Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and her Singaporean counterpart Lee Hsien Loong have added a focus on climate and sustainability to the enhanced relationship between the two countries.
Speaking after bilateral talks in Singapore, the pair jointly announced a fifth pillar would be added to the agreement on the New Zealand-Singapore Enhanced Partnership.
They announced the initial enhanced partnership in 2019 during Ardern’s last official visit, with the four pillars of trade and economics; security and defence; science, technology and innovation; and people-to-people links.
The fifth pillar added today will be “climate change and the green economy”.
Ardern said given the existential threat posed by climate change, it was fitting.
“When it comes to climate change this is not an area where countries are seeking to be competitive, or we shouldn’t be seeking to be competitive unless the competition is who can reduce emissions the fastest.
“Globally we have entered what must be an age of action, and that includes the private sector as well. No government can do this alone.”
Call for stronger global cooperation
Lee echoed that sentiment, calling for stronger global cooperation on climate change.
“Climate change is the existential challenge of our times … we need stronger cooperation among most countries.”
NZ Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern with Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. Image: Karan Gurnani/RNZ
He said areas that could be worked on included workshops for building joint capacity in responding to climate change, improved pricing for emissions trading, and work on sustainable aviation initiatives.
“Aviation is one of the major sources of carbon emissions … and New Zealand is at the end of the world and Singapore is not so close to Europe either.
“If we are going to call for a low-carbon world this is something we should be focused on.”
Ardern said Singapore was a trade hub which 20 percent of New Zealand’s exports funnelled through, and there were opportunities in reducing emissions for both shipping — including hydrogen fuel — and food, including research into urban farming.
Ardern’s trade delegation to Asia — including Trade Minister Damien O’Connor, officials, a dozen business people and media — landed in Singapore last night.
They expressed concern that the war in Ukraine could lead to increased protectionism in the region however, and reiterated their shared commitment to an “open, inclusive, rules-based and resilient Indo-Pacific region”, including free trade, open markets, and respect for countries’ sovereignty.
Lee also said they welcomed interest from other countries including China and Korea in joining the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement, an agreement signed in 2020 between New Zealand, Singapore and Chile.
The agreement aims to support digital economies and trade, and guarantees cooperation on digital identity, policies, emerging technologies, data protection and digital products.
They said they also welcomed the efforts of the United States in pursuing an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
At the closing of the Our Ocean conference in Palau the co-hosts announced that 410 commitments had been made by various, countries, civil society, and industry valued at $US16.35 billion.
The two-day conference was held in the Pacific region for the first time.
Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr and the US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, John Kerry, closed the conference. Each of them praised those attending for the commitment to protect the ocean.
“Our goal this week was to shine a light on what is happening to our ocean and to make real commitments about real actions and not just words,” Kerry said.
The Palauan president said that the conference was truly a global event, with more than 500 delegates from 80 plus nations.
Delegates at Our Ocean conference listening to the US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, John Kerry. Image: Jesse Alpert/RNZ
The Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs at the Department of State, Monica P. Medina, said that since the launch of the Our Ocean conference in 2014 it had ” generated over 1400 commitments valued at more than $US90 billion, that’s not including the commitments made at the 2022 conference”.
“Over the years, leaders around the world have protected more than 5 million square miles of ocean — that’s an area larger than the United States and Palau combined,” she said.
NZ commits US $6 million at Our Ocean conference
The Minister for Pacific Peoples and Associate Minister of Foreign Affairs, Aupito William Sio, and FFA Director-General, Dr Manumatavai Tupou-Roosen, announced at the Our Ocean conference that the New Zealand government would commit to a US$3.4 million partnership with the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA).
Participants at Our Ocean conference in Palau. Image: Jesse Alpert/RNZ
Aupito said fishing was a major big asset in the region, for example in Tokelau, 81 percent of its non-aid money came from fishing.
NZ’s Minister for Pacific Peoples and Associate Minister of Foreign Affairs, Aupito William Sio. Image: US State Department
He said New Zealand’s financial commitment to the FFA was for 4 years.
Increasing jobs and economic benefits from the Pacific’s offshore fisheries is the focus of the partnership.
New Zealand also committed US$3 million towards climate change assessment. The funds will go to the University of the South Pacific and the University of Canterbury.
The next Our Ocean conference will be in Panama in 2023.
RNZ Pacific’s manager Moera Tuilaepa-Taylor is covering the conference in Palau. Her trip was made possible by the US State Department. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
First-ever compilation of Canadian data on public subsidies for carbon capture technology documents billions in funding, but meager climate results
Unceded Algonquin Anishinaabe Territories [Ottawa, ON] – A new report released today by Environmental Defence, Buyer Beware: Fossil Fuel Subsidies and Carbon Capture Fairy Tales in Canada, reveals Canada’s federal government provided at least $8.6 billion to the oil and gas sector in 2021 alone – a substantial amount of taxpayer money that went towards making it cheaper to find, extract, process, transport and export fossil fuels.
“2021 was a horrific year for people in Canada and around the world. Yet even as communities across the country were fleeing their homes – because of heat domes, atmospheric rivers, wildfires, droughts or floods – the Government of Canada continued providing financial support to the industry at the root of this crisis,” says Julia Levin, Climate and Energy Program Manager at Environmental Defence. “We’re giving away wealth to oil and gas companies at the expense of a climate safe future.”
The report also provides the first estimate of public funding for carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) projects in Canada. Since 2000, the federal government has provided $2 billion, the Government of Alberta has provided $2.6 billion and the Government of Saksatechwan has provided $1.2 billion, bringing the total amount of subsidies for CCUS to $5.8 billion. However, as data collection was limited by what was reasonably possible to track using publically accessible information, this sum is likely an underestimation.
“Carbon capture is not a climate solution – its use in the energy sector only serves to prolong our dependence on fossil fuels,” says Julia Levin. “Oil and gas companies know these are dead-end technologies which won’t make a dent in emissions, but are using them anyway to delay the clean energy transition and wring out even more subsidies. It’s a greenwashing strategy to justify continued, and even expanded, fossil fuel production.”
Despite massive taxpayer subsidies, collectively these expensive projects only capture around 3.55 million tonnes of carbon per year – which represents 0.05% of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions. This is in line with projections provided by the International CCS Knowledge Centre, which estimates the average cost of a CCUS in Canada is $1 billion for a megatonne per year of reductions. Furthermore, 70% of the carbon captured in Canada is used for enhanced oil recovery – i.e., more production. Therefore these huge public subsidies have likely resulted in more emissions, rather than less.
The CCUS handouts could grow exponentially, depending on a new investment tax credit set to be released in the upcoming federal budget. Oil and gas companies are lobbying for the tax credit to cover 75 per cent of their CCUS costs. On the other hand, hundreds of civil society organizations as well as four hundred leading academics have called on Minister Freeland to scrap the tax credit – or limit it to only the sectors which have a role in a climate safe future and for which there are no decarbonization options, such as cement. Oil and gas, fossil hydrogen, plastics and petrochemical production should not be eligible for the credit.
“Will the government follow the science or will they bow to big oil lobbyists? If the new CCUS investment tax credit is made available for oil and gas projects including fossil hydrogen, this would create a significant new fossil fuel subsidy,” says Levin. “And once new subsidies like this are put in place, they are very hard to repeal. Instead of propping up the fossil fuel industry, the federal government needs to be spending this money on ensuring a safe and healthy future through a fair transition to renewable energy.”
The report documents not only Canada’s annual financial support for fossil fuels, but also showcases the specific ways in which oil and gas companies are given significant breaks in their public responsibilities at the expense of Canadians. On carbon pricing, for example, Suncor alone received a break equivalent to $771 million – an enormous yearly subsidy. Yet oil and gas companies made $86 billion in after-tax revenues in 2021 and are estimated to rake in $115 billion in 2022. Their record profits did not go to reduce emissions or pay for environmental remediation, but instead to increasing shareholder dividends and buybacks.
“The Canadian government’s approach to oil and gas subsidies continues to be unchanged – leaving Canadians to pick up the bill while industry gets a pass to continue to pollute,” says Levin. She cautions that although this year’s total is smaller than last year’s total, it doesn’t represent any policy improvement from the federal government. The difference between 2020 and 2021 is largely a result of fewer oil and gas companies applying for loans from Export Development and some ongoing 2021 spending, such as financing for the construction of the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion, having been counted in previous year’s data. Though the government has made new commitments, these haven’t yet resulted in action.
The report notes that real climate solutions aren’t being properly funded. The most important steps for decarbonizing Canada’s economy are increased electrification, wide-scale use of renewable energy and increasing energy efficiency – yet these sectors have received limited government support. The report provides strong recommendations for the government to end subsidies and guide its spending programs in a more sustainable way.
Read the report: https://environmentaldefence.ca/report/buyerbeware/
About ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE CANADA: Environmental Defence Canada is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.
-30-
For more information, or to request an interview, please contact:
SPECIAL REPORT: By Michelle Betz in Ninole, Hawai’i
As Cyclone Cody got set to pummel Fiji in early January, students at the University of the South Pacific in Suva, Fiji were getting set to start a media training programme that would have them reporting on climate change.
“More than a little irony here,” says Doug Mitchell, founder and director of Next Generation Radio.
“We’ve experienced weather related challenges but nowhere close to this level. Add in the global pandemic, case numbers soaring, our students across the International Dateline and a cyclone, wow.
“Still, we do what journalists do, we find a way to keep going. I can’t say enough how proud I am of the professional team and a very special hat-tip to our folks in Fiji. They remained, undaunted.”
Oceania is perhaps the most vulnerable region in the world to climate change, yet Pacific Islanders don’t often have the opportunity to tell the world their climate change stories – stories about declining fisheries, increased cyclone activity, displacement and more.
“There is a difference when you are a local reporting an issue that directly affects you, it is more impactful — to be able to report climate change effects to Pacific Islanders, by a Pacific Islander”, says Sera Tikotikovatu-Sefeti, one of nine USP students taking part in the Next Gen training programme.
The Next Gen Radio programme is a US-based digital media training initiative and the Fiji project was Next Gen’s first ever international project. The Next Gen USP stories can be heard here.
Cyclone set to threaten Fiji
And the arrival of Cyclone Cody was set to threaten Fiji the same day the project was due to begin — illustrating not only the urgency of climate change but the need to ensure the region’s journalists have the skills needed to tell those stories.
“The importance of our programme has never been more clear. We’re not doing traditional reporting but finding people who have a story to tell, and we let them tell it,” says Mitchell.
The choice of climate change as a theme for the workshops was not accidental.
A short video on NextGenRadio.
For Pacific islanders, land and ocean have huge economic, political and cultural significance – an ocean-based economy focused on maritime transportation, fisheries, extractive industries and tourism.
Yet these small island nations of the Pacific region are more vulnerable to the acute effects of climate change than any other region in the world.
And the importance of being able to tell those stories is paramount.
Cyclone Cody hits Wailotua village, Naitasiri, Central Highlands, Vitilevu, in Fiji. (Insert: Father and daughter sit on their rooftop for refuge). Image: The Fiji Times
Ability to use any medium
Lice Movono is a Fijian journalist and serves as a mentor on the project.
“The ability to use any medium to tell the stories of the Pacific and its people and the challenges they face is so important,” she says.
“The Next Gen project offers senior journalism students and journalists working in the digital space to combine the strengths of radio broadcasting with available visibility tools to tell these stories effectively.
“Pacific people are oral people with rich traditional art and so this model of communications development is very relevant to the region’s storytellers.”
The students are being guided by a team of Next Gen staff and mentors — many of whom deployed to Hawai’i.
Each student is paired with a mentor and has support from a full team of audio producers, digital and visual editors and even editorial illustrators – all working remotely to guide the students through the storytelling process.
Everyone is literally in the virtual room as the storytelling gets underway.
