Copenhagen isn’t about climate change at all.

The screaming over climate change is becoming louder and louder as we approach the Copenhagen climate change summit. And why not? We’ve been told that we have just four months to secure the future of our planet.

Yet nobody seems to be talking about the draft treaty – the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. But it seems that there may be something to be concerned about:

So far there have been more than a million hits on the YouTube post of his address. It deserves millions more because Lord Monckton warns that the aim of the Copenhagen draft treaty is to set up a transnational "government" on a scale the world has never before seen.

The "scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention" that starts on page 18 contains the provision for a "government." The aim is to give a new as yet unnamed U.N. body the power to directly intervene in the financial, economic, tax and environmental affairs of all the nations that sign the Copenhagen treaty.

In fact, a glance at the draft treaty turns up numerous concerns, among them:

PP.14 Acknowledging that current atmospheric concentrations are principally the result of historical emissions of greenhouse gases, the most significant share of which has originated in developed countries.

PP.15 Further acknowledging that developed countries have a historical responsibility for their disproportionate contribution to the causes and consequences of climate change, reflecting their disproportionate historical use of a shared global carbon space since 1850 as well as their proposed continuing disproportionate use of the remaining global carbon space.

So developed countries (i.e. US) get to pay for their disproportionate historical use of a shared global carbon space since 1850 onward.

How about this clause on page 10:

[Developing country Parties] lacking sufficient capacity to respond to the challenges of climate change require access [to opportunities to obtain this capacity] [to resources] in a timely [sustained and cooperative] manner.]] [Measurable, reportable and verifiable financing, technology transfer and compensation must be provided by developed countries to address the full costs of adaptation in developing countries, supported by appropriate institutional arrangements under the Conference of the Parties.] It is also particularly important to provide adequate, predictable, stable, sufficient and timely funding for adaptation purposes particularly by developed countries. Developed country Parties shall support these developing countries in meeting the costs of adaptation.

Developed countries MUST PAY the full costs of adaptation to climate change in developing countries. Not the cost of minimizing climate; the cost of adaptation to it, whatever that means.

And my favorite on page 122:

[[Developed [and developing] countries] [Developed and developing country Parties] [All Parties] [shall] [should]:]

(a) Compensate for damage to the LDCs’ economy and also compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity, as many will become environmental refugees;

(b) Africa, in the context of environmental justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.

How much does it cost to compensate for lost dignity? I’m sure the UN has an amount in mind.

It is perhaps somewhat telling that a search shows that the document contains only 17 occurrences of the word "temperature", and 112 occurrences of the word "finance".

The word "government" is mentioned only 9 times, which is odd, considering that the agreement is really all about setting up a new multinational government to implement the Convention, starting on page 18:

38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:

(a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body onadaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.

(b) The Convention’s financial mechanism will include a multilateral climate change fund including five windows: (a) an Adaptation window, (b) a Compensation window, to address loss and damage from climate change impacts, including insurance, rehabilitation and compensatory components, (c) a Technology window; (d) a Mitigation window; and (e) a REDD window, to support a multi-phases process for positive forest incentives relating to REDD actions.

(c) The Convention’s facilitative mechanism will include: (a) work programmes for adaptation and mitigation; (b) a long-term REDD process; (c) a short-term technology action plan; (d) an expert group on adaptation established by the subsidiary body on adaptation, and expert groups on mitigation, technologies and on monitoring, reporting and verification; and (e) an international registry for the monitoring, reporting and verification of compliance of emission reduction commitments, and the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries. The secretariat will provide technical and administrative support, including a new centre for information exchange.

In case it wasn’t clear, I’ve highlighted the relevant parts for you. The Convention is all about new funds for the UN and their new multinational government, compensation for climate change "loss", and transfer of technology and wealth from developed countries to developing countries.

And nary a mention of reducing the global temperature at all.

Take a few minutes and read the document that your government is about to agree to.

Powered by Bleezer

One thought on “Copenhagen isn’t about climate change at all.

  1. Pingback: They didn’t read the treaty either.

Leave a Reply