Key says it makes sense to go to Copenhagen

John Key. Photo / Dean Purcell

John Key has responded to mounting pressure by agreeing to attend the Copenhagen climate summit.

The Prime Minister announced yesterday he would attend the two-day leaders' meeting at the end of the conference in Copenhagen this month, after first saying he would not go.

Mr Key, who earlier resisted pleas by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and others for world leaders to attend the meeting, said yesterday he had reassessed his position.

"I have decided that on balance it makes sense for me to be there," he said.

Circumstances had changed and political momentum was growing for the conference.

He did not want give the impression by his absence that New Zealand was not committed to playing its part, he said.

The prospect of reaching a meaningful agreement in Copenhagen has undergone a dramatic revival, with more than 90 leaders now planning to attend.

The leaders' event is on December 17 and 18 - the final two days of the two-week conference.

Labour Party climate change spokesman Charles Chauvel yesterday welcomed Mr Key's change of heart, though he said the decision was belated.

Diplomats now hold no hope of reaching a legally binding agreement.

In a bid to save the conference, Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen has suggested a two-step process with a preliminary agreement covering some upfront finance for climate adaptation and interim action, followed by a final binding agreement next year.

Despite being downgraded, negotiators say the conference is the more important of the two steps.

Among other goals, New Zealand negotiators are likely to try to improve New Zealand's standing under forestry rules, make sure there is access to international carbon markets for countries with a shortfall in domestic emissions reductions, and promote a programme of action on agriculture.

New Zealand has pledged about $30 million a year for at least three years into a US$10 billion global fund for developing countries to adopt low carbon-emitting policies. Oxfam says vastly more than that will be needed if developed countries are to carry their share of historical emissions.

Scientists say rich countries must reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 25 to 40 per cent by 2020 from 1990 levels.

US and Chinese offers have been far below that benchmark.

Meanwhile, Reuters reported yesterday that China and other big developing nations had rejected core targets for a climate deal, such as halving world greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

China, the world's top emitter, with India, Brazil and South Africa had demanded that richer nations do more, diplomats said.

The four rejected key targets proposed in a draft text. additional reporting: Reuters Herald environment and science reporter Eloise Gibson will be reporting from the summit.

WHY THEY ARE GATHERING

What is it? It is the 15th United Nations Climate Change Conference Copenhagen 2009. COP15 for short.

Where is it? Copenhagen in Denmark.

When is it? From December 7-18.

Who'll be there? 193 countries will be represented by around 15,000 officials, advisers, diplomats, campaigners and journalists, and a variety of heads of state.

Who are the major players? China and India as developing nations, Britain and the US as industrialised nations.

What do they hope to achieve? They will be trying to thrash out a climate treaty as a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, the first stage of which expires in 2012.

What are the main points? There are four: how much industrialised nations are willing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; how much the developing nations, such as China and India, are willing to do likewise; how will the changes in developing nations be financed, and how will the money be managed.

What are the sticking points? The main issue is burden-sharing. Scientists say that by 2050 greenhouse gas emissions must drop by 80 per cent of their 1990 levels. This must be paid for, and developing nations will have to subsidise poorer nations. Also some nations, such as China, believe they have a moral right to develop their economy, and carbon emissions will grow with this. Another problem is working out who is responsible for the carbon emissions produced during the manufacture of goods - the country that produces them, or the country that buys them?