term Co-operative (AWG-LCA) session, the United States expressed its deep concerns for the delays raised by many Parties in accessing the Fund.

“The U.S is amazed that developing countries are still having difficulties and we want to know where the money was going.

It now wants a full review of the resources including its adequacy to ensure full financing is available to developing countries.

Bangladesh on behalf of LDC’s wanted to see a major ramp up of support for the Adaptation Fund.

It described as ‘peanuts’ the current two percent of levies from the Clean Development Mechanism as a pool of revenue for the Adaptation Fund.

A report jointly released by WWF-Global Conservation and German Watch at the Bonn climate talks said the Adaptation Fund is the most appropriate funding mechanism that accommodates the needs and priorities of vulnerable developing States.

“It works with direct access in those countries which can nominate a domestic institution with sufficient capacity, and has the most representative governance structures, with specific seats for LDC’s and SIDS.”

Apart from the Adaptation Fund, there are two other multilateral institutions funding adaptations in developing countries. These are the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) and the Pilot Programme for Climate Resilience (PPCR).

PPCR was set up under the World Bank, with the purpose to finance pilot programmes for integrating adaptation into national planning and was set up outside the UNFCCC mandate.

The WWF/German Watch report estimates that by 2012, the Adaptation Fund will have US$342 million while the LDCF will have contributions of US$223 million to deal with the special needs of 48 least developed countries.

Analysing the current negotiating climate, the two international NGOs said ‘adaptation has been outlined as one of the areas in which progress could be made in the run-up to Cancun.

“However, as the preliminary analysis has shown, substantial differences on real substance still remain.

They predicted five possible scenarios – no agreement on adaptation text, a weak adaptation text, an adaptation framework without strong financial mechanism, an adaptation framework with strong financial mechanism and a comprehensive post 2012 agreement.

Ms Komai will be covering the Bonn Climate Change negotiations from 31 May – 11 June 2010, thanks to funding from Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). She will provide daily coverage of the negotiations via PACNEWS and the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme’s climate pasifika blogspot, http://climatepasifika.blogspot.com

Climate Change Fund pledges begin to pour in, Australia promises $355 million

By Makereta Komai in Bonn, Germany for Climate Pasifika

01 June 2010 Bonn, Germany --- Australia is one of the first countries to make available short term climate change funding, as promised by industrialised nations in Copenhagen.

The first tranche of $355.4 million was announced in Bonn Tuesday at the beginning of the climate change talks.

Of these funds, $178 million will go towards international climate change adaptation, targeting Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS), which have limited capacity to adapt to the adverse impact of climate change.

Another $9 million will go towards the replenishment of the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF), a financing mechanism set up under the United Nations Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC).

Australia assured that it was working with other donors to minimise bureaucratic processes to ensure the funds are accessible to vulnerable countries in a transparent manner.

Spain, on behalf of the European Union also announced that it was committing 2.4 billion Euros for the fast track financing for adaptation.

The United States announced an allocation of $375 million in 2010 to Climate Investment Fund and a further $50 million for the replenishment of the LDC Fund. In the 2011 budget, it has set aside $1.4 billion, a 40 percent increase in additional funding to climate change.

China in response urged Australia, the EU and other industrialised nations making contributions to the fast track funds to ensure that the funds are new and additional to their normal overseas development assistance (ODA) commitment.

“Contributors to the fast track funds should be sincere and not just change the label of the funds to fulfil the pledge made in Copenhagen.

Developed nations promised to deploy US$30 billion in short term financing from 2010-2012 to kick-start climate change action in developing countries.

“These funds are indeed important for the survival of small island developing states, as explained to us by the representative of Grenada, on behalf of small island states,” pleaded a Chinese official in his intervention on the chair’s proposed text.

Despite the flow of kick-start funds for climate change, there is still no clear guideline on who is to manage and disburse the funds.

Ms Komai will be covering the Bonn Climate Change negotiations from 31 May – 11 June 2010, thanks to funding from Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). She will provide daily coverage of the negotiations via PACNEWS and the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme’s climate pasifika blogspot, http://climatepasifika.blogspot.com

Changes to negotiating process without Parties input, AOSIS hopes it will bring positive outcome

By Makereta Komai, Climate Pasifika in Bonn, Germany

01 June 2010, Bonn Germany --- In a departure from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiating process, chairpersons of the two ad hoc committees that guide the negotiations have drawn up draft conclusions even before the talks begin here in Bonn.

