Peak environment group backs binding Copenhagen treaty

Updated November 20, 2009 13:13:03

The Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme, SPREP, has backed pleas for the adoption of a legally binding treaty at next month's UN climate change talks. Eleven Pacific nations have already come together to tell the UN General Assembly that they can not accept anything less than a legally binding agreement at the meeting in Copenhagen.

It comes amid fears that the major pollutors are still a long way from finalising the details of an agreement to cut carbon emissions. That is bad news for the most climate-vulnerable countries in the Pacific like Kiribati - whose President told Pacific Beat this week that they need a Copenhagen agreement to survive.

Presenter: Helene Hofman
Speaker: Espen Ronneberg, Climate Change Adviser for Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme

The Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme, SPREP, has backed pleas for the adoption of a legally binding treaty at next month's U-N climate change talks.

Eleven Pacific nations have already come together to tell the U-N General Assembly that they can't accept anything less than a legally binding agreement at the meeting in Copenhagen.

It comes amid fears that the major polluters are still a long way from finalising the details of an agreement to cut carbon emissions.

That's bad news for the most climate-vulnerable countries in the Pacific, like Kiribati whose President told Pacific Beat this week that they need a Copenhagen agreement to survive.

SPREP's Climate Change Adviser, Espen Ronneberg, tells Helene Hofman that they're all very aware of what's at stake.

RONNEBERG: The Pacific Island countries have been very keen to ensure that the final outcomes are legally binding from the point of view of having certainty and assurance that the climate change actions that countries sign up to will in fact be carried out.

HOFMAN: I know that recent meetings of APEC and ASEAN have raised concerns among critics that a lot of countries, and especially the major polluters are moving away from this idea of a legally binding agreement. Is that a concern that SPREP holds?

RONNEBERG: Well certainly our members are quite concerned about this, they've said to us on numerous occasions, but most recently during the negotiations in Barcelona. So we take our lead from our membership and support them as much as we can. So certainly the need to have a legally binding agreement in Copenhagen is one that we would be supporting of.

HOFMAN: As the situation stands at the moment how do you feel going into the Copenhagen talks?

RONNEBERG: Well there is sufficient time and space to negotiate a political agreement in our view. There is, what is really needed is the political will to pull it altogether. I think we've made a lot of progress in negotiations so far. We have good material that's on the table. Now all we need is the legal agreement to bind it altogether. I think we can do it, we have been successful in the past in doing so. So all that it takes is for all countries to work together for this, but certainly sometimes you do get a little bit pessimistic, but for the moment we're trying to look at the positives in the negotiations in moving forward in support of our countries.

HOFMAN: You say there's a lot of time and all it needs is political willpower, but everything that's been coming about this recently and I mean Copenhagen is next month, a lot of people would argue that there isn't really enough time to generate that kind of political willpower?

RONNEBERG: Well the ability of the media to perhaps encourage leaders to step up to the plate I think is there, I think there's a significant role for the media that shouldn't be overlooked in this, especially given the urgency of taking climate change action both in our region and in other vulnerable regions of the world. So we were able to get an agreement in Kyoto, however limited it was, I think we can do the same in Copenhagen. The signal that would be sent by not having an agreement in Copenhagen is very serious, and it's one that should not be taken lightly. The timeframe that we have in order to begin taking meaningful action on reducing emissions and supporting countries' adaptation, we do have a limited time-frame in terms of the real world.

HOFMAN: Do you think that the major polluters also have a responsibility to discuss what to do once the effects of climate change are felt? I mean I understand that they are already being felt, but as this continues?

RONNEBERG: Certainly, we are pursuing the negotiations on many different levels within the climate change context. For example I've been quite involved in the work on adaptation and getting commensurate support for the region in terms of dealing with the impacts of climate change. And I think we've made a lot of progress in that group, but what is missing though is we need to have the emissions reductions target also settled, and we need to have a financial package in place that would then take care of both the mitigation as well as the adaptation actions. So I think we have a good understanding with most of the major emitters as to what needs to be done, however the legal and political and financial glue that holds it all together that we need to agree on.