2:00

at the climate conference. Worrying

2:02

too, the presiding of this conference

2:04

is Sultan Ahmed Al Jabbar, who

2:06

also chairs the Abu Dhabi National

2:09

Oil Company, and who said this.

2:11

There is no science out

2:14

there or no scenario out there that

2:16

says that the face out of fossil

2:18

fuel is what's going to achieve 1.5. 1.5

2:22

is my last step. And a

2:25

face down and a face out of fossil

2:27

fuel, in my view, is

2:29

inevitable. It is essential, but

2:32

we need to be real, serious, and

2:35

pragmatic about it. If

2:37

time is running out, should we use

2:39

what's left to chart a different course?

2:42

Or is this delegate from an endangered

2:44

Pacific island thinks make the best of

2:46

a process that so far has disappointed?

2:49

Because this is the only platform we

2:51

have, we must keep going on. We

2:53

must keep fighting and keep

2:56

pushing forward because there is no

2:58

alternative when you're dealing with matters

3:00

of existential crisis such as climate

3:03

change. That's the real story. Now,

3:09

let me introduce you to our real

3:11

story panel. Rachel Kite served as special

3:13

representative for the UN Secretary General and

3:15

is a long standing advocate for sustainable

3:18

energy. She was vice president of the

3:20

World Bank and is a visiting professor

3:22

at the Blavatnik School of Government at

3:24

the University of Oxford here in the

3:26

UK. Rachel, welcome. What would you say

3:28

is the mission of the COP? The

3:31

mission of the COP is to get

3:33

every government to

3:36

agree collectively

3:39

on action that is commensurate

3:41

to the crisis. And

3:43

over the years, that means

3:46

that the subject matter under discussion

3:48

is broadened and broadened and broadened

3:50

as we have understood that climate

3:52

change involves everything. So for the first

3:54

time this year, we're talking

3:56

about food and nutrition and

3:58

health as being... convention

6:01

and its mission is very clear

6:03

and I quote, its mission is

6:05

to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations at

6:08

a level that would prevent human-induced

6:11

interference with the climate system, which

6:13

means that mission has failed already.

6:16

So we are already seeing changes

6:18

in our climate. We are seeing

6:20

it literally outside your window in

6:23

every part of the world. So

6:25

that is the original mission of the

6:27

COP. It is a conference of the

6:29

negotiators to come together

6:31

to have a meaningful treaty

6:33

to stabilize this problem, which

6:35

we haven't done. Now

6:37

the mission of the COP is to do as

6:40

well as it can, to

6:42

try to at least keep things from

6:45

getting worse, given that they

6:47

are already out of hand. Right. Well,

6:49

as you probably deduced listening to this, this is COP 28 or

6:51

the 28th meeting of the

6:53

Conference of the Parties or Countries,

6:55

which adopted the UN Framework Convention

6:58

on Climate Change at the Earth Summit held in

7:00

Brazil in 1992. Years

7:03

later, at COP 21 in France,

7:05

under the Chairmanship of Foreign Minister

7:07

Laurent Fabius, the parties or countries

7:09

agreed this. The

7:13

Paris Agreement in 2015 aimed to keep

7:15

global temperature

7:23

increases to no more than two

7:26

degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and

7:28

ideally 1.5 degrees above. The

7:32

UN's first global stocktake of the implementation

7:34

of that Paris Agreement, which was released

7:36

in September rather than COP 28 itself,

7:38

found that the world has already

7:40

warmed about 1.2 degrees

7:43

above pre-industrial levels. And this

7:45

summer, the increase reached 1.5 degrees. Cassie

7:48

Flynn, take us back to Paris

7:51

and those original pledges. The

7:54

significance of that 1.5 degree

7:56

figure, why was it regarded as so

7:59

important? have

10:00

to do more than they did last time, but first of all they're

10:02

going to have to try to get back on

10:04

track, but they're also going to have to

10:06

understand that climate to be tackled means that

10:09

they have to take a whole of economy

10:11

approach. So the transport sector as well as

10:13

the energy sector, agriculture

10:15

and land use. We focus

10:18

very much on carbon dioxide, but

10:21

there are other gases out there which

10:23

are heating the planet even faster, including

10:25

methane which has been a big part of the

10:27

discussion here. It's half a degree of warming if we

10:29

can almost get rid of

10:31

all methane out of the gas industry

10:33

and reduce substantially

10:35

the methane emissions from, for

10:38

example, rice production, food loss

10:40

and waste and livestock

10:42

production. So we have

10:44

the technology to be able to get

10:46

rid of methane that buys you the

10:49

time of half a degree of warming

10:51

while really difficult moving away from carbon

10:53

dioxide across the energy systems of the

10:55

world takes place.

10:57

So yeah, total economy, all

11:00

gases, a new generation of NDCs, governments will

11:02

have to come back with those in the

11:04

next rounds of these talks. Adam Najam, just

11:07

pick up one last thought on that. The

11:10

German climate envoy, Jennifer Morgan, told a news

11:12

conference in Dubai last week, with current efforts

11:14

we're going to see a temperature rise of

11:16

2.5 degrees Celsius to 2.9 degrees Celsius. That's

11:19

way beyond the 1.5 ambition. Yeah,

11:22

it's way beyond and it's very optimistic,

11:24

actually. You know, I'm not

11:26

I'm not a big fan of Paris. What

11:28

Paris did was that it replaced action with

11:30

promise. And on the 1.5, it was

11:34

exactly rightly said this was pushed by

11:37

the most vulnerable countries by the developing

11:39

countries, the ones who had contributed the

11:41

least which were at greatest risk. The

11:44

industrialized countries didn't want 1.5. But

11:46

here is where we are at 1.5. I've been

11:48

lead author to two IPCCs.

