Contraction and Convergence: Government still failing us

I wrote a letter a while back to the Government re Contraction and Convergence (see blog for 20th April). One of the key questions was about the use of Simultaneous Policy to help ensure it happened. I was flattered that Aubrey Meyer left a comment on that blog item - this ex-musician created the Contraction and Convergence approach to climate change and has written much and campaigned much internationally on this - it is still for my money the best and fairest approach. Many countries and organisations are already signed up - our Government needs to join them if it is serious about climate change.

To put it simply "Contraction and Convergence" proceeds from the recognition that all countries must act together to set a limit on global greenhouse emissions. Once this limit is agreed (the contraction bit), they must decide how the remaining emissions are to be shared. Poor countries should not have to accept a smaller share of the shrinking pie - so, after a period of transition, all countries are allocated emissions entitlements based on their populations (convergence).

The Governments response (below) to my last letter seems to ignore my point about Simultaneous Policy altogether and doesn't see our Government has a role in promoting Contraction and Convergence. The response ignores my question: "Would you also be able to let me know at what stage would the Government be prepared to join a Simultaneous Policy for Contraction and Convergence process if it were to be initiated by some other country?"

It looks like I'll need to reply. I've said before it doesn't make sense for people to make individual sacrifices while the world goes on around them. The unwillingness of people to act just reinforces the need for government to do something collectively. Contraction and Convergence is part of the answer.

CCU 6th Floor, Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1A 3JR

Dear Mr Booth,

CONTRACTION AND CONVERGENCE

Thank you for your email of 18 April to Jennifer Offord and Ian Pearson regarding climate change. I have been asked to reply. We are also in receipt of your email about Sustainable Drainage Systems and you will receive a response shortly.

Contraction and Convergence is one suggested approach on how to create a future framework for addressing climate change after the first commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol. Broadly, the idea is that in the long-term all people in the world have equal rights to emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

Certain aspects of Contraction and Convergence are appealing, including the identification of a fixed level for stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations, and comprehensive global participation. Any framework that incorporates long term targets can offer countries greater certainty about their national targets and provide a clear signal to allow business to plan ahead and help drive investment in new and better technologies. The principle of equity is extremely important to all countries but, in particular, developing countries and a number of countries have expressed an interest in using per capita emissions as a basis for assigning responsibility for future action. Some developing countries, e.g. India, have advocated the Contraction and Convergence model. Equally, other countries have shown interest in alternative frameworks; Brazil for example has championed historical responsibility as a basis for future action. However, one key element of any future regime must be its workability and one particular concern with Contraction and Convergence is the question of how globally acceptable, and in consequence how workable, it would prove to be.

Given that there is still some way to go in building the level of consensus within the international community that would be required to agree on a framework for the way forward, it would be premature for the UK government to commit itself to any particular framework at this stage. We are, however, giving full consideration both to the possible frameworks themselves and also to the elements within them that could be used to form part of a workable solution.

We will continue to discuss these issues with our partners; for example, at present we are also discussing Brazilian Historical Responsibility Proposal and the use of Sustainable Development Policies and Measures in the framework of the climate change convention. We think that further discussions of the advantages and disadvantages of various frameworks under the auspices of the convention would make a useful contribution to the debate.

I hope that this letter addresses your concerns.

Joss Wallace, Customer Contact Unit, Defra