“It’s great to be part of a team dedicated to increasing coverage of the Pacific on some of the most pressing issues facing Oceania. As a journalist indigenous to Micronesia who returned home to report, I am so humbled to be part of a team preparing the next generation to continue to make meaning,” says Thomas Mangloña, regional correspondent for KUAM on Guam and a project mentor.
Project an eye opener
Student Sera Tikotikovatu-Sefeti says the Next Gen project has been an eye opener.
“As a journalism student and writer, it has never occurred to me how much planning and prepping takes place before we actually go out into the field,” she says.
“The Next Gen project has given me the opportunity to learn from media specialists, illustrators and other work that goes into the field of radio and more. My impression of Next Gen is really just that – it is an extraordinary opportunity to collaborate with some of the best in the field, even if we are separated by time zones and miles apart, we connect through the same passion and this project gives us that opportunity to collaborate despite the distance. I’m learning so much and willing to learn so much more.”
The students will produce audio and digital stories highlighting the experiences of people in Fiji and Papua New Guinea whose lives are being affected by climate change.
The Next Gen programme is part of the Growing Independent Radio Broadcast Journalism in the Pacific Islands project that aims to bolster radio at both USP and across the Pacific and is administered by the East-West Center in partnership with the Institute for War and Peace Reporting.
“We are so excited to be working with journalists from USP and the whole Next Gen team,” said Scott Kroeker, project coordinator from the East-West Centre.
“The centre is always looking for opportunities to support media professionals in the Pacific Islands, and this project should have a direct and tangible impact on the careers of the young participants.”
The year is 2040 and Aotearoa New Zealand has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions consistent with the commitment to keep global heating below 1.5°C above pre-industrial temperatures.
The economy, society, local government, transport, housing and urban design, energy, land use, food production and water systems have all changed significantly. Fossil fuels have been mostly phased out internationally and import taxes are imposed on high emissions goods.
New Zealand is now a world leader in natural infrastructure, clean hydrogen energy, engineered wood and high quality low emissions food. Despite ongoing challenges, with a prosperous economy, most people think the transition was worth it.
Cities are more pleasant places to live, air and water are cleaner, nature is more abundant.
Following the emissions budgets stipulated by the Zero Carbon Act in late 2021, emissions are now properly priced into all economic decisions. The Emissions Trading Scheme has been reinforced and the price of emitting carbon has stabilised at $300 per tonne, after hitting $75 in 2022 and $200 by 2030.
In 2026, New Zealand signed the International Treaty to Phase out Fossil Fuels, which prohibits fossil fuel extraction, phases out use and requires international cooperation on renewable energy.
Carbon import taxes mean many high emissions commercial activities are no longer economically viable. Trade unions have played a major role in the industrial strategy underpinning the transition to a lower emissions economy.
Māori economy bigger than any other sector The Māori economy is bigger than any other sector and has benefited from wider international recognition of the long term value of climate and biodiversity work.
Queenstown … New Zealand’s economy is based on productive activity that stays within planetary boundaries while respecting social requirements, such as a decent standard of living for all. Image: The Conversation/Shutterstock
New Zealand’s economy is based on productive activity that stays within planetary boundaries – including emissions and pollution of land and water – while respecting social requirements, such as a decent standard of living for all.
Building on their successful response to the covid pandemic, marae-based organisations are prominent as centres of excellence for climate and economic strategy, health and social services, managed retreat from coastal areas and natural infrastructure development.
Public financing was radically rebalanced in the 2020s, delivering more for local government and a greater partnership between councils, government and Māori organisations. This has enabled far better delivery of local services and much more meaningful connections within communities.
Councils and council organisations laid the groundwork for the climate transition, helping address the unequal impacts of climate change on different groups. Councils and mana whenua collectively administer substantial funds for regional development.
People travel between cities primarily via electric rail, managed by a new national passenger rail agency InterCity, which acquired the InterCity regional bus operator in 2023. Image: The Conversation/Shutterstock
Fast, frequent rail
The government’s 2022 Climate Budget provided the massive injection of funds required to redesign our cities, which are now organised around mass transit, safe and segregated routes for cycling and vibrant pedestrian areas. People can access fast, frequent light rail and dedicated busways with low cost fares. Less road space is required for driving, which is more accessible now for those who need it, including disabled people and service vehicles.
People travel between cities primarily via electric rail, managed by a new national passenger rail agency InterCity, which acquired the InterCity regional bus operator in 2023. Through major reforms in 2024, KiwiRail became a dedicated rail freight operator. A new government agency, OnTrack, oversees maintenance and renewal of tracks and rail infrastructure.
Passenger rail services run across the North Island main trunk line on improved electrified tracks at up to 160kph. South Island rail uses hydrogen trains fuelled by locally produced green hydrogen.
Most of the work to upgrade transport, housing and energy infrastructure has been done by a new Ministry of Green Works set up in 2025. This Ministry partners with local hapū and iwi, as well as councils through regional hubs. It is backed by the government’s expanded Green Investment Finance company.
Anger at the divide between property owners and renters culminated in a general rent strike in 2024. Image: The Conversation/Shutterstock
Anger over housing for all Anger at the divide between property owners and renters culminated in a general rent strike in 2024. The government responded with new financial rules ending the treatment of housing as an asset class. Kāinga Ora, Māori organisations and councils have undertaken a massive public housing construction effort.
Most new housing is now public infrastructure rather than private homes built to store individual wealth. Public ownership has expanded, in particular for entities that provide core services such as transport, energy and water.
In 2024, the government worked with councils to focus plans on quality universal design housing. Since the new building code was adopted in 2025, all new homes have high standards for energy efficiency and accessibility. Higher density apartments line public transport routes in the main centres, with terraced homes in smaller towns. Structural timber has replaced concrete and steel in many construction projects.
Changes to housing, transport and urban design have supported improvements in health, well-being and physical activity. Health improved dramatically after universal basic services were introduced in 2024 to cover free visits to the doctor and dentist as well as free childcare and elderly care.
Electricity generation has doubled, with a mix of wind, solar and geothermal. Image: The Conversation/Shutterstock
Energy goes green Electricity generation has doubled, with a mix of wind, solar and geothermal. Many more energy storage facilities exist, including pumped hydroelectricity. Distributed energy is commonplace. Many councils have helped their communities set up local solar schemes and dozens of towns are completely independent of the national grid.
Green hydrogen is produced at the converted aluminium smelter at Tiwai Point using hydroelectricity. This is used in heavy industry and transport and exported from Southport.
In 2027, after New Zealand blew its first carbon budget, the government replaced MBIE with a new Ministry for Economic Transition. The ministry oversaw the transition to green jobs via a universal job guarantee scheme.
It also supported a dramatic reduction in energy use in all parts of society and the economy. This effort had a greater impact on emissions reduction than the replacement of energy and fuel with renewable sources.
The land heals In 2025, the government established a Natural Infrastructure Commission. The term “natural infrastructure” emerged in the 2020s as a term to include native forests, wetlands, coastal environments and other ecosystems that store and clean water, protect against drought, flooding and storms, boost biodiversity and absorb carbon.
The commission has supported massive land restoration for carbon sequestration and biodiversity purposes, with an annual budget of NZ$5 billion from emissions revenue. Among other uses, the fund compensates land owners for land use changes that reduce emissions and build up resilience.
Under the new Constitution of Aotearoa adopted in 2040, ownership of the Conservation Estate transferred from Crown ownership to its own status of legal personhood.
International carbon taxes have transformed agriculture. Dairy herds have reduced in size and New Zealand is known for organic, low emissions food and fibre. High quality meat and dairy products, as well as plant-based protein foods, supply international markets.
Seaweed and aquaculture operations have flourished. Along with regenerative agriculture, this transition has reduced pollution and emissions. With native ecosystems regenerated, tōtara and harakeke can now be sustainably harvested for timber and fibre.
In urban and industrial settings water use has dramatically reduced. Every business, home and building stores its own water. Water use is measured and charges are levied for excess water use beyond the needs of the household. No water is ever wasted.
The country feels steadier than 20 years ago. There is hope for the future in a world that was full of uncertainty after the pandemic stricken early 2020s. Image: The Conversation/Shutterstock
A better place The country feels steadier than 20 years ago. There is hope for the future in a world that was full of uncertainty after the pandemic stricken early 2020s.
Many government agencies and councils are now seen as useful and relevant, having been equipped with the money to provide housing, social services, environmental restoration and support for economic and land use change.
Moving away from high emissions exports was more successful than anyone expected, but it took strict rules to make it happen. Some in the business sector opposed more government direction and regulation, but it’s widely accepted that relying on market forces would not have delivered a successful transition.
That approach had driven the country to the brink of failure on climate, biodiversity and social cohesion. Having been leaders in milk powder and tourism, the country now leads on natural infrastructure and the future of food, timber and energy.
Big and important decisions about Canada’s energy future will continue to be made in the dark. That’s because the Canadian agency that is supposed to inform public and private sector decision-making on energy development and climate action continues to provide scenarios that are both unrealistic and pessimistic, and are lacking critical information, such as Canada’s expected greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs).
The agency is the Canada Energy Regulator, and its mandate is “advising and reporting on energy matters.” It does so primarily through its annual publication, Canada’s Energy Future, which lays out future scenarios for energy development in Canada. This report is used by federal and provincial governments developing public policy, energy companies making decisions about future directions, and investors trying to figure out where to put their money.
The CER insists that Energy Futures involves “neutral, fact based analysis.” But this year’s edition, released yesterday, once again fails to provide key information that is critical to making energy-related decisions. First, it does not include projections in which Canada actually succeeds at tackling climate change. Second, none of the scenarios include estimates of Canada’s carbon emissions.
Excluding basic climate-related information is a baffling omission, which leads the report to overestimate the future size and importance of Canada’s oil and gas industry. And that in turn may skew oil and gas development–already Canada’s #1 climate polluter–in a direction that makes meeting our international climate commitments impossible, or lead to poor investment decisions that leave stranded assets.
Success on climate change nowhere to be found
Energy Futures 2021 has two main projections of Canada’s future energy needs. In neither of these scenarios does Canada actually meet its 2030 emission reduction target under the Paris Agreement or achieve net zero emissions by 2050 – both of which are legal commitments. And yet, the CER believes that developing a scenario where Canada and the world take no further action on climate change is more useful than a scenario where Canada achieves its climate obligations.
Canada’s target is completely achievable – it’s the weakest in the G7. But a world where Canada meets that commitment is seen by the CER as too ambitious to bother analyzing.
The result is that the most ambitious scenario in Energy Futures 2021 has oil production in Canada continuing to climb for over a decade, until 2032, before it declines to levels roughly similar to today’s production in 2050. Gas production stays flat for another two decades.
The International Energy Agency (IEA), the global equivalent to the Canada Energy Regulator, has developed a climate-safe pathway that limits warming to 1.5 degrees and achieves net-zero in 2050. In this scenario global oil and gas production both decline significantly, starting immediately. Investments in new oil and gas fields end abruptly.
Understanding how to align energy needs and climate success is incredibly useful for understanding what we should be investing in–and not investing in–over the coming years and decades. The IEA provides that analysis. Canada needs the CER to do it for our country.
A net zero analysis for electricity only
The CER does present one net zero by 2050 scenario, but that is for the electricity sector only. Canada’s electricity sector is already 82% free of carbon emissions. And yet, this year’s report shows that electricity sources will continue to shift. This isn’t a bad thing, of course, but it’s also not where Canada needs to prioritize its climate efforts.
Canada’s oil and gas sector is by definition 0% decarbonized – fossil fuels are hydrocarbons. A net zero assessment of that sector is likely to come to very stark and important conclusions on its future.
No assessment of carbon emissions
It is also negligent for Energy Futures to still not estimate carbon emissions – despite using the same model that Environment and Climate Change Canada uses to do exactly that. The Canada Energy Regulator states “the effort of Canada, as well as the global community, to reduce GHG emissions will be a critical factor in how energy systems evolve in the long term.” But somehow, it is not critical enough to let Canadian decision-makers know what those emissions are.