11:51

I know of no science, no

11:53

science whatsoever, by which

11:55

we can reach 1.5. I hope I'm wrong.

11:57

I will give anything in my life. to

12:00

be wrong on this. But

12:02

at this point, just looking outside the window,

12:04

looking what has happened this year,

12:07

last year, the year before that,

12:09

looking at those so-called national reports,

12:11

they don't add up. They cannot add

12:13

up to 1.5. They cannot add

12:16

up to anywhere near 1.5. And

12:18

countries are not even doing what they said they

12:21

would do. And so

12:23

we are in very dire states. What

12:25

you could call the front line of global warming

12:28

is the world's island communities, the ones

12:30

who will be most affected as the

12:32

glaciers melt, sea water levels rise, and

12:34

hotter conditions force fish to see cooler,

12:37

deeper waters further away from coastal fishing

12:39

communities. 65 million people live in the

12:41

39 countries who make

12:43

up the small island developing states

12:46

group in the Caribbean, East Atlantic,

12:48

Pacific and Indian Oceans. Vishal

12:50

Prasad is a delegate to COP 2080

12:53

flew from Fiji to Dubai, leaving

12:55

just after a cyclone, although no

12:57

one weather event can be attributed

12:59

to climate change, shorter, more frequent

13:01

cyclones have been predicted. Vanuatu, a

13:04

neighbour in Fiji, is currently experiencing

13:06

back-to-back cyclones. Normal weather

13:08

cyclone seasons are from November to

13:10

April. But we've had the

13:12

first off-season cyclone hit Vanuatu and then

13:15

make its way a bit closer towards

13:17

Fiji in October, which went beyond category

13:19

three, which is a severe level storm.

13:21

And even in Fiji, just before leaving

13:24

COP a week ago in the same

13:26

week of COP, actually, we had a

13:28

cyclone that passed through the islands. And

13:30

I'm being told that as we speak,

13:32

there's another that's circling around the Solomon

13:35

Islands. So these are just

13:37

examples of how frequent

13:39

and how severe cyclones are

13:41

becoming as a result of climate change. The

13:44

projections are that for this

13:46

cyclone season, the South Pacific

13:48

will have somewhere between 12

13:51

to 14 tropical cyclones. And

13:53

that's completely unprecedented. The

13:55

implications of that are severe, presumably in

13:57

terms of the potential damage

14:00

loss of life, reduction in

14:02

economic activity for your fellow Fijians

14:04

and others in the different islands

14:06

around the Pacific. Is there anything

14:08

that has been done so far

14:11

in the COP process which has

14:13

had an impact to

14:15

help in those situations, do you think? Well,

14:18

there's been a lot that's been going

14:20

on in COPs and really we seem

14:22

to not be addressing the root causes

14:24

of the crisis. We're trying to find

14:27

band-aid solutions that provide aid, for example,

14:29

whenever cyclone hits, trying to

14:31

then reload, looking at adaptation. But

14:33

we seem to be failing to address

14:35

the root causes of the crisis which

14:37

is removing fossil fuels and a complete

14:39

phase out of fossil fuel and moving

14:41

countries to actually address the

14:43

plight of Pacific island countries, other small

14:46

island countries. And so everything that's being

14:48

done at the moment seems to be

14:50

very band-aid solutions. But as long as

14:52

we fail to talk about and really

14:55

get to the root of the crisis, we'll

14:58

continue facing this problem. When you

15:01

talked to your fellow Fijians about

15:03

this process, when you told them you were

15:05

going off to COP, what did they say

15:07

to you? Well

15:10

there is not a lot of expectation

15:12

really because we've been coming to COPs

15:15

for quite a while. Of the three

15:17

COPs that have been here, we've been

15:19

talking about things like a fossil fuel

15:21

phase out and just playing with words

15:23

from a phase out to a phase

15:25

down. Should we use the fossil fuel

15:27

word? Should we talk about unabated fossil

15:29

fuels? And it's just like more of

15:31

the same I've been seeing without any

15:34

result. And so the expectations are quite

15:36

low back home and there's good reason

15:38

for that. But because this is the

15:40

only platform we have, we must

15:42

keep going on. We must keep

15:44

fighting and keep pushing forward because

15:46

there is no alternative when you're

15:48

dealing with matters of existential crisis

15:50

such as climate change. Vishal Prasad,

15:52

Cassie Flynn from the UN Development

15:54

Programme, is it now too late

15:56

for some of the small islands?

16:00

too late, but I think that it

16:02

really represents the stakes

16:04

of this and it is existential.

16:07

When you are on a small island

16:09

and a cyclone is coming your way,

16:11

it is life and death. And you

16:13

see the impacts even

16:15

on the social side, you know, Cyclone

16:18

Winston in Fiji in a matter of

16:20

an hour, wiped out a third of

16:22

their GDP. And that set in

16:24

a what will be

16:27

decades long trying to build

16:29

back. And then many economies

16:31

go into great amount of debt to

16:33

be able to build back some of

16:35

the infrastructure that they lost in a

16:38

matter of moments. And then only

16:40

to have a cyclone come back

16:42

and damage that infrastructure. It is a

16:44

cycle that is set up that

16:47

puts these economies at huge,

16:49

huge risk. And I think

16:51

in these conversations in

16:54

Dubai with the arrival

16:56

of the loss and damage fund that

16:58

is meant to address some of the

17:00

most extreme stakes of

17:02

climate when you have the loss

17:04

of coastlines and communities that, you

17:06

know, what does the world do?

