No Money, No Action

While the PM was trying to look important, the G20 was avoiding getting anything done on climate change.

In case you missed it buried in Tuesday paper the G20 withdrew several crucial statements at the last minute about international climate change financing from its official communique.

Climate change financing is a series of programs - derived from public aid and private carbon markets - to help developing countries pay for global warming mitigation and adaptation programs. It is crucial for convincing major developing countries to accept emissions cuts. For example Indonesia (the world’s third largest emitter) has said it will cut emissions 41 per cent by 2020 on business as usual levels if a financing plan is rolled out.

Without a substantial financing plan there will not be an international climate change agreement in Copenhagen or beyond.

For months those watching international climate change talks have been hoping the UN/G20 Pittsburgh meeting would build some momentum on financing towards Copenhagen.

It did not. It was a bust.

So far the UK is the only developed country to have put up any proposal with numbers in it ($A125 billion, with a 10 per cent overlap between new money and existing aid programs). However, the British Labour Government has flagged that was just a first offer and it could end up being more.

It is now clear Australia has developed some plans on financing at the departmental level, but it is not talking about it publicly and details are scarce. It is understood our climate change negotiators are waiting for a EU position to be revealed later this month and for Rudd to make a political announcement before properly engaging with the issue at climate change talks.

US President Obama earlier this year signalled the Pittsburgh meeting would be the place for the scope and mechanisms of a financing proposal to be established. Indeed Treasurer Wayne Swan briefed NGOs before he left for an earlier G20 Finance ministers meeting that he expected the scope of the financing plan to come out of the meeting.

Very quickly it was realised that hard numbers were not coming out of the Pittsburgh meeting (i.e. how much should be spent). So the leaders and their staff instead began working out some directions and principals for financing and worked up a draft version of the communique.

As revealed on Tuesday in The Age and Herald, and for the record, the draft communique stated these important principles:
* Green growth is crucial for sustainable economic growth.
* Climate finance must be integrated with development planning for poorer nations, including a low-emissions growth plan for any country seeking to access financing. That would need involvement from the World Bank and other like organisations.
* Public financing for mitigation and adaptation has to be scaled up urgently and significantly.
* Public financing should be additional to current aid budgets.
* Carbon markets need to be improved, with greater oversight, and expanded.
* Both public money and carbon markets must be used to leverage private money.
But at the last minute (and really it was very last minute) these got stripped out. Nobody is yet sure by who but the European Union is the primary suspect.
By stripping those sentiments from the communique (as generic as they were) the G20 killed off any momentum built during the UN leaders meeting days before for a climate change agreement.

Only two statements on climate change financing survived in what was finally released by the G20 leaders.

1. As leaders of the world’s major economies, we are working for a resilient, sustainable, and green recovery. We underscore anew our resolve to take strong action to address the threat of dangerous climate change. We reaffirm the objective, provisions, and principles of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), including common but differentiated responsibilities. We note the principles endorsed by Leaders at the Major Economies Forum in L’Aquila, Italy. We will intensify our efforts, in cooperation with other parties, to reach agreement in Copenhagen through the UNFCCC negotiation. An agreement must include mitigation, adaptation, technology, and financing.
and...
2. We welcome the work of the Finance Ministers and direct them to report back at their next meeting (in November) with a range of possible options for climate change financing to be provided as a resource to be considered in the UNFCCC negotiations at Copenhagen.

*YAWN*

To start with the last G20 finance ministers meeting in early September blew off financing discussions completely because it was too busy with limiting what Richard Branson gets paid.

The reporting in Australia on the conclusions of the G20 meeting hailed Rudd’s ‘‘victory’’ for his role in replacing the G8 with the G20 as the ‘‘premier forum for international economic co-operation.’’ Rudd was reported as convincing Obama to accept the change.

Well bless, Kevin. The big ‘‘breakthrough’’ if the G20’s treatment of climate change financing is any indication was to get 20 countries to do nothing instead of eight.

Meanwhile in Bangkok - where climate change negotiations are dutifully taking place this week - the negotiating teams are without a fresh political mandate and avoiding financing like a syringe on a beach.