Conclusions
Canada cannot be left in the dark on something as crucial as the energy transition. Canada’s Minister of Natural Resources needs to direct the Canada Energy Regulator to provide much needed information in its 2022 report. That includes showing Canadians the energy pathway we should be following to achieve climate action success.
It’s an F for Ontario. The Auditor General of Ontario just gave the province a dismal 27 per cent grade on its climate progress – a massive fail.
The 2021 climate audit by the Auditor General is the follow-up to one produced in 2019, which provided 22 recommendations for the province to improve its climate outcomes. It turns out that, two years later, the government has only implemented six of those recommendations.
Ontario is failing to reduce the province’s greenhouse gas emissions
This is pitiful, especially because provinces hold sizable levers that can reduce (or increase) greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. While a lot of attention is paid to the policies of the federal government, we should be paying equal attention to the actions of our provinces. Especially Ontario, which is the second most polluting province in Canada.
Ontario does have a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. But, as the Auditor General has confirmed, the province is far from being able to meet even its own modest target. According to the report, “…policies to achieve the majority of emissions reductions required to meet the 2030 target have not been identified.” And the Environment Ministry doesn’t have an updated climate change plan for the province to follow, nor a timeframe to provide such a plan.
Part of the problem, as the Auditor General’s report suggests, is thatOntario is refusing to adopt the federal carbon pricing system for industrial polluters which would help bring down emissions. Ontario’s government is adamant about sticking to its own weak system for these industrial emitters. And this anemic plan won’t even be implemented until 2023. Yes, you read that right – industrial polluters are not paying for their emissions now and will not be until 2023, at the very earliest.
Other shortcomings were identified in the audit as well, including problems with climate modelling and emissions estimates, as well as the lack of public reporting, monitoring, and evaluation on the government’s existing commitments.
Based on the conclusions of the Auditor General’s report, it’s glaringly obvious that the current government isn’t even remotely interested in tackling climate change. If it were, there are many ways it could take action to decrease emissions.
For example, the province could phase-out the use of gas plants (which utilize fossil fuels) to generate electricity for the province. Fossil-fuel generated electricity is responsible for rising emissions in the electricity sector and these emissions are expected to triple over the next decade. Instead of expanding fossil gas use, we could expand renewable energy sources to meet our electricity needs.
Building more highways increases greenhouse gas pollution – the opposite of what is needed to tackle climate change
Another easy way to keep emissions down is to invest in public transportation instead of building new mega highways like Highway 413 that will only increase car traffic and, in turn, greenhouse gas pollution.
Climate solutions exist and are cost effective. What’s lacking in Ontario is the will – from the very top. That means we all have to push for climate action from the bottom up to make sure Ontario does its part to address runway climate change.
Journalists and journalism are waging a global struggle for survival and for “truth” against fake news and alternative facts, say two Asia-Pacific media commentators.
“Without journalists who will tell it like it is no matter the consequences, the future will continue to be one of alternate facts and manipulated opinions,” Rappler executive editor Glenda Gloria told about 135 media scholars, journalists and researchers at the opening of the Asian Congress for Media and Communication (ACMC) in Auckland today.
“As we’ve experienced at Rappler, the battle to save journalism cannot be fought by journalists alone, and cannot be fought from our laptops alone. The battle for truth is a battle we must share — and fight — with other groups and citizens.
“Each time our freedoms are threatened, we should have no qualms engaging other democracy frontliners and participating in collective efforts to resist authoritarianism.”
However, she told the virtual conference hosted at Auckland University of Technology (AUT) she believed that journalists had the motivation and enough understanding now to “stop the tide of disinformation” that fuelled the spread of authoritarianism.
“In this environment, make no doubt: Journalism is activism,” added the award-winning investigative journalist and author who heads the digital website that has repeatedly angered Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte with its exposés.
Another keynote speaker, Dr David Robie, founding director of the Pacific Media Centre and retired professor of Pacific journalism at AUT, condemned a “surge of global information pollution”.
Disinformation damaging democracy
He outlined how disinformation was damaging democracy and encouraging authoritarianism across the Pacific, singling out Fiji and Papua New Guinea for particular criticism.
Dr Robie cited how authorities in PNG had been forced to abandon mobile health clinics and teams of health workers carrying out covid-19 vaccination and awareness programmes because of the increasingly risky attacks against them.
Professor Felix Tan … a welcome from AUT’s Faculty of Design and Creative Technologies. Image: AUT
He said much of the content used by anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists which framed the covid-19 response as a fight between the individual and the allegedly “treacherous” state had been repackaged from US and Australia vested interests.
Dr Robie said universities could do far more in the fight against disinformation and praised initiatives such as the RMIT fact-checking collaboration with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), The Conversation news and academia project, The Juncture journalism school website, and the new Monash University backed 360info wire news service.
“The challenge confronting many communication programmes and journalism schools located in universities or tertiary institutions is what to do about authoritarianism, how to tackle the strain of an ever-changing health and science agenda, the deluge of disinformation and the more rapid than predicted escalation of climate catastrophe,” he said.
“One of the answers is greater specialisation and advanced programmes rather than just relying on generalist strategies and expecting graduates to fit neatly into already configured newsroom boxes.
“The more that universities can do to equip graduates with advanced problem-solving skills, the more adept they will be at developing advanced ways of reporting on the pandemic – and other likely pandemics of the future – contesting the merchants of disinformation and reporting on the climate crisis.”
Dr Robie, who was awarded the 2015 AMIC Asian Communications prize, pioneered several student journalist projects in the region such as intensive coverage of the 2000 Fiji coup and the 2011 Pacific Islands Forum, and more recently the 2016-2018 Bearing Witness and 2020 Climate and Covid project in partnership with Internews.
Journalism Nobel Peace Prize
Glenda Gloria said her entire editorial team had been delighted when their chief executive Maria Ressa was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize – along with Russian editor Dmitry Muratov. Ressa was the first Filipino Nobel laureate and “some of us started calling our office the Nobel newsroom”.
“This immense pride that we feel isn’t just because Maria is our CEO, it is that the prize went to two journalists who have faced the toughest challenges imposed by authoritarian states,” Gloria said.
“More than that, the Nobel prize puts a global spotlight on the extraordinary dangers that we journalists face today.
“To many of us in the Global South, journalism has always been considered a dangerous profession long before media watchdogs started ranking countries around the world according to the freedoms enjoyed by their press.
“And yet, despite all that we have seen and experienced, it’s no exaggeration to say that this is the most challenging period for journalism.
“At stake today is our very existence, our relevance, and our ability to speak truth to power.”
The conference was opened following a traditional mihi by AUT’s acting dean of the Faculty of Design and Communication Technologies, Professor Felix Tan, and ACMC president Professor Azman Azwan Azamati of Malaysia.
Master of ceremonies duties are being shared by AUT’s Khairiah A. Rahman, the chief conference organiser, and Dino Cantal of Trinity University of Asia.
More than 40 media and communication research papers are being presented over three days with the conference ending on Saturday afternoon.
“The need for urgent action to address the climate crisis was front and centre in the 2021 Speech from the Throne. Now we need to see that same urgency in plans for implementation – concrete and swift measures to reduce carbon emissions, end plastic pollution and remove toxic chemicals from our daily lives.” – Tim Gray, Executive Director
“While the Speech from the Throne made nods to both reconciliation and fighting the climate crisis, the government continues to support oil and gas projects which violate Indigenous rights, including the Coastal Gas Link pipeline, where the RCMP just arrested Wet’suwet’en land defenders to protect corporate interests, and the Trans Mountain pipeline. We’re also compelled to note the huge levels of public spending the government continues to provide to climate culprits, including for false solutions like carbon capture and fossil hydrogen.” – Julia Levin, Senior Climate and Energy Program Manager
“It is disappointing that the Speech from the Throne made no mention of promises to end plastic pollution, to create and implement a strategy to address the harms caused by environmental racism or to protect people from toxic chemicals by bringing forward a strong bill to modernize the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.” – Karen Wirsig, Plastics Program Manager
“It is worrisome that no mention of a just transition strategy or legislation were made in the Throne Speech. Despite talking about green jobs and clean communities, this government has given us no reassurance that it is setting up the right processes to deliver on these promises and truly leave no one behind. These processes must also ensure that polluters are held accountable for their harm to the land, water, climate and communities – including toxic tailing ponds from the oil sands.” – Aliénor Rougeot, Climate and Energy Program Manager
“We heard the government state that it will move to cap and cut oil and gas sector emissions and accelerate our path to “100 per cent net zero electricity future” yet they continue to support Line 5, an unnecessary and dangerous pipeline which threatens the Great Lakes and should be shut down as soon as possible. And while we have seen some positive progress in recent months for outcomes for Indigenous communities facing boil water advisories, there is still a lot of work to be done to ensure all drinking water advisories are ended and that Indigenous communities are properly resourced and given agency to lead this work” – Michelle Woodhouse, Water Program Manager
About ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.
-30-
For more information and to arrange an interview please contact: Barbara Hayes, Environmental Defence, bhayes@environmentaldefence.ca
Police have arrested 30 climate activists after they blocked a bridge in central London with a sit-down protest.
The arrests on Lambeth Bridge came after Public Order Act conditions were imposed on the protest. It had been held in support of nine Insulate Britain campaigners who were jailed on Wednesday 17 November.
“Hope lies in the streets!”
The sit-in caused the bridge to be shut down to traffic for a number of hours on Saturday 20 November. The protest initially involved up to 250 people who had marched from the Royal Courts of Justice.
The demonstrators made speeches, sang songs, ate lunch and chanted slogans.
Supporters of the nine jailed Insulate Britain climate activists (Dominic Lipinski/PA)
Cheers had broken out earlier as campaigners told the crowd that the nine jailed Insulate Britain climate activists are “political prisoners” and won’t be the last to be locked up. Insulate Britain posted a tweet thanking supporters after the protest:
Hope lies in the streets!
Thank you to everyone who stood up today.
Thank YOU for not being a bystander as this government continues to betray its people, refusing to act on the science of climate breakdown, and is complicit in enabling a project of systemic genocide. https://t.co/qFDuKg1I4f
‘The only thing that is going to serve us is civil resistance’
The nine protesters were jailed this week for breaching an injunction designed to prevent road blockades.
Extinction Rebellion later said Saturday’s sit-down protest was to break the injunction granted to National Highways. It was in solidarity with the at least 34 people who have broken these injunctions so far, including those who were jailed this week.
Gabriella Ditton, 27, an animator from Norwich, Norfolk, was among those who took part in the Saturday’s demonstration. She said she’s been arrested six times with Insulate Britain, including once for breaking the injunction.
She said:
I expect to go to prison at some point for at least six months because I am not going to be apologetic about this.
I have known for a couple of years that the only thing that is going to serve us is civil resistance. I have faith in people coming together.
Solutions to this crisis exist, we just need the political will to do it.
30 arrests
Referring to Public Order Act conditions imposed on the protest, the Metropolitan Police said:
Lambeth Bridge has now been reopened, 30 arrests were made for breach of S14 conditions.
Earlier, uniformed officers had stood on Lambeth Bridge as traffic was diverted. The Metropolitan Police said this was “for the safety of all”.
Uniformed officers were at the scene as traffic was diverted (Helen William/PA)
‘Power to the people’
Zoe Cohen, 51, said she had travelled from her home in Warrington, Cheshire, to take part in the demonstration. Cohen said she’s “angry, distraught and grieving for the huge amount of nature that we have already lost”.
She said that “ordinary people should not have to do this and risk prison”. And she added that “any disruption is microscopic to the suffering of millions of people who are dying now across the world due to this crisis”.
Insulate Britain began a wave of protests in September. Since then, supporters have blocked the M25, roads in London including around Parliament, roads in Birmingham and Manchester and around the Port of Dover in Kent.
In a warning directed to police at the protest, Gully Bujack said:
These streets are ours and we will put one foot in front of the other, and dare you to stop us.
She added:
You can jail the resistor but not the resistance.
Campaigners told the crowd the nine jailed Insulate Britain climate activists are ‘political prisoners’ (Helen William/PA)
The group, watched closely by uniformed officers, then set off towards Westminster, chanting “power to the people”.
Cheers rang out as one campaigner told the crowd that “good people have a duty to disobey bad laws”.
Insulate Britain said it did not set up the event. Those who took part described the event as community-led.
The nine protesters were sentenced at the High Court on Wednesday after they admitted breaching an injunction by taking part in a blockade at junction 25 of the M25 during the morning rush hour on 8 October.
Insulate Britain has said it intends to continue the protests until the Government agrees to insulate homes.
Both the INEOS and Altrad logos will be emblazoned on the All Blacks jerseys and shorts for the next six years from 2022 and critics say both are bound to tarnish New Zealand’s clean, green image.
Imagine, in the opening match of the 2023 Rugby World Cup both the All Blacks and France will be wearing the albatross-like Altrad brand, and both seeming to endorse a company that dabbles in worsening climate change.
Again, New Zealand Rugby (NZR) is on the wrong side history and flying in the face of environmentalists the world over who came together in Glasgow for COP26 earlier this month to labour the point that climate change is here right now.
How the Altrad logo will look on the All Blacks jersey … a $120 million deal with the French energy and construction company. Image: NZR
The All Blacks jersey will carry the Altrad logo which AIG has adorned for 10 years, and the back of the shorts carry the giant British petrochemical firm INEOS logo which is owned by James Ratcliffe who was valued by Forbes magazine as having $14.9 billion and 26,000 employees.
Who is Altrad? A quick search on your browser comes up with screeds of material virtually all positive about its owner Mohed Altrad, 73, a tale of rags-to-riches for the French-Syrian businessman who is valued at $3.3 billion, has 42,000 employees and is the owner of Montpellier Heralt Rugby club in the Top 14 elite.
What does Altrad do? “Altrad is a world leader in the provision of industrial services, generating high-added value solutions principally for the Oil and Gas, Energy, Power Generation, Process, Environment and Construction sectors. The Group is also a recognised leader in the manufacturing of equipment dedicated to the Construction and Building market,” according to its website, and that doesn’t mention the work it does at nuclear power sites.
However, Altrad either doesn’t participate or disclose to the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) which conducts disclosure from companies willing to engage with the project.
The INEOS logo … an $8 million deal with the British petrochemical giant. Image: INEOS
Combined deal worth $50m a year
For NZR the deal with Altrad is in excess of $120 million and $8 million from INEOS with the combined deal believed to be around $50 million a year.
“INEOS have been caught out at the far end of those who are being seen as not playing their part in climate change mitigation and obviously positioning themselves accordingly,” said former All Blacks captain Chris Laidlaw, one of 100 signatories on an open letter sent by Kiwis in Climate to NZR decrying the deal with INEOS last month.
“They will be thinking about it now because the fuss is erupting, there is not much more that I can say other than it is not a good look for New Zealand.
“It is not a good look that we are on the backfoot and up in the climate change stakes and the rugby union have to think about it in those terms that it all adds up to not being in their interests to go ahead with these is drawing a fairly longer bow.”
As a former All Black, Laidlaw in his public service career was also a tireless campaigner against apartheid which saw rugby on the wrong side of history once again.
“In 1977, during a diplomatic cocktail party in New York, Laidlaw says the then New Zealand Prime Minister Robert Muldoon drunkenly harassed him, jabbing his finger in Laidlaw’s chest. Muldoon was angry about Laidlaw’s public comments criticising apartheid,” his Wikipedia entry says.
“Laidlaw says he grabbed Muldoon by the lapels and propelled him against the wall saying something like, “If you ever touch me again, I’ll knock your teeth out.” Muldoon glared at him, turned on his heel and walked out.
“In 1986, Laidlaw became New Zealand’s first resident High Commissioner to Harare, representing New Zealand’s interests throughout Africa. In 1989, Laidlaw was appointed Race Relations Conciliator.”
‘A great shame’ “I’m very sad about that, I’ve always thought the rugby union has been behind the play when it comes to social or political awareness, and they are showing it again now which is a great shame,” Laidlaw told Asia Pacific Report.
“If you asked most former All Blacks what they think about that, they are probably not going to give the answer you want, I just know that as a rule they are not connected with the political dimension we are talking about here.”
For Professor Dave Frame, director of the New Zealand Climate Change Research Institute at Wellington’s Victoria University and another of the signatories, it was a simple equation.
“I don’t see it as anything against New Zealand rugby, it is more as being about fossil fuel companies …I get why they spend money advertising in the motorsport industry, and they are enormously profitable companies,” he said.
“So, I think they are a bit like cigarette and alcohol companies sponsoring sport and these are things that we know to be harmful in one way or another to the environment.
“The All Blacks are a precious national brand and not just a company.
“Some of their own declared values, things like be a good ancestor, don’t really fit well in the 21st century being sponsored by a fossil fuel conglomerate.
Fossil fuel sponsorship ‘obsolete’
“Any fossil fuel sponsorship of a national rugby team it feels obsolete it feels like the sort of thing that it wouldn’t take much to decline. We shouldn’t be giving social licence to organisations which are actively causing one of the world’s greatest problems,” said Professor Frame who happens to be a Crusaders fan.
“If they’ve got spare money, they should stick that money into research and development into non-emitting energy technology rather than laundering their reputations via things like the All Blacks.
“That to me doesn’t feel right, I think it will be like turning up these days in a Rothmans or Benson & Hedges jersey or something like that.
“It is worse in some ways because people who are smokers choose to smoke like I say these are phenomenally profitable companies, you look at other sports like football.
“The champions league is probably one of the biggest annual sporting events in the world and champions league final, and they are sponsored by Gazprom and now the Saudis have bought Newcastle United [Saudi Arabia Public Investment Fund-backed consortium for £305 million] so they will be in there as well.
“These are profoundly profitable companies that are doing an enormous amount of environmental harm that is already being felt and it is disproportionately being borne by the poorest people in the world, and the leaders of these companies have this money to splurge on trinkets like football teams and rugby teams and that seems wrong,” Professor Frame said.
“I object to fossil fuel companies sponsoring sport in principle, I don’t have specific views on particular companies I don’t know of like Altrad although I do know a little bit about INEOS.
A place in motorsport
“They have their place like in the motorsport industry where they are encouraging more efficient design and that is a more arguable place, but I struggle to see the link between a fossil fuel company and rugby.
“We ought to have moved past it, and I think society will, I hope, soon withdraw its licence for this sort of reputational laundering,” said Professor Frame.
Laidlaw said he had looked at INEOS and thought they were not a good fit for NZR.
“They are not doing it for the betterment of rugby, I suspect therefore as seen as good citizens these companies choose their sponsorships arrangements very carefully and strategically, we all know that,” Laidlaw said.
The fact that they are a company that is intent now — right in the middle of when it’s very obvious we need a dramatic change in climate change management — buying up petrochemical plants around the world does not send the right signal.
“So, they are not a good partner. Any company that is in the middle of this kind of syndrome really does not warrant much attention as a donor or a partner.”
“It is very galling and a very large chunk of (rugby) supporters are really not much interested in climate change.
‘Pushback and backlash’
“Again, there will be some pushback and backlash but all the fuss in the world, once they have signed that agreement, they will just tough it out.”
What chance then of a court action, like that in 1985 when club players and lawyers Patrick Finnegan and Philip Recordon sought and gained an interim injunction that was granted by Justice Maurice Casey, stopped the All Blacks tour to South Africa.
“I was in the courts in 1985. I was astounded that the judge decided to provide an interim injunction, it was a very surprising decision given the law, it was a very good decision, and everyone was very pleased,” recalled Laidlaw.
“Well, not everyone, the Rugby Union was very displeased but on the same scale I would doubt it would, but you never know but it would be very interesting to see that happen.”
However, he doubted that such an action would take place with NZR’s deal with INEOS and Altrad.
“This is more an emotional thing than international law, there is nothing illegal about it, there is nothing in terms of human rights or anything like that. It is really not as compelling, I’m afraid.
“They might be moral companies but when it comes to climate change, they are missing the point.
Hard to persuade people
“Even then it is going to be quite hard to persuade people of the merits of this in terms of the argument being about climate change.”
The problem with climate change, he said, was people could not see the tangible effects of it in New Zealand.
“You can’t see climate change, you can see some of the side effects of it, but it is too big a thing for most people to comprehend.
“That is the fundamental problem, I’ve been through this as the chair of the regional council [Greater Wellington Regional Council] for some years and trying to get people from the farming community and others to actually convince themselves that they really have to be part of the solution is very, very hard, even now.
“We are getting some progress but dramatic action it is almost impossible to get, to persuade people. It is not in their material interest to move, and they won’t.
“There is only one side that you can be on this issue while it’s ephemeral to climate change, it is not a good look for New Zealand Rugby, and they are clearly going to be on the wrong side of history if they do it,” Laidlaw said.
France completely dominated the All Blacks, winning 40-25 in Paris yesterday and handing New Zealand their second loss in row, and a third loss in a season for the first time since 2009.And, the Black Ferns were beaten by France as well, going down to them 29-7 in Castres to complete their tour losing all four tests to England and France.Their two years without playing a test because of covid-19 has seen the English and French steal the march on them ahead of next year’s Women’s World Cup in New Zealand.
Nine activists from Insulate Britain were jailed for breaching High Court injunctions. They must now pay £5k each for National Highways’ claim for legal costs, judges have ruled. This amounts to a total of £45k to go towards the “excessive” legal bill.
The protesters were sentenced on Wednesday 17 November. It came after they admitted to breaching an injunction by taking part in a blockade, during morning rush hour on 8 October, at M25’s junction 25.
Sentences
Ana Heyatawin and Louis McKechnie were jailed for three months. Meanwhile Ben Buse, Roman Paluch-Machnik, Oliver Rock, Emma Smart, Tim Speers and James Thomas received four-month sentences.
Smart is currently on hunger strike whilst in prison:
Emma Smart, 44, ecologist. Four month prison sentence.
Ben Taylor was given a longer sentence of six months “to deter (him) from committing further breaches”. It came after justice Victoria Sharp described his submissions to the court on Tuesday as “inflammatory” and a “call to arms”.
The judge, sitting with justice Martin Chamberlain, said there was no alternative to custodial sentences given that the group’s actions were so serious and they had made it clear they intended to further flout court orders.
Protesters from Insulate Britain block Great George Street in Parliament Square, central London (James Manning/PA)
Exorbitant legal costs
Myriam Stacey QC, representing National Highways, previously said the legal costs of the proceedings were just over £91k. And she had asked the court to order the protesters to pay.
But in a written judgment after the hearing, the two judges ruled while it was fair to get the jailed activists to pay some legal fees, National Highways’ claimed costs were “excessive”.
They found National Highways’ fees included sums for advice from two senior barristers, four junior barristers and extra fees for three barristers.
Sharp said:
Even bearing in mind the need to consider relatively extensive evidence… we consider that these costs were excessive
The two judges also said it was not “reasonable” for three solicitors to attend the High Court hearing.
Sharp and Chamberlain ordered each of the activists to pay £5k towards National Highways’ costs, making a total of £45k. The judges concluded:
We would expect the claimant to enter into a dialogue with the defendants about how this liability is to be discharged
Insulate Britain has said it intends to continue the protests, which have sparked anger among motorists and others affected by the blockades, until the government agrees to insulate homes.
Preventing protest
The High Court has so far issued five injunctions to prevent protesters from blocking roads.
They include one injunction granted to Transport for London (TfL) and four to National Highways, banning demonstrations on the M25, around the Port of Dover and on major roads around London.