17:08

This is where this is so

17:11

important. And we have to be

17:13

able to meet the scale of

17:15

it. We've had about $700 million

17:17

pledged to this

17:19

loss and damage fund so far. But

17:21

when you look at what the need

17:23

is for places like Fiji, for places

17:25

like Pakistan, for places in East Africa

17:27

that are facing this extreme level of

17:29

drought, this is a drop

17:31

in the bucket for the level of

17:33

need. Right. So what's been achieved at

17:36

COVID-28 so far? I mean, we're halfway through, Rachel.

17:38

Well, I think the first 72 hours where a

17:42

sort of shock and awe of

17:45

announcement after announcement after announcement,

17:47

engineered very much by the COP presidency

17:49

who have adopted this attitude of, you know,

17:52

everybody else talks and we just do things.

17:54

And, you know, you saw agreements

17:56

to, you know, for more than 100 countries.

18:00

to travel renewable energy, double

18:02

energy efficiency. You saw the

18:04

creation of new funds in

18:07

addition to the initial pledging into the loss

18:09

and damage fund, as Cassie has said. You

18:11

saw ministerial agreements on methane, on

18:14

the role of food system transformation

18:16

in climate change. So on and

18:18

on and on. I mean, quite extraordinary

18:21

list of activities. But of course, as

18:23

we said at the beginning of the

18:25

program, this is about getting countries to

18:27

negotiate with each other and

18:29

commit to implementation action on

18:32

that ambition. And the

18:34

further you get into the cop, so

18:36

the focus moves to negotiated text. And

18:38

there's some really fundamental issues around which there

18:41

is not consensus. And now the job of

18:43

the UAE is not to be the UAE,

18:45

and not to sort of shepherd

18:48

forward lots of big announcement. But now the

18:50

UAE has to broker deals across

18:52

the entire planet in terms of what

18:54

governments will be prepared to agree to

18:57

here. Adel Najam, you've

18:59

talked already about these nationally

19:01

determined contributions. In other words,

19:03

individual countries come up with

19:05

their idea for what they

19:08

can do. But the

19:10

pledge is non-binding. Is

19:12

this process slowing the

19:15

prospects of getting to an international

19:17

convention that everybody signs up to?

19:22

I think it is. In some ways it

19:24

is. If even

19:26

some of them get fulfilled, we are better

19:28

off than none of them. But

19:30

overall, I think, to the process there is, it

19:33

is not just that the pledges are non-binding, but

19:36

we are not even sure if they are in good

19:38

faith. One thing I've learned

19:41

from 28 cops is if you're going

19:43

to make a promise you don't intend to keep, then

19:45

make it really big. All

19:48

your way out of it, like the $100

19:50

billion in Paris that turned out to be

19:52

monopoly money. This was the

19:54

$100 billion for the kind of damage

19:57

to those countries that mitigate against

19:59

the... the ones who are most exposed, like

20:01

those islanders. Yes. Since you are

20:03

now playing to social media, you're playing

20:05

to you, media, make the big headline.

20:09

And by the time it turns out to

20:12

figure out whether it happened or not, we

20:14

are all dead, kind of, as

20:16

Cain said. I know I'm

20:19

sounding cynical, but I do

20:21

think that this notion of

20:24

pledge and awe has gotten

20:26

out of hand. I

20:28

would much rather have meaningful,

20:31

concrete, legal agreement

20:35

with saying, this is what you do,

20:37

this is what you cannot do, this

20:39

happens if you do not live by

20:41

your agreement. I

20:43

would much rather have that at a

20:45

smaller level than these bombastic

20:47

numbers that are thrown, which turn

20:49

out not even to be bombastic.

20:51

I agree with Adil. I

20:55

agree with him on the finance and I

20:57

think changing the financial system is one of

20:59

the things that's creeping along

21:01

actually on the sides and underneath these

21:03

kinds of meetings. But where I disagree

21:05

with him is that there

21:07

should have been a binding treaty from the

21:10

top down. Both he and I teach negotiation

21:12

or have taught negotiation in the past. And

21:14

that deal was not on the table. It

21:17

was not on the table from the United

21:19

States, not from China, not from Saudi Arabia.

21:21

And so this bottom up agreement was one

21:23

that was palatable to China and to the

21:26

US and frankly has protected Paris through the

21:28

rise of populism in the West. Thank you

21:30

for that. And we are going to talk

21:33

about possibly alternative models in the second half

21:35

of this. Just before we take a break,

21:37

can I get the last word

21:39

from Cassie Flynn? Cassie, can you

21:42

respond to Adil's point about these

21:44

nationally determined but voluntary pledges? Well,

21:46

I think something that's really important about this

21:49

is that these pledges don't happen in

21:51

a vacuum. It's not a matter of

21:53

a country arriving, making a pledge, and

21:55

that it only exists within this process.

21:58

They exist in the real world. And

22:00

I think that applies to not just the

22:02

level of ambition when we're talking about a

22:04

country making huge energy

22:07

transformations or farms transformation

22:09

or transportation. It

22:12

needs to be economy wide. But

22:14

it also applies to accountability. I

22:16

think here, this is where these

22:19

pledges, we all as countries,

22:23

as society need to be

22:25

paying attention to these pledges. And I think we're

22:27

starting to see some real promising

22:29

ways that even groups

22:32

within countries are starting to look

22:34

at some of these pledges and

22:36

starting to say, hey, government, you

22:38

need to fulfill this. I

22:40

mean, we've seen it in Montana, right? Young people

22:42

talking about how they have a

22:45

constitutional right to a healthy environment.

22:47

And therefore, every energy project needs to

22:49

be evaluated for its impacts on climate. So in

22:51

other words, it's down to us. That

22:53

the court agree with me. So it's down

22:56

to us to hold our government's own feet

22:58

the flames as it were to make the

23:00

more pledges they've made at this international event.

