Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-01-10-Speech-1-059"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050110.12.1-059"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, the use of the word 'success' in this context depends on one's expectations; it means different things to different people. To me, if we exclude the interactions and discussions that took place in the margins in Buenos Aires, it is difficult to use the word 'success'. The success I found in Buenos Aires was in discussing with other colleagues – particularly the huge numbers of representatives from political and corporate America and other American bodies – how much support we have on the ground, both in the United States and in Australia, as distinct from the Bush Administration's position and, indeed, the Australian Premier's position on the Kyoto Protocol and climate change. That is the sense of success I brought back from Buenos Aires. There is huge and growing support from nine or ten different states in America, and even from some of the energy and fuel corporations and corporate America generally. That support continues to grow.
I also measure success by the progress made by China and in the attitude of the Chinese authorities – China being a developing state with huge demographic challenges. There is also the change in attitude of Brazil which is coming the road with us. That is how I measure the real success of Buenos Aires, as an indicator of the progress that has been made since previous COPs I attended.
To confuse us even further, this was COP 10, and next year we have COP 11. We have the special meeting to continue discussions; we are not allowed to call it post-Kyoto or post-2012, but we cannot ignore that it is going to be out there in the realm of debate. Also next year, we have MOP 1, to further confuse the uninitiated! I think that means the meeting of the parties who ratified Kyoto, as distinct from the Conference of the Parties who all signed the original agreement. They are two different, if similar, groups of meetings that, presumably, will go hand in hand. Maybe the Commissioner will tell us more about it.
I would like to thank Mr Florenz for his leadership of the parliamentary delegation. And thank you, Commissioner, for including the Parliament's Members. I would still like to see greater structure around Parliament's involvement in various COPs, particularly at the MOP 1 stage. I hope you found our contribution rewarding and of some use. I would love to see it structured even more, although I know there is some reticence at Council level about that. But it is a suggestion that urgently needs to be taken seriously at that level.
We cannot afford not to succeed. The Kyoto Protocol is the only game in town. An even greater emphasis on cost-benefit reports and transparent pricing of the environmental consequences of climate change and global warming will help to convince those markets still doubting the economic significance of Kyoto. It will show that any short-term inconveniences and costs will be more than compensated for by the medium- to long-term gain for the developed as well as the developing countries."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples