An open letter to E-Monitor Super Star – Michael Christie

Dear Michael,

First of all, thank you for your engagement in this project! I am here in Bonn for you, for the people of Australia, to work as a conduit between the bubble of the UN negotiations and the Australian population. I would also strongly encourage you, and everyone else concerned about our future, to take your concerns as loudly and as widely as possible. Talk to your friends, colleagues and neighbours. Write to your MP, our PM and all ministers in between. Send letters to your local paper, phone radio stations, do everything in your power to get your concerns on the radar of our pollies. Everyone who has sent me a question on A Climate for Change, please send that same question and your suggestions to Senator Wong, and our Prime Minister Rudd, cc me in if you like! We need people like you to take action, because our survival is not negotiable.

I hope that in my last few blogs I have been able to touch on many of the questions that you asked, for those that I haven’t yet addressed here goes...

Why are you only interviewing people from you own country?
I have also been speaking with delegations from other countries, but my focus here is on the Australian government delegation, and that keeps me very busy!

What is the current position of China, India and the USA? And, how much leeway is there for their positions to change?
That’s the question on everyone’s lips! If only we knew the answer, we wouldn’t be stuck in such a political gridlock.
China and India, are part of the G77 + China country block, that means they do the majority of their negotiating within the block, and then the Philippines, who are the current chair, speak on behalf of the whole block in the large Plenary sessions. So, in some senses it's hard to know exactly what China and India's positions are as they speak within a larger block of countries. But, what we do know is that India and China want developed (or Annex 1) countries to fulfil their Kyoto Protocol commitments and take emission reduction cuts in line with historical responsibility and economic capacity. India and China (along with all the other G77 countries) want to know what scale of financing will be made available for them to use before committing to emission reduction targets.
The USA – The basic answer is... it's not clear. We expect them to bargain hard unilaterally, and come up with something, but it's not clear what.
I would suggest that you check out the blogs of Deepa and Leela from India and Reed from the USA who, like me, are tracking the delegates from their country's. Reed has written a piece on the whole USA/ China relationship, check it out here. I am sure that Deepa, Leela and Reed would love to hear from you, so please do send them comments and questions.

What alliances are being built with other delegations at the conference? And, what other countries are taking a similar position to the Australian climate change?
Australia has for a while now, been a part of the oddly named 'Umbrella Group'. Although there is no formal list, the Group is usually made up of Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, the Russian Federation, Ukraine and the US (basically anyone who isn’t an African nation, doesn’t belong to the European Union, isn’t part of the G77 + China, nor is a small Island nation). While the umbrella group don’t negotiate in a block like the EU or the G77 + China does, they have regular meetings to share information and largely have similar positions. When I questioned the Australian delegation who they worked closely with, they said the umbrella group, but they also have bilateral meetings with various other countries on a wide variety of issues.

What expertise and qualifications do these Australian representatives have on Climate Change?
Nice question! The delegation team here of almost 30 people here in Bonn are from a range of different government departments, including Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), Department of Agriculture and Fisheries (DAF), AusAID, Department of Climate Change and more. They are here to negotiate Australia’s policy positions that have largely been pre-determined before they come to Bonn. Depending on their area of work and experience they follow different ‘tracks’ of the negotiations – for example the guys from DAF largely follow the tracks that related to agriculture, land use and forestry. As far as I understand, none of them are climate scientists – but their role here in Bonn is not to decide Australia’s policies, but rather, to communicate and negotiate them. Would we have a different outcome if there were scientists on the negotiating team? Maybe, but maybe not. The Australian government doesn’t dispute the science, but it is clear that our current policies are not in line with what science demands.

Michael, thanks again for your interest. I think you deserve a “#1 E-monitor t-shirt.” Keep the questions rolling, and keep sharing your concerns loud and wide.

Kind regards,
Cara

Check out Michael's profile here