The High Court granted TfL a civil banning order aimed at preventing protesters from obstructing traffic on some of the London’s busiest roads.
Those who breach the injunctions could face a maximum penalty of two years in prison or an unlimited fine.
Further committal proceedings are expected to be issued against other Insulate Britain protesters relating to protests on 27 October.
A protest is planned at noon on Saturday 20 November to show solidarity with the activists in prison:
9 in prison for standing up to the “systematic project of mass genocide, occurring in Britain”.
This injustice will not be forgotten.
Will you stand with us in solidarity with the #Highway9?
Pacific civil society organisations say COP26 was the most exclusionary and inequitable of the annual United Nations climate negotiations so far and the results are equally disappointing.
The global climate negotiations concluded over the weekend in Glasgow with a new global deal on climate.
But reaching an agreement is looking like one of the only good things to come out of the negotiations from the Pacific Islands’ perspective.
Lavetanalagi Seru of the Pacific Islands Climate Action Network was in Glasgow and said that after all of the struggle getting there it was disappointing to find civil society excluded from many of the meeting rooms.
“So it doesn’t deliver on being an inclusive COP, neither does it deliver on equity and ensuring that the voices of frontline communities who are most impacted by the climate crisis are being heard,” he said.
“And that would mean the rapid phase out of fossil fuels, increased climate finance commitments.
“The second [disappointment] was on how they watered down the language on fossil fuel phase out to now its phase down.”
Lavetanalagi Seru said another big letdown for the Pacific was there was no concrete action on setting up a mechanism for loss and damage finance, which is reparation for the longterm and permanent damage already being caused by climate change.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Opposition National Federation Party leader Professor Biman Prasad has hit out at the Fiji government, calling on Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum to tell the Fijian people who funded the 36-member Fiji delegation to the Glasgow COP26 climate summit.
Professor Prasad said Fiji’s failure to achieve anything tangible from its agenda at COP26 proved that the donor-funded trip was a “junket”.
He said human rights activist Shamima Ali was right to ask the government to tell Fiji’s people who funded the delegation to Glasgow.
“Bigger countries than Fiji, such as New Zealand, sent fewer than 10 people,” he said.
“The Marshall Islands made a bigger impact than Fiji at COP26. It had a delegation of just five.
“But instead of sending a small, effective delegation that Fiji could afford — and lowering Fiji’s own carbon footprint — Fiji put out the begging bowl for three dozen people to travel.
“But which donors donated the money? Were these donors aligned with Fiji’s interests at COP26? Or were they big polluters such as China or Australia?
“Was the Fiji government compromised? Whose tune were the Prime Minister and Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum dancing to in Glasgow?
How The Fiji Times reported the COP26 funding controversy today. Image: Fiji Times screenshot APR
“And regardless of who was paying, the Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum should tell the people of Fiji what per diem allowances they collected for the duration of the trip?”
Professor Prasad said tens of thousands of people had had their jobs and lives ruined by covid-19 and could barely keep their families fed.
“Perhaps our elected leaders are too ashamed to tell us what money they have been able to receive in their two weeks away from the country.”
Questions sent to Bainimarama and Sayed-Khaiyum by The Fiji Times remained unanswered when it went to press last night.
Luke Naceiis a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.
Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama being briefed on Pacific priority areas at COP26. Image: FT/Fiji govt
After two hard-fought weeks of negotiations, the Glasgow climate change summit is, at last, over. All 197 participating countries adopted the so-called Glasgow Climate Pact, despite an 11th hour intervention by India in which the final agreement was watered down from “phasing out” coal to “phasing down”.
In an emotional final speech, COP26 president Alok Sharma apologised for this last-minute change.
His apology goes to the heart of the goals of COP26 in Glasgow: the hope it would deliver outcomes matching the urgent “code red” action needed to achieve the Paris Agreement target.
At the summit’s outset, UN Secretary-General António Guterres urged countries to “keep the goal of 1.5℃ alive”, to accelerate the decarbonisation of the global economy, and to phase out coal.
So, was COP26 a failure? If we evaluate this using the summits original stated goals, the answer is yes, it fell short. Two big ticket items weren’t realised: renewing targets for 2030 that align with limiting warming to 1.5℃, and an agreement on accelerating the phase-out of coal.
But among the failures, there were important decisions and notable bright spots. So let’s take a look at the summit’s defining issues.
We’ve kept 1.5 alive and made huge progress on coal, cars, cash and trees.
And while there is still so much that needs to be done to save our planet, we’ll look back at COP26 as the moment humanity finally got real about climate change. pic.twitter.com/Rf91HN4fS3
Weak 2030 targets The goal of the Paris Agreement is to limit global temperature rise to well below 2℃ this century, and to pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5℃. Catastrophic impacts will be unleashed beyond this point, such as sea level rise and more intense and frequent natural disasters.
But new projections from Climate Action Tracker show even if all COP26 pledges are met, the planet is on track to warm by 2.1℃ — or 2.4℃ if only 2030 targets are met.
Despite the Australian government’s recent climate announcements, this nation’s 2030 target remains the same as in 2015. If all countries adopted such meagre near-term targets, global temperature rise would be on track for up to 3℃.
Technically, the 1.5℃ limit is still within reach because, under the Glasgow pact, countries are asked to update their 2030 targets in a year’s time. However, as Sharma said, “the pulse of 1.5 is weak”.
And as Australia’s experience shows, domestic politics rather than international pressure is often the force driving climate policy. So there are no guarantees Australia or other nations will deliver greater ambition in 2022.
“Many of our small, low-lying islands may disappear by the end of this century. That means the country will be lost.”
Palau’s Environment Minister Steven Victor tells #Newsnight decisions made tonight at #COP26 are also about “deciding whether we keep a culture alive” pic.twitter.com/Qnr0X219om
Phase down, not out India’s intervention to change the final wording to “phase down” coal rather than “phase out” dampens the urgency to shift away from coal.
India is the world’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, after China and the United States. The country relies heavily on coal, and coal-powered generation is expected to grow by 4.6 percent each year to 2024.
India was the most prominent objector to the “phase out” wording, but also had support from China.
And US climate envoy John Kerry argued that carbon capture and storage technology could be developed further, to trap emissions at the source and store them underground.
Carbon capture and storage is a controversial proposition for climate action. It is not proven at scale, and we don’t yet know if captured emissions stored underground will eventually return to the atmosphere. And around the world, relatively few large-scale underground storage locations exist.
It is hard to see this expensive technology ever being cost-competitive with cheap renewable energy.
In a crucial outcome, COP26 also finalised rules for global carbon trading, known as Article 6 under the Paris Agreement. However under the rules, the fossil fuel industry will be allowed to “offset” its carbon emissions and carry on polluting. Combined with the “phasing down” change, this will see fossil fuel emissions continue.
It wasn’t all bad Despite the shortcomings, COP26 led to a number of important positive outcomes.
The world has taken an unambiguous turn away from fossil fuel as a source of energy. And the 1.5℃ global warming target has taken centre stage, with the recognition that reaching this target will require rapid, deep and sustained emissions reductions of 45 percent by 2030, relative to 2010 levels.
What’s more, the pact emphasises the importance to mitigation of nature and ecosystems, including protecting forests and biodiversity. This comes on top of a side deal struck by Australia and 123 other countries promising to end deforestation by 2030.
The pact also urges countries to fully deliver on an outstanding promise to deliver US$100 billion a year for five years to developing countries vulnerable to climate damage. It also emphasises the importance of transparency in implementing the pledges.
Nations are also invited to revisit and strengthen the 2030 targets as necessary to align with the Paris Agreement temperature goal by the end of 2022. In support of this, it was agreed to hold a high-level ministerial roundtable meeting each year focused on raising ambition out to 2030.
Despite the world not being on track for the 1.5℃ goal, momentum is headed in the right direction. And the mere fact that a reduction in coal use was directly addressed in the final text signals change may be possible.
But whether it comes in the small window we have left to stop catastrophic climate change remains to be seen.
Following two weeks of negotiations, the UN climate summit COP26 concluded with the Glasgow Climate Pact. The supposed aim of this pact, signed by 197 countries, is to keep hopes alive of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels by the year 2100.
As reported by the Guardian, the pact has been labelled “imperfect”. And prime minister Boris Johnson said “there is still a huge amount more to do in the coming years”. The UK, which hosted COP26, says the pact keeps alive hopes that we’ll avoid the worst of global warming. However, environmental activist Greta Thunberg was having none of it:
The #COP26 is over. Here’s a brief summary: Blah, blah, blah.
But the real work continues outside these halls. And we will never give up, ever. https://t.co/EOne9OogiR
As the leaders were putting the final touches to their pact, Thunberg predicted a spin on the outcome:
Now as #COP26 is coming to an end, beware of a tsunami of greenwashing and media spin to somehow frame the outcome as “good”, “progress”, “hopeful” or “a step in the right direction”.
Then came a warning from environmental journalist George Monbiot:
At #COP26 they are frantically seeking a compromise between our prospects of survival and the interests of the fossil fuel industry. But there is no room for compromise.
Earlier Monbiot had been even more damning. He called the pact a “total fiasco” and a:
pathetic limp rag of a document. Demonstrating that [COP26 leaders] are not here to protect life on Earth but to protect the fossil fuel industry from challenge:
Following the announcement of the pact, the COP26 Coalition – an environmental and civil society organisation – said:
This agreement is an utter betrayal of the people. It is hollow words on the climate emergency from the richest countries, with an utter disregard of science and justice. The UK government greenwash and PR have spun us off course
And that:
It’s immoral for the rich to sit there talking about their future children and grandchildren, when the children of the south are suffering now. This Cop has failed to keep 1.5C alive, and set us on a pathway to 2.5C. All while claiming to act as they set the planet on fire
Some of the pact’s takeaways
The pact asks countries to “strengthen” their climate plans by the end of 2022 and to reduce their use of coal and fossil fuel subsidies. It agrees to ‘phase down’ unabated coal power and to phase out “inefficient fossil fuel subsidies”. But there’s some confusion over the definition of the words “unabated” and “inefficient”.
There was also push back on the necessary financial side. Because countries from the Global South wanted financial assistance to help them deal with the harm created by the climate crisis. But the US and EU resisted this, so it wasn’t included in the final deal.
And as for the all important goal of limiting global temperatures to 1.5 degrees, Simon Lewis and Mark Maslin wrote in the Conversation:
Announcements at COP26, including new pledges to cut emissions this decade, by some key countries, have reduced this to a best estimate of 2.4°C.
And that:
Carbon markets could throw a potential lifeline to the fossil fuel industry, allowing them to claim “carbon offsets” and carry on business as (nearly) usual.
Thunberg tweeted:
2,4°C if all govts met the 2030 targets, 2,7°C with current policies. These NDCs are based on flawed and underreported numbers. And this is IF leaders meet their promises, which judging by their track record is not very likely… This is what some seem to celebrate today. #COP26https://t.co/VNT4bxfPck
Other people and campaign groups took to social media to echo that sentiment. Extinction Rebellion slammed COP26’s claim that it had “kept 1.5 degrees alive”:
I know there are so many people desperately needing to spin it as a success, and millions desperate to believe it was, so we can sleep at night, but in truth "BLAH BLAH BLAH" was an uncannily prescient and accurate summary of #COP26.
The Canary attended a number of days of the two-week COP26 and gave it extensive coverage. Reflected in that coverage were the numerous ways in which this summit was failing both planet and people. So it comes as little surprise that the final agreement showed COP26 really was nothing more than a “failure and PR event”, as Thunberg described it.
What should also come as no surprise is that the people who really care about our planet will fight on. Because we’re fucked if we don’t, and we’ve got precious little time.
The climate emergency is the result of an ethical, moral and spiritual crisis, manifested in a fixation on profit.
The extractive and, ultimately, unsustainable systems of production and consumption, by those complicit in this crisis, continue to ignore increasing scientific, and moral warnings.