23:02

I think we all have a responsibility on

23:04

this. It can't just exist within this process.

23:07

We all need to know what these pledges

23:09

are and we need to hold governments accountable

23:11

for the words that they

23:13

say at these conferences. A

23:15

reminder, you're listening to the real story

23:17

from the BBC World Service with me,

23:20

Sean Lay. This week, we're

23:22

asking whether the process to tackle

23:24

climate change, which depends on annual

23:26

COP meetings is failing. We've

23:28

already charted what's happened in previous years

23:31

along with the UN's own verdict that

23:33

on current plans, the world is not

23:35

going to keep average global temperatures below

23:37

two degrees Celsius over pre-industrial levels. Nevermind

23:39

the 1.5 degrees regarded by scientists as

23:41

the tipping point. In the next half

23:44

hour, we're going to look at improvements

23:46

for the process and alternatives to help

23:48

meet that objective. Let me reintroduce our

23:50

panel. Rachel Kite served as

23:53

special representative for the UN Secretary

23:55

General and is a long-standing advocate

23:57

for sustainable energy. She was

23:59

vice president. the World Bank and is a

24:01

visiting professor at the Blavatnik School of Government

24:03

at the University of Oxford here in the

24:06

UK. She's in Dubai as

24:08

is Cassie Flynn, who is now

24:10

Global Director of Climate Change at

24:12

the UN Development Programme. Cassie Flynn

24:14

was Senior Advisor to the Prime

24:16

Minister of Fiji when he was

24:18

presiding at COP23 in 2017. Adil

24:21

Najam has just returned from

24:23

Dubai to Massachusetts in the

24:25

United States where he's Professor

24:27

of International Relations and Earth

24:29

and Environment at Boston University.

24:31

He's originally from Pakistan. In

24:33

the summer, Professor Najam became

24:35

President of WWF, the Worldwide

24:37

Fund for Nature. Now, renewable

24:39

sources of energy, wind, solar

24:41

and others in preference to

24:43

carbon-generating fossil fuels are central

24:45

to achieving the ambition. Further

24:47

down the road than anyone

24:49

else is Kenya in East Africa.

24:51

Although at present only 75% of

24:54

the population is on the power grid, more

24:56

than 90% of

24:58

the power comes from renewable sources.

25:01

Amos Wamanya is Senior Advisor

25:04

on Climate and Energy at

25:06

Power Shift Africa, a Pan-African

25:08

non-governmental organisation. Kenya is

25:11

running out of very ambitious

25:13

renewable energy projects. Recently

25:16

Kenya has led to establishment

25:18

of an initiative called Accelerated

25:21

Partnerships for Renewables in Africa

25:24

and the initiative aims at

25:26

increasing Africa's renewable

25:28

energy capacity from 56

25:30

gigawatts that was last

25:32

year, 300 gigawatts by

25:34

2030. But locally in

25:36

Kenya we have also

25:38

seen increased investment in

25:40

renewable projects, among them being

25:43

the Turkana wind project coming

25:45

online, but there are also

25:47

other solar projects, centralized renewable

25:49

energy systems coming online and

25:51

these are seen increased access

25:54

to electricity from 40 to now 75% powered

25:56

by 92%. renewables.

26:00

So three-quarters of the

26:02

population have access to

26:04

electricity and of

26:06

that electricity 92%

26:09

in Kenya is now generated

26:11

from renewable sources. That sounds a

26:13

very impressive figure. Yeah, that's true

26:15

and of this 92% is

26:18

a mix of systems, it's not

26:20

just centralized systems but

26:22

Kenya is investing in both

26:24

large infrastructure of renewable energy

26:26

projects but also decentralized projects

26:29

that are able to reach rural communities that

26:31

it might be very hard to reach

26:33

them with a highly centralized system. Why

26:36

do you think that the

26:38

take-up has been so much faster in

26:40

Kenya than it has in many

26:43

other countries which have more money and

26:45

more resources? I think one

26:47

of the things is political will.

26:49

Kenya's political will I think is

26:52

very high. The leadership, especially the

26:54

executive, has been championing renewable energy

26:56

rollout in Africa. Actually, he

26:59

said it's a no-brainer to invest in

27:01

renewables in Africa and Kenya has set

27:03

a very ambitious goal of reaching 100%

27:05

renewables by 2030. With political will, this

27:10

has seen a shift in policies that

27:12

Kenya is putting forward that are favouring

27:14

renewable energy investments. There are a lot

27:17

of people who are critical of the

27:19

process saying it hasn't achieved results. I'm

27:21

just wondering if what

27:23

has happened because

27:25

of COP or in spite of COP? Last

27:29

year in the Chairman's House, COP27,

27:31

there was establishment of Just Transition

27:33

Work Programme but also there

27:35

was establishment of a Loss and Damage Fund.

27:37

I think these were one

27:40

of the major successes within

27:42

COP27. Also, COP27 was referred

27:44

to renewable energy for

27:46

the first time. Here in COP28,

27:48

the first decision that was taken

27:50

was to operationalise the Loss and

27:52

Damage Fund. This decision was taken

27:54

on the first day of this COP.

