Kyoto negotiator Prescott issues Stern Warning to US at Copenhagen

Former UK Deputy Prime Minister and EU Kyoto negotiator John Prescott issued a stern warning to the US that they must do much more to help a secure a deal at Copenhagen.

Speaking at the Danish Parliament to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, Mr Prescott publicly criticised the US Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern for saying emissions was ‘just maths.’

Mr Prescott, who is at Copenhagen as the Council of Europe’s Rapporteur on Climate Change, said:

“I was very concerned with remarks from the US Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern in which he pointed out that China, by 2020, will be emitting far more than America.

“Todd Stern also said that with emissions “you’ve just got to do the maths. This isn’t a matter of politics or morality or anything else. It’s just maths.”

“Well let me give my interpretation of the maths. The US emits 20 tonnes of CO2 per person a year compared to about 6 tonnes for China, 2 for India and less than 1 for Africa. The US also, according to the World Bank, has a GDP per person seven times higher than China.

“Such remarks offend anyone with a sense of fairness and certainly goes against the agreed UN principle that governs climate change negotiations – that of common and differentiated responsibilities, as we emphasised in our Council of Europe resolution. In other words, the polluter pays.

“That attitude certainly makes the relationship and the possibility of an agreement between rich and poorer countries, much more difficult.

“It’s not just about maths. It’s about equity and social justice, which President Obama has talked an awful lot about in the last few months.”

Mr Prescott, who negotiated on behalf of the EU at Kyoto in 1997, said President Obama should make the most of his executive power to increase the US emissions target.

He added: “These two great nations of China and the US need to redouble their efforts to find an agreement.

“It is said that China’s target of reducing carbon intensity by 40-45% by 2020 underestimates what it will actually achieve.

“And the US President now has the power, confirmed by his courts, to act to reduce the threat of greenhouse gases to the heath of his nation without the necessary agreement of Congress.

“That’s why I think its possible that the US could maker a greater contribution than its target of a 17% emissions cut.

“So the world calls upon China, the US and Europe to make a greater contribution to secure a credible political agreement at Copenhagen. Or as the Council of Europe has called it, a New Earth Deal.

“Because if we don’t, our children and our children’s children will never forgive us.”

Ends

Full text of Mr Prescott’s address at the Danish Parliament

It feels that 12 years on I’m back at Kyoto. All those hopes and fears of an agreement (or lack of one) are running rife through the Bella Centre.

Having met and talked to a number of my former Kyoto negotiators here, we’re all agreed it seems to be following the same path.

So is this going to be Kyoto 2 or a separate Copenhagen agreement?

I have to say I’m in the Kyoto 2 camp.

It has to build on the existing treaty – not replace it.

That may involve a twin track process in the final political agreement that runs alongside Kyoto and leads to a legally binding agreement at a future COP.

I believe we’re 80% there on a deal, just as we were at Kyoto at this stage. This is particularly impressive as back in 1997 we found agreement from 47 industrial countries – now we’ve got to find consensus from 192!

However there’s still a long way to go and just as we experienced back then, there’ll be lots of walking and talking, and negotiations into the night.

Also as at Kyoto, Europe’s playing a major part in forging that agreement.

Gordon Brown in getting the leaders to come here for the final push and Ed Miliband working night and day as the Chair of the committee dealing with the finance for the agreement.

Ed is handling the pivotal issue that will make or break a Copenhagen deal.

There are of course other issues such more funding, greater emissions cuts, the timetable for an agreement along with verification of the commitments.

In fact our Council of Europe resolution called for the right to live in a clean, safe and healthy environment a human right.

However we really do need to avoid the elephant traps – the late issues such as a demand from G77 to commit the agreement to stabilising the increase in temperature from two degrees to 1.5.

I understand their motive and the intention but it threatens the possibility of an agreement in the last 60 hours, as the UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has made clear. Failure is not an option here.

We must also be careful about intemperate language during these negotiations.

I was very concerned with remarks from the US Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern in which he pointed out that China, by 2020, will be emitting far more than America.

Todd Stern also said that with emissions “you’ve just got to do the maths. “This isn’t a matter of politics or morality or anything else. It’s just maths.”

Well let me give my interpretation of the maths. The US emits 20 tonnes of CO2 per person a year compared to about 6 tonnes for China, 2 for India and less than 1 for Africa. The US also, according to the World Bank, has a GDP per person seven times higher than China.

Such remarks offend anyone with a sense of fairness and certainly goes against the agreed UN principle that governs climate change negotiations – that of common and differentiated responsibilities, as we emphasised in our Council of Europe resolution.

In other words, the polluter pays.

That attitude certainly makes the relationship and the possibility of an agreement between rich and poorer countries, much more difficult.

It’s not just about maths. It’s about equity and social justice, which President Obama has talked an awful lot about in the last few months.

These two great nations of China and the US need to redouble their efforts to find an agreement.

It is said that China’s target of reducing carbon intensity by 40-45% by 2020 underestimates what it will actually achieve.

And the US President now has the power, confirmed by his courts, to act to reduce the threat of greenhouse gases to the heath of his nation without the necessary agreement of Congress.

That’s why I think its possible that the US could maker a greater contribution than its target of a 17% emissions cut.

So the world calls upon China, the US and Europe to make a greater contribution to secure a credible political agreement at Copenhagen. Or as the Council of Europe has called it, a New Earth Deal.

Because if we don’t, our children and our children’s children will never forgive us.

So let the Copenhagen agreement be a testament to future generations that the world had the courage to find a global solution to the global problem of climate change.