Those who have contributed to this crisis the least, suffer the most, physically, existentially, and ecologically.
We affirm the Faith and Science Joint Appeal, calling us to respond, with the knowledge of science, and the wisdom of spirituality: to know more and to care more.
Our interconnectedness to this common home forces us to a radical solidarity, across gender and generation, for climate justice for all.
In this spirit, wealthier countries must lead in reducing their own emissions, and in financing emission reductions of poorer nations.
Industrialised countries must support the vulnerable
Industrialised countries must support the vulnerable countries, and finance adaptation.
They must put into action a mechanism for loss and damage, with additional funds.
Love calls us to seek climate justice and restoration. It calls us to respect the rights of Indigenous Peoples, to protect them, and their ancestral domains, from predatory economic interests, and to learn from their ancient wisdom.
Indigenous spirituality could restore our understanding of interdependence between land, ocean, and life, between generations before us,and the ones to come.
Love calls us to transformation of systems and lifestyles. This transition away from fossil fuel-based economies must be just, securing livelihoods and wellbeing for all and not just some.
Keep Paris Agreement promise alive
We ask our leaders to not only keep the promise of the Paris Agreement alive, but also to keep alive the hope of a flourishing future for humanity.
We have heard many commitments in this place.
Words have power, but only when they are manifested into action.
The fate of the planet depends on it.
The World Council of Churches (WCC) presented a longer statement to the COP26 Climate Summit. This was the text of Pacific Conference of Churches (PCC) secretary-general Reverend James Bhagwan’s intervention to the High Level Plenary yesterday.
COMMENTARY:By the Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown
After years of empty promises by major emitters, it’s time to deliver on climate financing.
The world is warming. The science is clear. Most large, developed countries need to take ambitious action to reduce their emissions in order not to impact us further.
If they don’t, there is dire consequence, and in turn a significant rise in adaptation cost to us, those that did not cause this problem.
Some people call it paradise, but for me and thousands of Pacific people, the beautiful pristine Pacific Island region is simply home. It is our inheritance, a blessing from our forebears and ancestors.
As custodians of these islands, we have a moral duty to protect it – for today and the unborn generations of our Pacific anau.
Sadly, we are unable to do that because of things beyond our control. The grim reality of climate change, especially for many Small Island Developing States like my beloved Cook Islands, is evidently clear.
Sea level rise is alarming. Our food security is at risk, and our way of life that we have known for generations is slowly disappearing. What were “once in a lifetime” extreme events like category 5 cyclones, marine heatwaves and the like are becoming more severe.
No longer theory
These developments are no longer theory. Despite our negligible contribution to global emissions, this is the price we pay.
We are talking about homes, lands and precious lives; many are being displaced as we speak. I am reminded about my Pacific brothers and sisters living on remote atolls including some of those in our 15 islands that make up the Cook Islands — as well as our Pacific neighbours such as Kiribati, Tuvalu, Tokelau and many others, not just in the Pacific Ocean.
This family of small islands states is spread beyond our Pacific to across the globe.
Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown … “the devastating impact of climate change has evolved from a mere threat to a crisis of epic proportion.” Image: Nate McKinnon/RNZ
Here in the Cook Islands, we are raising riverbanks to protect homes that for the first time in history are being reached by floodwater. We are building water storage on islands that have never before experienced levels of drought that we see now.
Over the years, the devastating impact of climate change has evolved from a mere threat to a crisis of epic proportion, now posing as the most pressing security issue to livelihoods on our island shores.
We live with undeniable evidence to back up the science. Most of you who follow the climate change discourse know our story. We have been saying this for as far as back as I can remember.
For more than 10 years of my political career, our message to the world about climate change has been loud and clear. Climate change is a matter of life and death. We need help. Urgently.
Given only empty promises
Today, I am sad to say that after all the years of highlighting this bitter truth, the discourse hasn’t progressed us far enough. All we have been given are promises and more empty promises from the world’s biggest emitters while our islands and people are heading towards a climate catastrophe where our very existence and future is at stake.
But we will not stop trying. As long as we have the strength and the opportunity to speak our truth to power, we will continue to call for urgent action. In the words of our young Pacific climate activists, “We are not drowning, we are fighting.”
Koro Island, Fiji, after Tropical Cyclone Winston in 2016. “It is critical that COP26 begins discussions for a new quantifiable goal on climate finance.” Image: UNOCHA
As the political champion of Climate Finance for the Pacific Islands, I believe it is imperative that world leaders fast track large-scale climate finance that are easy to access for bold long-term and permanent adaptation solutions.
It is critical that COP26 begins discussions for a new quantifiable goal on climate finance. We need to do this now. Not tomorrow, next year or the next COP.
Last week when I addressed world leaders attending COP26, I urged them to consider a new global financial instrument that recognises climate-related debt, separately from national debt. We need to provide for innovative financing modalities that do not increase our debt.
We need to take climate adaptation debt off national balance sheets, especially since many Pacific countries are already heavily in debt. Why? Pacific countries contribute the least to global emissions and they should not have to pay a debt on top the consequences they are already struggling with.
Amortising adaptation debt
We need to consider amortising adaptation debt over a 100-year timeframe.
We must seek a new commitment that dedicates financing towards Loss and Damage that would assist our vulnerable communities manage the transfer of risks experienced by the irreversible impacts of climate change. We must also ensure that adaptation receives an equitable amount of financing as for mitigation.
I want to reiterate that adaptation measures by their very nature are long-term investments against climate impacts, thus we need to be talking about adaptation project lifecycles of 20 years, 50 years and 100 years, and more.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres visited Tuvalu in 2019 and described the nation as “the extreme front-line of the global climate emergency”. Image: UN in the Pacific
We are at a critical juncture of our journey where the fate of our beautiful, pristine homes is a stake. I call on all major emitters to take stronger climate action, especially to deliver on their funding promises.
Stop making excuses; climate change existed way before covid-19 when the promises of billions of dollars in climate financing were made.
It is time to deliver.
Mark Brown, Prime Minister of the Cook Islands, is also the Pacific Political Champion for Climate Finance at COP26. While not attending the COP this year due to covid-19 travel restrictions, Prime Minister Brown is providing support and undertaking this role remotely. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
What do you do when the other small island nations don’t recognise your brilliance and won’t go along with your suggestions?
Well, when you are Fiji Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, you call up your brother, Riyaz’s, broadcasting network (their FBC, not yours), and instruct it to express your displeasure.
FBC News reports that the Chair of the Alliance of Small Island States, Antigua and Barbuda, rejected a proposal on oceans put forward by Fiji at COP26 and “this has not gone down well with Fiji, which says it does not believe this position is in the long-standing collaborative interest of AOSIS”.
Which actually means the big slap in the face has not gone down well with Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, an oceans champion at COP.
The FBC News story doesn’t carry the name of the author of the story, which is a requirement for every story under the AG’s media laws. But those rules don’t apply either when the AG orders a version of a story to go to air to try to counter a humiliating setback.
Grubsheet Feejee understands that with the Chair of AOSIS “shunning Fiji’s presentation” – which is how even FBC News put it – other island nations have taken Antigua and Barbuda’s lead.
Indeed, there are reports that not a single other AOSIS member has sided with the AG, which just compounds his humiliation.
It wasn’t meant to be this way. COP26 was meant to showcase Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s brilliant negotiating skills by putting oceans at the centre of the climate agenda.
But Glasgow is not Suva. And the AG is finding out the hard way that just because he wants something doesn’t mean that he will get it.
Maybe he can use his celebrated skills of persuasion to turns things around before it all ends in failure.
But let’s hope Captain Mendacious has learned a valuable lesson in one of his first forays onto the global stage. That the leaders of other nations don’t necessarily share his high opinion of himself.
Australian-Fijian journalist Graham Davis publishes the blog Grubsheet Feejee on Fiji affairs. He was a member of the Fiji government’s climate delegation at COP23.
Prime Minister James Marape told the media yesterday that the gains from the country’s attendance at the current COP26 Climate Summit in Glasgow, Scotland, will far outweigh the cost of attending.
But if we are being true to the essence of COP, are we really there to find solutions to climate change?
Marape said “the benefits from COP26 will outweigh the cost” in direct response to this newspaper questioning the decision to send a 62-member delegation to the current 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference — that is the long version of COP26 for those who have been wondering.
The Post-Courier, through sources it considers reliable, found that the trip while regionally and globally important, involved sending one of the largest delegations ever assembled by this or any other country to a global climate meet.
Also disconcerting was the fact that this would no doubt have to have cost a fortune – this is after taking into account the usual accommodation, logistics, travelling allowances and all the other bells and whistles that go with such grand displays of Papua New Guinean interest.
Now, Marape has come back with a rather lengthy statement informing the media and thus our consumers of the reasons why the large delegation to Scotland was warranted.
His firm assurance to us is basically that PNG will reap the harvest from this COP26 meet and that naysayers and soothsayers alike should not worry about the costs involved in the country’s participation at the climate event.
PM’s stand on COP26 meeting
That is our Prime Minister’s stand on the matter and for all intents and purposes we are bound to accept it for what it is and give him and our government the benefit of the doubt.
Marape has told us that a COP26 outcomes report and correlating implementation matrix shall be made known to the public in the near future and we shall hold him to his word.
But what concerns us as a newspaper for the people, is the fact that the international community is abuzz with disdain towards the current and on-going COP26 climate meet that PNG seems so interested in.
It would seem while we as a country are in Glasgow for the good of the nation, we are missing the very essence of what the climate meeting is all about.
All major news agencies around the world have reported that COP26 cannot in good conscience hold any real representative climate change talks because most countries that are most affected by climate change remain absent this year.
A third of Pacific islands have announced they are unable to send senior delegations for the first time in COP history.
Small nations least responsible
These nations, Small Island Developing States (SIDS), are the least responsible for climate change — but are some of the most impacted on.
And their voices are missing in Glasgow.
Only four Pacific island nations are sending their leaders, Fiji, Tuvalu, Palau and good old PNG.
The rest either have limited or no representation, largely due to COVID-19 restrictions in the region.
It is important that as one of only four Pacific island nations at COP26, we speak for the good of all our neighbours who we are sure would have liked to be at COP26 but could not make it.
As our delegation concludes its climate talks and pushes for innovative ways to help combat the adverse effects of climate change, let us hope our good PM, the government and our delegation remain true to what COP26 is all about.
And that they actually push for ways to mitigate our drowning islands and ever increasing loss of animal habitats.
We say this because at the moment it seems like PNG has again sent another rather large sales and marketing team abroad to garner interest in our country in the hopes of improving our financial and economic situation rather than actually finding climate change solutions.
Post-Courier editorial published on 8 November 2021 with permission.
“This is a package of available financing of 197 million euros for the years 2021 to 2027. This will be implemented in the countries of the Pacific with a very strong focus on climate change.”
Seam said the EU would hold further talks with member states to ensure their interests and priorities aligned with the Climate Act.
Alliance partner members have already established relationships in several countries, to work with governments and enhance their domestic policy, planning, and regulatory frameworks, as well as create more favourable investment environments.
Mark Carney, the UN’s special envoy on climate action and finance, said the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) deal demonstrated how the financial sector was “no longer a mirror that reflects a world that’s not doing enough”.
However, environmental groups warned there were too many loopholes in the ambitious plan and no legal obligation on the part of financial institutions to steer clear from investing in carbon-heavy activities.
European Union’s ambassador for the Pacific, Sujiro Seam … “The key priority areas at COP26 will include keeping 1.5 degrees alive, scaling up support for adaptation, and loss and damage.” Image: RNZ/Sujiro Seam/Twitter
At the global level, there is a commitment from developed countries to provide US$100 billion in climate finance to countries which need it the most, Seam said.
He said the EU was taking more than its fair share because it was contributing $25 billion. He said the EU only contributed to eight percent of carbon emissions.