27:56

Now we have seen pledges going into

27:58

the fund, even though the pledges

28:00

are not sufficient, considering the losses

28:02

and damages that are being caused

28:05

by the climate crisis. We've seen

28:07

countries like Kuwait apply the $100

28:09

million, same to Germany,

28:11

but we've seen also peak economies

28:13

like United States fail by

28:16

only pledging $17.5 million. What

28:19

impact do you think it's having

28:22

on the COP that some

28:25

of the companies who depend on fossil

28:27

fuels are now involved in

28:29

the process? I think over time this

28:31

process is turning into an expo. We

28:34

saw that we had over 600 lobbyists

28:37

in Egypt, but in this

28:39

Dubai COP, I think the

28:41

number has really skyrocketed. We

28:43

are talking about 2,400 plus

28:45

fossil fuel lobbyists. I

28:48

know you wouldn't expect in a

28:50

World Health Conference to have tobacco

28:52

lobbyists, but this is happening in

28:55

a climate conference, and this is starting

28:58

to show that the fossil industry

29:00

is not ready to give a

29:03

prediction on oil. Then

29:05

they have realised that the world

29:07

now knows that they are the

29:09

main contributors to the crisis, and

29:11

fossil fuel base-out is inevitable, but

29:13

they are wailing and kicking and

29:15

crying because their time is up.

29:19

What role fossil fuels should still play

29:21

for how long is one of the

29:23

main debating points? A draft text which

29:25

Rachel referred to in the first part

29:28

of our programme is now being circulated.

29:30

It is, I understand, listing three options,

29:32

cutting down their use, phasing them out

29:34

altogether or simply not mentioning them at

29:37

all. Amos Romania is not the only

29:39

one to have noticed the large number

29:41

of fossil fuel lobbyists actually attending this

29:43

year's event, but Inisha Kowshira, a UK

29:46

delegate in Dubai, thinks actually it's good

29:48

that the industry has a present. We

29:50

finally have a meeting point for all these

29:53

people so we can address them and negotiate

29:55

with them. I think for

29:57

the time it starts to continue, we need to

29:59

be... And

30:02

I think cops on case at meeting point, you

30:05

know, we have an actual conversation

30:07

with these people that are in

30:10

charge of literally having a direct connection to

30:12

fossil fuels. Rachel Kaid,

30:14

what role is lobbying

30:16

playing there? We heard Amos earlier

30:18

saying you wouldn't have the tobacco

30:20

companies lobbying at a health event.

30:22

Is it as straightforward as that?

30:25

Yes, actually. I mean, lobbying is not new

30:27

to the cops. It's always been

30:30

there. But I think as we're getting down to

30:32

the wire and we really need to sort of

30:34

have parity about what we're talking about, which is

30:36

about phasing out the emissions that come from burning

30:38

fossil fuels, to have a preponderance of

30:40

the fossil fuel industry here is an issue

30:42

if it's not clear what the rules of

30:44

the road are. So obviously phasing

30:47

out means that these companies have to with

30:49

their technologies and the countries that they operate

30:51

in have to work out how quickly they

30:53

can do that. They're going to have to

30:56

be held to account for that by governments

30:58

as well. So there's no point in not

31:00

having them in the conversation. But I think

31:02

we need transparency about how they're operating. Can

31:05

I put you what Christiana Figueres, the former

31:07

head of the U.M. Framework Convention said? She

31:10

said, actually, the private sector needs to be at

31:12

the cop because they have the capacity to implement

31:14

much more than governments do. She's right.

31:17

But the question is, how do you hold them to account? And this

31:19

is again where government falls down. So

31:21

government can regulate business. Government can say

31:23

to any oil and gas company operating

31:26

in its jurisdiction, you may not have

31:28

to put air unnecessarily and put methane

31:30

in the atmosphere. But very few governments

31:32

have done that. And companies have pledged

31:34

that, well, they would voluntarily do it.

31:36

But methane emissions are higher today than

31:38

they were when they pledged to do

31:40

that in Glasgow. And that's where the

31:43

distrust comes. That's where the low trust

31:45

environment comes. Cassie Davis, what about resistance

31:47

from countries like China in India on

31:50

phasing out of fossil fuels? That

31:52

was highly controversial at the end of the

31:54

Glasgow COP two years ago, when suddenly

31:56

this phrase phasing down appeared almost at

31:58

the last minute. and

32:00

was accepted because if it hadn't been accepted,

32:02

there would have been no agreement at all

32:04

that year. Has the kind of Chinese and

32:07

Indian view on that changed evolved at all

32:09

in the last two years, do you think?

32:12

Everyone is realizing that the phase out is

32:14

really the only acceptable pathway

32:16

ahead. And phase out

32:19

looks very different depending on the

32:21

country that you're in. And clearly,

32:24

the bigger economies, China, India, alongside

32:26

the US, the UK and others,

32:29

have built economies on fossil fuels. And

32:31

so this transition is one of the

32:33

biggest transitions that these countries can take.

32:36

For a head of state to start

32:38

talking about pivoting their economy away from

32:40

fossil fuels, this requires an immense amount

32:43

of political wealth. Adil Nairtyam,

32:45

can I pick up on the

32:47

lobbying question? What's your perspective? You've

32:49

been attending practically since this process

32:51

began. What's your view of how

32:54

lobbying has developed? I think

32:56

Rachel is exactly right. When we started,

32:58

and even at Rio, we wanted business

33:00

to be there because we understood that

33:02

we needed business to be part of

33:04

the solution. But what it has

33:07

grown into, if you think about, you know, what

33:09

is a COP? Going back to that, a COP

33:11

is a conference of the parties, which means it

33:13

is a meeting of the government. You

33:15

go to Dubai right now, the

33:17

type of person you are least

33:19

likely to encounter is a policymaker.

33:22

It's about 100,000 people, more than 100,000

33:24

people they're estimating who are out there.

33:26

And in that sense, you know, whether

33:29

we are activists, whether we are scholars,

33:31

whether we are business, the

33:33

world has taken over because the

33:35

thing is important enough. And because

33:38

it is important for business. The business

33:40

problem also becomes, especially when you see

33:42

this amazing growth, that it

33:45

is also a question of resources and

33:47

power. A COP is not a

33:49

cheap place to go to, to get

33:51

that pavilion where you hold events. It

33:54

costs tens and sometimes hundreds of thousands

33:56

of dollars. Who

33:58

has that will have more voice.

34:01

You have these 20 events happening

34:03

all across the fanciest restaurants in

34:05

town because lobbying is what lobbying

34:08

is. So that

34:10

power imbalance, that imbalance of

34:12

voice between someone

34:14

from Fiji whose island

34:16

is an existential threat and

34:19

someone who is trying to lobby to

34:22

hold back action is

34:24

what is worrying people. I totally agree

34:26

with Rachel that it needs to come

34:28

back into balance but balance doesn't mean

34:30

that you sort of throw out some

34:32

type of people and allow only some

34:34

type of people. What about

34:36

the status of Sultan Ahmed Al-Jaba who

34:38

is presiding at the conference who also

34:41

happens to chair the Abu Dhabi National

34:43

Oil Company? Do you think that has

34:45

compromised his role as president? I

34:48

think the conversation has certainly been that

34:50

way. It depends on what will come

34:52

out of it. The reason I hesitate

34:54

on this is we saw this also

34:56

in the last COP which was also

34:58

in an Arab country. One wonders how

35:00

much of this is just the perception

35:02

of certain parts of the world. When

35:04

we've had COPs in industrialized

35:07

countries, Glasgow for example, a country which

35:09

has a long history of high emissions

35:11

amongst the highest emissions, that question

35:14

didn't come up. So I think

35:16

there is an unease at least

35:18

among some people whether this is

35:20

being targeted because of geography. But

35:23

beyond that I think we should

35:25

hold every president and every presidency

35:27

to account on the basis

35:29

of the actions they actually take. There

35:32

are alternative solutions that have been put forward

35:35

to get an agreement on climate change

35:37

to make progress. One possible solution is

35:39

to use the law to prevent countries

35:41

backsliding on their pledges. Indeed back in

35:44

the spring the UN General Assembly passed

35:46

a resolution that seeks an advisory opinion

35:48

from the International Court of Justice on

35:50

the obligations of countries under international law

35:52

and the consequences if they fail to

35:54

meet them. Vishal Prasad, the Fujian delegate

35:57

we heard from earlier, is campaign director

35:59

of... students fighting

36:01

climate change, which is pushing for

36:03

that to happen soon. The

36:05

ICJ is asking two questions, or

36:08

will be responding to two questions.