“It’s a new thing introduced by the chair before Parties input, said Espen Ronneberg, climate change adviser for the Secretariat of the Pacific Environment Programme (SPREP).

“The chair feels that it can save time because some of the points are well known beforehand and can be reflected in the conclusions.

“The Alliance of Small Islands States (AOSIS) was a little surprised by the chair’s decision but in retrospect we believe that these can be done for some topics, especially the issues that have almost been reached by consensus. We could follow that procedure, said Ronneberg.

But, he cautioned that full discussion needs to be done on some cross cutting issues before any conclusions are put together.

Possible conclusions may have arisen from adaptation, technology development and transfer and reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD), whose negotiating texts received consensus in Copenhagen.

An agreement should be possible on these issues in Mexico, said Yvo de Boer after the Copenhagen talks failed in December 2009.

If Parties were hoping for a compromise on the negotiating text and the final conclusions, it may just become an uphill battle.

Tuvalu started the ball rolling with its attack on the Umbrella Group of countries which has Australia, New Zealand, United Nations, Canada and other powerful industrialised nations.

The no-nonsense Ian Fry, Tuvalu’s climate change adviser criticised the Group for what he called its ‘lack of concern for climate change’ through its ‘lack of vision and ambition’ for the Long term Cooperative Action (LCA) process. Instead, the Group is pushing for provisions of the Copenhagen Accord to be included in a likely agreement expected to come out of Cancun in December.

Fry was one of the first few speakers that took the stand at the beginning of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long Term Co-operative Action (AWG-LCA) session in Bonn Tuesday morning.

He expressed Tuvalu’s concerns to what he called ‘short term quick fixes’ to financing mechanisms.

“Tuvalu does not believe in short term quick fixes or fast track financing. There needs to be scaled up funding from developed countries.”

Fry said the response measures on the economic and social consequences of climate change are inappropriate and not realistic.

“Tuvalu will seek deletion of chapter 7 of the text if it’s not improved, said Fry.

Chair of the AWG-LCA, Margaret Mukahanana-Sangarwe has been praised for her initiative to prepare a draft text, now seen as a compromised text, before the Bonn talks. The text draws on the outcomes of the LCA conclusions in Copenhagen and the agreement reached by 29 countries, led by the United States.

The text, according to Ronneberg, reflects all but one of the 15 issues raised by AOSIS.

“It’s the one that deals with safeguarding small island states as a benchmark for any agreement.”

“I think it had a largely political origin as a practical issue and I don’t know how the group is going to deal with it, said Ronneberg.

“On the issue of the Copenhagen Accord, AOSIS as a group is fairly pragmatic about it. They are willing to look at the text on its own merits, discuss it and see what it means for us as a group.

“I don’t think anyone from the group will be adamant that the exact wording put forward has to be reflected in the documents. It’s a negotiation and the group will analyse it and make sure our key concerns are reflected.”

Ronneberg said AOSIS remains optimistic despite predictions that Cancun will be another Copenhagen.

“We can make progress on the LCA text but there are some fundamental issues that need to be discussed that are fairly cross cutting. We need to have the time to have full discussion and the political will from all parties to really want to make a deal.

“We can be optimistic and work on trying to bridge all these gaps to make sure we understand fully the positions of others so that we can come to a compromise solution that is acceptable to the entire membership.

“One of the key concerns from the Pacific is that we want to see strong emissions reduction. If the rules are so flexible that you can reach your target by creative book keeping, that’s not really in our interest.

“We need to have emissions reduced to a level that safeguard the Pacific that requires actual, real action in terms of mitigation and also requires proper financing and support for adaptation.

The full transcript of the interview with Espen Ronneberg will also be available soon.

Ms Komai will be covering the Bonn Climate Change negotiations from 31 May – 11 June 2010, thanks to funding from Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). She will provide daily coverage of the negotiations via PACNEWS and the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme’s climate pasifika blogspot, http://climatepasifika.blogspot.com