“The key priority areas at COP26 will include keeping 1.5 degrees alive, scaling up support for adaptation and loss and damage, oceans climate nexus, increased climate finance and finalising the Paris Agreement rule book,” he said.
Pacific youth rally for climate justice Pacific climate warriors marched in Glasgow this week as world leaders continued to negotiate how best to save the planet.
To mark the Global Day of Action for Climate Justice, thousands of young environment advocates from across the world converged on the COP26 city.
More than 50,000 people attended the Glasgow rally on Friday.
Pacific climate activist Brianna Fruean said that if the Pacific was saved, the world could also be saved.
Pacific climate warrior Brianna Fruean … “It’s like trying to talk to leaders who continuously do not listen. So how do we tell that story differently?” Image: Christine Rovoi/RNZ
The Samoan student of Auckland University earlier addressed the UN climate meeting.
“It’s like trying to talk to leaders who continuously do not listen. So how do we tell that story differently?,” she said.
“I think for years UN and big structures like this has expected Pacific Islanders to come and cry and to come and show them our pain and say, we are here please help us, please save us. And that’s not the story I wanted to tell, I wanted to tell that story of resilience.”
Inspired by many
And while she is now the face of the region, Fruean said she had been inspired by many people.
“I am not one person, I am a collective of many. I have been so lucky to be enriched by our Pasifika people.
“Many of my elders who come from Fiji too. I call them elders because I learn from them and wisdom too and a lot of them who say they are youth adjacent.
“People like George Nacewa, Alisi Nacewa, his wife, all people that you might but… Fenton Lutunatabua, they are my mentors and they are the people who have guided me to come this far.”
Samoan climate activist @BriannaFruean, 23, addressed world leaders at the opening of #COP26. Brianna shares what it felt like to speak up for Pacific islanders – whose homes & way of life are under threat from rising sea levels. @350Pacific@BBCWorldhttps://t.co/Hr8jtegw34
Papua New Guinea — a country faced with a depressed economy and its public health system on the brink of total collapse due to the covid-19 pandemic sent a 62-member delegation to Europe to attend the COP26 Climate Change conference at a cost of a whooping K5.8 million (NZ$2.03 million).
The Post-Courier was told the initial budget for PNG’s participation in the climate change conference was put at K20 million for 82 people.
However, this was brought down to K5.8 million, but the National Executive Council approved only K3 million and reduced the number of delegates to 62 people.
Prime Minister James Marape stayed in PNG and appointed his Minister for Environment and Conservation, Wera Mori, to head the delegation to Glasgow.
Mori, when contacted by this newspaper to justify the cost, referred us to the NEC.
Apart from Mori, other MPs on the trip are Oro Governor Gary Juffa, Member for Moresby North West Lohia Boe Samuel, Member for Talasea Francis Maneke, Vice-Minister for Works and Member for Anglimp-South Waghi Joe Kuli, Member for Kairiku-Hiri Peter Isoaimo and Member for Rai Coast Peter Sapia.
The money was spent on airfares, accomondation and allowances and the delegation requested from the Finance Department in total K800,000 for airfares and K620,000 for accommodation for 10 nights.
Furthermore, travel allowances for the special envoy, the six other MPs with their officers was at US$500 to US$600 per day and at today’s exchange rate, this works out to about K2500 to K3000 a day.
Travel allowance rates
For the public servants, the current rate for travel allowance is at US$300 (K1500) per day and accommodation between US$200 – US$250 (K600 – K1250) per day, depending on the rate charged by the hotels they are booked in to stay.
According to our findings, the actual cost of the trip would have been K1.32 million.
The delegates travelled in three groups and the round trip — Port Moresby, Singapore, Doha and Glasgow — and back cost K19,000 on business class for the envoy and the MPs and K12,980 for the others on economy class.
The Post-Courier was told the first 20 travelled on PX 009 on October 23, the next 20 on the 24th and the rest on the 25th.
Attempts to get the full list of the delegation as well as an official response on the exorbitant cost from the Prime Minister’s office and the departments of Finance, and Foreign Affairs and Office of Environment and Climate Change were unsuccessful.
PNG’s Kundu London High Commissioner was also sent questions relating to PNG’s participation and the costs, but this newspaper was advised all media responses must be channelled through the Foreign Affairs Secretary Elias Wohengu.
This is the second international conference on Climate Change PNG has participated in as a country.
‘Corruption at its best’
After the COP15 conference held in Paris, France, in 2015, the then Environment Minister, Sir John Pundari, went public and condemned the conduct of some members of the government delegation to that conference.
In his criticism, Sir John particularly talked about the attendance of members of the delegation, noting that some went missing, others turned up late while others left early for home.
At that time, Sir John said he was very disappointed that even his fellow ministers who were part of the government delegation quickly disappeared.
He said then that “getting airline tickets and allowances to attend international meetings, and to show up for a day or two, then spend the rest of the time in other places was corruption at its best, and must never be encouraged”.
Over the last two weeks, the Post-Courier asked Sir John twice to comment on the COP26 trip but he referred the newspaper to the Prime Minister’s office instead.
By PNG Post-Courier reporters. Republished with permission.
Critics in Fiji are concerned about climate change hypocrisy at the COP26 Leaders Summit this week. Fiji Times contributor Ajay Bhai Amrit was moved to comment about the problem of the government’s “gas guzzler” vehicle fleet.
Bula readers! First and foremost, this article is not a criticism of the government and its policies. It is more of an observation on how officials can rectify and improve themselves because if we, the public, cannot voice our opinions and suggest changes then who can?
The hot topic this week is about the huge contingent of 36 people that Fiji has sent half way around the world to Glasgow, Scotland.
This is to be part of the COP26 summit and the many discussions on climate change that major counties such as the US, UK, Canada, Australia, Germany and France and so on will hopefully discuss and agree to principle points and further reduce harmful emissions to the environment globally.
This topic brings issues closer to home as I am seeing a worrying trend of our government leaders splashing out on massive gas guzzling vehicles with full black tinted glass, which quite frankly looks a little embarrassing in a country where we basically all know each other.
I have witnessed time and again these huge beasts of vehicles being left with engines running, both consuming fuel and polluting the environment as they wait for the occupants to arrive.
Government entourages have a huge fleet of the most uneconomical big 4X4 luxury vehicles available with not one hybrid or electric vehicle, or even a small engine vehicle, in the fleet for the ministers or even assistant ministers.
This is a sad sight to see as the world moves in one direction towards a greener environment and it seems our leaders are moving in another direction towards more excess and luxuries.
Environmental luxury warriors
Unfortunately, you have to ask yourself what type of example does this set for our so-called environmental warriors who will fly in luxury half way around the world to represent us.
The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that vehicles cause about 75 percent of the carbon monoxide pollution in the US alone.
The science doesn’t lie, when each gallon of fuel you burn creates 20 pounds of greenhouse gases, which is roughly six to nine tons of greenhouse gases each year for a typical vehicle.
To make things worse the average hardworking Fiji citizen who drives let’s say a Toyota Prius or other similar hybrid vehicle makes approx 99/km of CO2 emissions, compare that with our government ministers’ Toyota Prados and Land Cruisers which can make up to a whopping 300/km of CO2 emissions. This is very sad indeed to see.
I am the first to put my hand up and say, after much deliberation, I decided to purchase a big eight-seater Toyota Land Cruiser for my family of six and sometimes eight when my elderly parents visit as it can accommodate eight people and the only legal form of transport I can use to carry that number of people.
The government on the other hand is using our public funds to totally disregard any environmentally friendly options and has actually purchased and leased the biggest, most expensive, vehicles with the largest engines to pollute the environment even more.
These vehicles are equipped to carry many passengers but sadly usually only carry the driver and minister.
A huge flying fleet
To add to this, these are not just one or two vehicles, but a huge fleet of them flying around Suva and other towns and villages Fiji wide, sometimes speeding along with screaming lights flashing away.
For the life of me I still don’t know why they do this.
I don’t want to be critical, but just imagine if the powers that be in government decided for once to follow their own guidelines and maybe purchase a more modest and fuel efficient substitute, millions upon millions of dollars would have been saved plus millions of pounds of harmful greenhouse gases would have been avoided.
And the environment would be much less polluted and we would certainly commend them for this.
Would it be too much to ask to introduce smaller fuel efficient hybrid vehicles to their fleet for the ministers and senior officials to show their commitment to their polices?
There are so many fuel efficient vehicle options available.
Where I live, we constantly see governments huge 4×4 vehicles screeching around with their fully tinted windows, and also entourages of them storming in and out of Suva with little or no regard to the pollution and impact it has on the environment.
Willing to be inspired
I am willing to be inspired by any one of the ministers who will give up gas guzzling vehicles which they have been cruising around in for the last eight plus years for a smaller hybrid efficient vehicle.
I will be the first to congratulate them for practising what they preach. Finally there is a very inspiring four way test that all Rotarians try and abide by. These are:
Is it the truth?
Is it fair to all concerned?
Will it build goodwill?
Will it be beneficial to all?
Unfortunately, when it comes to the government hierarchy and their passion for large expensive gas guzzling and environmentally damaging vehicles, I am embarrassed to say that they have failed every one of the four-way test completely and miserably.
Ajay Bhai Amrit is a freelance writer. Fiji Times articles are republished with permission.
Jokes at the COP26 Climate Leaders Summit … but many questions about the future. Image: UK govt/FT
Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and more than 60 environmental journalists of 34 different nationalities have appealed for respect for the right to cover environmental issues.
These journalists — who are from every part of the world and every kind of media, and who have all kinds of backgrounds and political views — have joined RSF in signing an unprecedented appeal coinciding with COP26 entitled “Climate emergency, journalism emergency”.
Men and women, some of them environmental experts and some of them more general reporters, some with a long history of covering “green” issues and some covering the environment more recently as it has become an increasingly alarming news story, they have denounced the obstacles that limit the right to provide information about these issues.
The petitioners are asking governments to officially recognise that the right to information about these issues is inherent in the right to a healthy environment and the right to health.
The first journalists signing the appeal include Gaëlle Borgia, a 2020 Pulitzer Prize winner based in Madagascar, France’s Morgan Large, a food industry specialist, Russia’s Grigory Pasko, an RSF Press Freedom laureate who was awarded the Sakharov Prize in 2002, India’s Soulik Dutta, an expert in energy and land issues, South Africa’s Khadija Sharife, who investigates environmental crimes, and Lucien Kosha, a freelancer covering mining in the DRC.
Most of them have signed on an individual basis but the staff at some news organisations have wanted to sign collectively.
Environmental teams
This was the case with Afaq Environmental Magazine, a Palestinian media outlet, and Reporterre, a French news site covering environmental issues.
Crucially, the appeal points out that, although the right to cover environmental issues was established as a principle as early as the UN Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, this right is still not being respected.
The signatories report that, in many countries, it is still very difficult to obtain information and scientific data about the environment, although such information is of paramount public interest. Their coverage can help change behaviour and help combat the unprecedented threat posed by global warming.
“Nearly 30 years after the right to cover environmental issues was proclaimed in the United Nations Earth Summit declaration in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, this right must finally become a reality, it must finally be applied and respected without exception, as something that is self-evident,” RSF secretary-general Christophe Deloire said.
“At the hour of the climate emergency, this is a journalistic emergency. Environmental coverage is now vital.”
The dangers linked to covering environmental issues in some parts of the world has led to the killing of at least 21 journalists in the past 20 years for investigating these sensitive issues.
RSF and the journalists signing the appeal have also called for concrete implementation of international law on the protection of journalists.
Children and young people are experiencing a mental health epidemic. Markela Panegyres argues that resources are not being made available either for the treatment or to tackle some of the causes.
Australia is accused of using “diplomatic strong-arm tactics” to water down outcomes in Pacific climate negotiations and “buy silence” on climate change, a new report has revealed.
Greenpeace Australia Pacific’s report, Australia: Pacific Bully and International Outcast, reveals that the Australian government uses “bullying tactics” in regional negotiations on climate change, according to former Pacific Island leaders interviewed as part of the study.