36:10

The first of understanding these obligations more

36:13

broadly, and then the second when there is a

36:15

breach or when there is a failure of

36:17

countries to meet these obligations, what

36:20

are the consequences on small island

36:22

developing states? That's one. And second

36:24

on peoples of present and future

36:26

generations. So that's the climate justice

36:29

question that we've been campaigning for,

36:31

been calling for, is really getting

36:33

that accountability built in, and the

36:35

ICJ really can help in solidifying

36:38

climate obligations, actions and accountability. How

36:41

are you doing on persuading countries to

36:43

sign up to that? Because effectively you're

36:45

asking them to volunteer to put themselves

36:47

at risk of legal challenge. Well, so

36:50

the path to get this through is

36:52

through the UN General Assembly, and in

36:54

March we had passed, we had through

36:57

the government of Anwar, we worked closely with them

36:59

and a core group of countries where

37:02

a resolution was passed by the General

37:04

Assembly by consensus to refer this matter

37:06

to the ICJ. So essentially

37:09

all countries in the world pushed this forward

37:11

to the ICJ, and the ICJ now has

37:13

accepted that request. And

37:15

it's asked countries to make submissions on precisely

37:17

the two legal questions that I talked to you

37:19

about. Do you think that would make

37:21

any difference to the COP process? We

37:24

definitely think so. When we started this

37:26

campaign, the ICJ advisory opinion was seen

37:28

as really a catalyst to help break

37:31

this deadlock, because we were not moving

37:33

as fast as we need to be,

37:35

and coming to three COPs now, and

37:38

even this one, it is becoming even

37:40

more apparent that despite repeated warnings, despite

37:42

the science telling us otherwise, we still

37:45

fail to navigate through even the most

37:47

basic of things. And so parity from

37:49

the world's highest court could go a

37:51

long way in arming us all in

37:54

pushing for greater ambition, accountability and fairness

37:57

in COP spaces, and really plugging the

37:59

gaps that currently exist. exist that countries

38:01

are using to exploit, using as loopholes

38:03

out of their responsibilities

38:05

and duties. So through an

38:07

ICJ's advisory, we could really

38:10

put a lot of action hopefully into

38:12

what's becoming really just a discussion

38:14

space. It's not working, there's another

38:16

lever of power that we can

38:18

move and push so that

38:20

we're in a much better place in responding to

38:23

climate change. As for Shul Prasad

38:25

there from Fiji, Cassie Venn

38:27

from the UN Development Programme, what do you

38:29

think of the legal option? You've already mentioned

38:31

it in the context of a case in

38:34

Montana. What do you think more

38:36

broadly about the idea of using the law to

38:38

hold countries to account? I think

38:40

it's critical. I don't think we can

38:42

have an impactful and

38:45

successful future without being

38:48

able to use all of

38:51

the regulatory, the legal and

38:53

the financial tools available. And

38:56

this includes even companies being able

38:58

to be transparent about what they

39:00

are up to. It includes people

39:02

being able to bring cases to

39:04

demonstrate harm according to the actions

39:06

of governments or companies. Having

39:09

this accountability is really important in all

39:11

of this. And I think we've even

39:13

seen this in kind of the fossil

39:15

fuel companies. The IMF recently said that

39:17

fossil fuel companies get $7 trillion. They

39:20

got it last year in subsidies. We've

39:23

created a global economy where the

39:25

playing field is completely tilted in

39:27

a fossil fuel company's direction. And

39:30

until we're willing to address some

39:32

of those tools, until we're willing

39:34

to address some of the harm

39:36

caused by these companies in a

39:39

legal perspective, we won't

39:41

get the speed and scale that we need

39:43

to be able to achieve these goals. There

39:45

was a case not that long ago in

39:47

the Netherlands, I think, where the

39:50

government tried to draw back from a

39:52

previous pledge and the Supreme Court said,

39:54

sorry, you can't do it because under

39:57

Dutch law, you've made a promise and you have to

39:59

honour it. Right. And I

40:01

think having the real sort of, as

40:03

everyone was saying, sort of the rules

40:05

of the road very clear and having

40:07

accountability and transparency for

40:10

the actions of government, knowing that

40:12

when they make these pledges, that

40:14

at the national level, that these

40:16

signals need to be stable. And

40:18

once they start violating them, that there

40:20

becomes a pathway to hold them accountable

40:22

through the courts. And I think we're

40:24

going to start seeing more of this

40:26

as the years go on. Rachel

40:29

Kite, has there been any breakthrough

40:31

on the terms used by bodies

40:33

like the IMF or the World

40:35

Bank, your old stomping ground, to

40:37

increase the range of finance, in

40:39

particular, the kind of opportunities to

40:42

borrow money on favorable terms, particularly

40:44

for the most exposed countries? Yeah,

40:46

I think over the last couple of years in particular, this

40:49

has been one of the big shifts,

40:51

if not a breakthrough, in that

40:54

having post pandemic, post Russian

40:56

invasion of Ukraine with

40:58

fuel price, inflation, etc. Countries

41:01

are in desperate straits across

41:03

large parts of the global

41:05

south. And the

41:07

intensity and the frequency of

41:09

extreme weather events and climate

41:11

related shocks are wiping

41:14

off percentage points of growth

41:16

every year. The unsustainability of

41:18

this is now recognized by the IMF,

41:20

recognized by the International Financial System. And

41:23

those discussions don't really take

41:25

place at the COP. But the

41:27

COP can send very strong signals. And

41:29

so what we've seen is

41:31

some innovation over the past year, attempts

41:33

to sort of get countries money before

41:36

they are hit with the shocks rather

41:38

than getting them the money afterwards so

41:40

that they're just repairing. And we're starting

41:42

to see some real urgency in mobilizing

41:45

the financing necessary for the ramping up

41:47

of the kinds of clean infrastructure and

41:49

energy that will make countries more resilient,

41:52

which will help them grow. So this

41:54

sort of travelling of renewable energy, etc.

41:56

Where we're falling down still is

41:58

mobilizing. the finance for

42:01

the adaptation and the resilience of

42:03

countries, countries that did nothing

42:05

to create this problem. This large, large,

42:07

large amount of investment, much of it

42:09

probably going to have to come from

42:11

public funds as well as private funds.

42:13

That's not on the table yet and

42:15

that's not negotiated here yet. Cassie Flynn

42:17

from the UN Development Programme, this is

42:19

very much in an

42:21

area where your agency is particularly

42:24

concerned. What do you make of

42:26

the options that are now starting

42:28

to open up, particularly for developing

42:30

countries? I think here this is where

42:33

being able to expand these options is

42:35

needed more now than ever.

42:37

When you do have a country that

42:39

is on the front lines, has very

42:42

little fiscal space, just having faced COVID

42:44

in immense debt over trying

42:46

to provide safety and

42:48

support for the people in their country,

42:50

they are squeezed more than they

42:53

ever have been before. We're seeing

42:55

many countries, I was talking with

42:57

the ambassador from Cape Verde the

42:59

other day and she said they

43:01

spent their entire state budget on

43:03

climate action that stated even in

43:06

their NDC, the National Climate Pledges,

43:08

they would never be able to meet

43:10

those goals. They're just in

43:12

that much debt and this is

43:14

where I think being able to

43:16

really exercise these muscles over being

43:19

able to have better terms for

43:21

financing, being able to think

43:23

about all the debt for nature swaps,

43:26

debt for climate swaps, how do we

43:28

start to expand the tools that are

43:30

needed and help to make these terms

43:32

work for developing countries that in this

43:34

traditional system that was created many

43:37

decades ago that did not take their

43:39

economies into account that they now have

43:41

access to this and that's an issue

43:43

of justice. Adil Najam, are these things

43:45

such as money to vulnerable countries addressing

43:47

the symptoms of climate change which of

43:50

course make politicians look good but not

43:52

addressing the cure? Now

44:00

for you and me, that's big money. But

44:03

here is what it means. The flood

44:05

in Pakistan last year, 2022, only one flood

44:07

in one country. The

44:10

World Bank estimates its cost of loss and

44:13

damage because of it was to the tune

44:15

of 30 to 40 billion. Right?

44:18

That's one country. Now you add

44:20

the other 198 countries, you

44:22

look at everything you've been seeing, and

44:24

you try to figure out how this

44:26

is going to work. Now there is

44:29

a farmer whose home got washed away.

44:31

Right? That's the loss.

44:33

That's the damage. That's actual climate

44:35

finance. The real climate finance that

44:37

is happening unfortunately is that the

44:39

poorest people in the world who

44:41

have had least to do with

44:43

creating the problem are being

44:45

made to pay for your

44:47

and my excesses in carbon.

44:50

That farmer's house got blown away. What

44:53

did he do? He sold the cow, which

44:55

was producing methane which we now want to

44:57

make the culprit, his cow. He

44:59

sold that which he was saving for his

45:02

daughter's wedding, rebuilt his house. That's

45:04

real climate finance that is happening. People

45:06

who are the victims are having to

45:08

pay. Are you saying then that we're

45:10

kind of kicking the can down the

45:12

road? Because instead of the

45:14

rich countries, the countries who are generating

45:16

the carbon saying, right, no, we're going to cut

45:18

this now, we're going to stop doing this now,

45:21

we're saying to the poor countries. Well,

45:23

look, we'll give you some money now so that when

45:25

the problem comes to you, you'll be able to deal

45:27

with the effects. Sharn, we have been

45:29

kicking the can down the road for 28 years. Now

45:32

we are kicking the poorest people in the

45:36

abdomen. And by

45:38

we, I mean you, me, everyone.

45:40

The urgency is now beyond urgency.

45:42

I have been, remain a friend

45:44

of the cop. But I

45:46

do not anymore want to be simply

45:48

a cheerleader for inaction. Rachel, would you like

45:50

to come in? There's two things that

45:53

have happened here, which while I respect the

45:55

deals view would indicate

45:57

to me progress. First, the

45:59

IMF. talks to every country on a regular

46:01

basis about the health of their economy. If

46:03

they're serious, as they said they were here, about

46:06

climate, then that means under what's called an article

46:08

for review, they're going to sit down with Janet

46:10

Yellen. They're going to sit down with Jeremy Hunt.

46:12

They're going to sit down with the People's Bank

46:15

of China. They're going to sit down with

46:17

the Ministry of Finance of Fiji. And

46:19

they're going to say, OK, how resilient is your

46:21

economy to climate change? And in the case of

46:23

the US, they're going to say, why are you

46:25

not putting an effective price on carbon? Why are

46:27

you not pricing the thing which is polluting the

46:29

planet? So I think that's new. And then secondly,

46:31

we've always talked about rich countries and poor

46:33

countries. And there are poor people in rich

46:35

countries who are suffering from climate change extensively

46:38

as well. You've started to see a

46:40

conversation here about the fact that it is the richest

46:42

of the rich globally. They're actually the problem

46:44

is the overconsumption of fossil fuels. That is

46:46

the problem. And that might lead us to

46:49

some more creative ways of negotiating going forward.

46:51

I want to ask a question

46:53

in concluding to all of you

46:55

about how optimistic you are that

46:57

the conference of the parties process

47:00

can achieve this. Cassie

47:02

Flynn first. I think the conference of the

47:04

parties is at the center of

47:07

these conversations on climate. And I think

47:09

that we've really seen that over these

47:11

last few days and over the next

47:13

week of COP that to have nearly

47:15

100,000 people here. I

47:17

mean, I've been going to COPs long enough. I still

47:19

remember when it was it was mostly

47:21

policy wonks and scientists. And to

47:24

see it having evolved in this

47:26

way, I think, does provide a

47:28

sense of optimism, a sense of

47:31

hope. And it

47:33

is at the moment of truth

47:35

that the pledges have to be

47:37

realized as a deal

47:39

with saying that this is a moment

47:41

for action. As Rachel is saying, if

47:43

these actors are serious here like the

47:46

IMF, then it's the moment for these

47:48

big changes. And it has

47:50

to go beyond the conversations into

47:53

action. I think it is possible. I

47:55

think we can do it. But

47:57

it does require the commitment. from

48:00

all the serious actors that are willing

48:02

to do this. Adonachan? So

48:04

if by success you mean will we solve the

48:07

climate problem? Of course we want. No

48:09

chance. On the other hand, I don't

48:11

think the COP will be a failure

48:13

because all COPs are condemned to succeed.

48:15

And I don't say that cynically. It

48:17

would be terrible if we lost hope.

48:20

So at the same time that we need

48:22

to push the COPs to do more, to

48:24

do their job, they

48:27

are an important element of

48:29

the continuity of the movement. They

48:31

are important to have some forum to

48:33

keep pushing at. So in that sense, I

48:35

don't think the COP will fail. We

48:38

will meet again in a year. We'll talk

48:40

again in another year. We'll talk again. I

48:43

just hope that 20 years later, we are

48:45

not having the same conversation. Rachel Kite? Climate

48:47

is everything and everything is climate. And

48:49

I think if an alien landed,

48:51

understanding in the brief that they read on

48:53

the way down to Earth, that we were in the

48:55

middle of a climate crisis, they would be a little

48:58

stupefied that this is the way that we are managing

49:01

that crisis. And so I think we need

49:03

to have less of these big once

49:05

a year fiestas. And

49:08

there needs to be a series of intensive

49:11

working groups, sort of working all

49:13

year around the year on

49:15

the many, many different issues, and then

49:18

bring them together perhaps in a more

49:20

sober environment. My thanks to our panel.

49:22

Rachel Kite from the University of Oxford.

49:24

Cassie Flynn for the UN Development Programme

49:26

and Adil Najam from Boston University. Last

49:28

week's programme on the Dutch general election

49:31

and Europe's populist right is in our

49:33

podcast feed or on the BBC Sounds

49:35

app. Do join us for next week's

49:37

edition, the last before our traditional end

49:39

of year break. But from me, Sean

49:41

Ley and producers Ramela Dasgupta and Max

49:43

Horvig, that's The Real Story. Tired

49:48

of ads barging into your favorite news

49:50

podcasts? Good news. Ad-free

49:52

listening on Amazon Music is included with

49:55

your Prime membership. Just head

49:57

to amazon.com/ad-free news podcasts to catch

49:59

up on the latest episodes. without

50:02

the ads.