The leaders include former Kiribati President Anote Tong and former Prime Minister of Tuvalu Bikenibeu Paeniu.
Australia’s aid to the Pacific has been “greenwashed”, with some of the largest and most expensive “climate adaptation” projects having no link to climate change or contributing to increase the climate resilience of Pacific peoples.
The Australian government’s climate position harms its international relations and economy with Australia’s export markets for coal and gas shrinking as major trading partners such as Japan and South Korea commit to net-zero emissions, says the report, published coinciding with the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow.
The report draws on dozens of interviews with present and former Pacific leaders, Australian diplomats and academics to expose the hardline tactics used by Australia to thwart stronger regional action on climate change and to shift focus away from Australia’s responsibility to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The report also uncovers the greenwashing of Australian aid in the Pacific, finding that millions of aid dollars have been given to “climate adaptation” projects that do not have any link to climate change.
Australian standing damaged
Greenpeace Australia Pacific researcher and international relations expert Dr Alex Edney-Browne said the investigation showed Australia’s international standing had been damaged by its climate obstruction.
“Australia has lost its once-respected position in the Pacific and now has a reputation for bullying and strong-arm diplomatic tactics to thwart regional climate action,” she said.
“Pacific Island leaders are some of the world’s strongest climate advocates, but Australia has brazenly tried to buy their silence through aid with strings attached.
“Morrison’s last-minute commitment at COP26 this week to increase regional climate finance by $500 milion, via bilateral agreements, simply won’t cut it. Given the level of greenwashing going on in Australia’s foreign aid to the Pacific as revealed in this report, there is also no guarantee that this money will go where it’s needed to increase the climate resiliency of Pacific peoples,” she said.
“Australia has a history of using bilateral aid as a way of gaining leverage over Pacific island countries. It would be nice to see Australia being a good international citizen and showing support for multilateral climate finance such as the UN’s Green Climate Fund. It refuses to do so.
“Australia must make a serious effort on climate change, which is threatening the very survival of Pacific nations. That means ruling out any new coal or gas projects, ending the billions in subsidies given to the fossil fuel industry and committing to a science-based target to cut emissions by 75 percent this decade to bring it up to speed with our regional neighbours and trading partners.”
Gareth Evans, a former Australian foreign minister, said Australia’s climate policy was already hurting the country’s diplomatic standing.
‘Reputation for decency’
“A country’s reputation for decency in these matters does really, really matter… Australia’s credibility in all sorts of ways depends on our being seen to be responsible, good international citizens and Australia is putting that reputation very much at risk on the climate front,” he said.
Anote Tong, former President of Kiribati, said Australia had not acted in the spirit of mutual respect in its dealings with the Pacific on climate change.
“I cannot read into the minds of Australian leaders but it’s always been my hope that we would treat each other with mutual respect, but I’m not sure this has always been the case,” he said.
“But we should be partners in every respect and not when it is convenient to one party but not the other, for example on climate change. We expect Australia to be stepping forward because climate change is very important for us and we’re meant to be part of this family. It had always been my expectation, my hope, that Australia would provide the leadership we desperately need on climate change.”
Dr Matt McDonald, associate professor of International Relations at University of Queensland, refers to Australia’s climate policies as a “perfect storm”, with serious repercussions for the country’s regional and international relations if these policies remain weak by comparison with similar developed countries.
Fiji has done its part in the fight against climate change by pushing for the first international accord to include the 1.5-degree threshold in the Suva Declaration in 2015 and committing to net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, says Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama.
“At COP21, in a fury of forceful negotiations in Paris, France, the 1.5-degree guardrail was written into the Paris Agreement on climate change,” he said.
“Fiji has since done our part — legally empowering ourselves to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 through our recently passed Climate Change Act,” he said at a COP26 briefing in Glasgow, Scotland this week.
“Six years post-Paris, we are on track for 2.7 degrees of warming — a hellish future that will spare no nation,” he said.
“To demand the action we need, the world’s climate champions are marching to Glasgow to the mantra of ‘keep 1.5 alive’ — a battle cry first uttered here in the Pacific.”
PM condemns selfish ‘carbon addicts’
Timoci Vula reports that in his speech at COP26 yesterday, Bainimarama said the world could not let “a coalition of carbon addicts” write out the urgency of accelerating climate action for the survival of low-lying island nations and communities.
Bainimarama said the “1.5” (global warming limit target) was a compromise that Fiji had struck alongside all of the world’s most climate vulnerable nations.
He said they knew then all the human tragedy that level of warming would mean, but it would also ensure that, at the very least, low-lying island nations and communities would survive.
“Six years on, where has that goodwill gotten us? The world’s collective climate commitments will see us fly past 1.5 by the end of the decade.
“We are losing the race to net-zero to a coalition of carbon addicts who would rather fight for coal than for a future of good jobs and innovative industries created by climate ambition,” Bainimarama said.
“These leaders make pledges but won’t show us plans. They even seek to spin the science. But we cannot let them write out the urgency of accelerating action.
“Clean coal, responsible natural gas, and ethical oil are all figments of the selfish mind.
“No matter what they call them, carbon emissions are wrecking the climate. There’s nothing clean, natural or ethical about it.”
Bainimarama claimed other leaders pursued a “policy of appeasement”.
“They sit idly by as their high-emitting counterparts destroy our children’s futures.”
Talebula Kateand Timoci Vula are Fiji Times reporters. Republished with permission.
As the Glasgow climate summits gets underway, New Zealand’s government has announced a revised pledge, with a headline figure of a 50 percent reduction on gross 2005 emissions by the end of this decade.
This looks good on the surface, but the substance of this new commitment, known as a Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), is best assessed in emissions across decades.
New Zealand’s actual emissions in the 2010s were 701 million tonnes (Mt) of carbon dioxide equivalent. The carbon budget for the 2020s is 675Mt. The old pledge for the 2020s was 623Mt.
The Climate Change Commission’s advice was for “much less than” 593Mt, and the new NDC is 571Mt. So yes, the new pledge meets the commission’s advice and is a step up on the old, but it does not meet our fairshare under the Paris Agreement.
It is also a stretch to call the new NDC consistent with the goal of keeping global temperature rise under 1.5℃.
True 1.5℃ compliance would require halving fossil fuel burning over the next decade, while the current plan is for cuts of a quarter.
The dark dashed line shows New Zealand’s domestic climate goal – its carbon budget. The blue area shows a possible pathway under the old climate pledge, and the red area represents the newly announced pledge. Graph: Office of the Minister of Climate Change, CC BY-ND
Emissions need to halve this decade Countries’ climate pledges are at the heart of the Paris Agreement. The initial round of pledges in 2016 added up to global warming of 3.5℃, but it was always intended they would be ratcheted up over time.
In the run-up to COP26, a flurry of new announcements brought that figure down to 2.7℃ — better, but still a significant miss on 1.5℃.
As this graph from the UN’s Emissions Gap Report 2021 shows, the world will need to halve emissions this decade to keep on track for 1.5℃.
This graph shows that new and existing pledges under the Paris Agreement leave the world on track for 2.7ºC of warming. If recent net-zero pledges are realised, they will take us to 2.2ºC. Graph: UNEP, CC BY-ND
New Zealand’s first NDC, for net 2030 emissions to be 30 percent below gross 2005 emissions, was widely seen as inadequate. An update, reflecting the ambition of the 2019 Zero Carbon Act to keep warming below 1.5℃, has been awaited eagerly.
But several factors have combined to make a truly ambitious NDC particularly difficult.
First, New Zealand’s old climate strategy was based on tree planting and the purchase of offshore carbon credits. The tree planting came to and end in the early 2010s and is only now resuming, while the Emissions Trading Scheme was closed to international markets in 2015. The Paris Agreement was intended to allow a restart of international carbon trading, but this has not yet been possible.
Second, New Zealand has a terrible record in cutting emissions so far. Burning of fossil fuels actually increased by 9 percent from 2016 to 2019. It’s a challenge to turn around our high-emissions economy.
Third, our new climate strategy, involving carbon budgets and pathways under advice from the Climate Change Commission, is only just kicking in. The government has made an in-principle agreement on carbon budgets out to 2030, and has begun consultation on how to meet them. The full emissions-reduction plan will not be ready until May 2022.
Regarding a revised NDC, the government passed the buck and asked the commission for advice. The commission declined to give specific recommendations, but advised:
We recommend that to make the NDC more likely to be compatible with contributing to global efforts under the Paris Agreement to limit warming to 1.5℃ above pre-industrial levels, the contribution Aotearoa makes over the NDC period should reflect a reduction to net emissions of much more than 36 percent below 2005 gross levels by 2030, with the likelihood of compatibility increasing as the NDC is strengthened further.
The government then received advice on what would be a fair target for New Zealand. However, any consideration of historic or economic responsibility points to vastly increased cuts, essentially leading to net-zero emissions by 2030.
Announcing the new NDC, Climate Change Minister James Shaw admitted it wasn’t enough, saying:
I think we should be doing a whole lot more. But, the alternative is committing to something that we can’t deliver on.
What proper climate action could look like Only about a third of New Zealand’s pledged emissions cuts will come from within the country. The rest will have to be purchased as carbon credits from offshore mitigation.
That’s the same amount (100Mt) that Japan, with an economy 25 times larger than New Zealand’s, is planning to include in its NDC. There is no system for doing this yet, or for ensuring these cuts are genuine. And there’s a price tag, possibly running into many billions of dollars.
New Zealand has an impressive climate framework in place. Unfortunately, just as its institutions are beginning to bite, they are starting to falter against the scale of the challenge.
The commission’s advice to the minister was disappointing. It’s being challenged in court by Lawyers For Climate Action New Zealand, whose judicial review in relation to both the NDC and the domestic emissions budgets will be heard in February 2022.
With only two months to go until 2022 and the official start of the carbon budgets, there is no plan how to meet them. The suggestions in the consultation document add up to only half the cuts needed for the first budget period.
Thinking in the transport area is the furthest advanced, with a solid approach to fuel efficiency already approved, and an acknowledgement total driving must decrease, active and public transport must increase, and new roads may not be compatible with climate targets.
But industry needs to step up massively. The proposed 2037 end date for coal burning is far too late, while the milk cooperative Fonterra — poised to announce a record payout to farmers — intends to begin phasing out natural gas for milk drying only after that date.
The potentially most far-reaching suggestion is to set a renewable energy target. A clear path to 100 percent renewable energy would provide a significant counterweight to the endless debates about trees and agricultural emissions, but it is still barely on the radar.
Perhaps one outcome of the new NDC will be that, faced with the prospect of a NZ$5 billion bill for offshore mitigation, we might decide to spend the money on emissions cuts in Aotearoa instead.
A New Zealand Pasifika climate activist has told the UN climate meeting that young Pacific people are not victims of climate change but beacons of hope.
The first day of the Leaders Summit is wrapping up at COP26 in Glasgow.
Environmental advocate for Samoa Brianna Fruean said Pacific people were not just victims of the climate crisis, but were beacons of hope.
If the world leaders at COP failed, the people will step up, she said.
“I believe that COP is like a compass, that we are all in collective canoe and if we’re able to get COP right we can be pointed in the right direction.
“But at the end of the day, my ancestors travelled the oceans without compasses. So if COP doesn’t work, the people will.
Hope lies in the streets!
Thank you to everyone who stood up today.
Thank YOU for not being a bystander as this government continues to betray its people, refusing to act on the science of climate breakdown, and is complicit in enabling a project of systemic genocide. 
Emma is now on 
Where do YOU stand?
Will you stand with us in solidarity with the 
12pm Sat 20th @ Royal Courts of Justice: 
1.5 isn't "Alive" it's dying before our eyes 
not 
sharing an important message to world leaders. “We are not drowning, we are fighting!” 
Listen to her powerful words below