4 March 2009

Green Party: Moment of truth on climate

Dr Kennedy Graham MP - General Debate Speech

I rise to address what may be the most urgent issue to come before this House in its entire history. The spectre of climate change grows more severe with every passing year.

The 2007 IPCC report projected a global temperature increase of some 3 degrees C. over the next half-century, with a consequent sea-level rise of some 0.5 m. The IPCC acknowledged that even more serious scenarios involving ice-melt and thawing of the northern tundra were not included, since the relevant studies had not been peer reviewed.

Since then, the scientific community has confirmed that this is already occurring. The IPCC co-chair has just stated that we are looking now at a future climate beyond anything seriously considered before. The possible sea-level rise may be anything from 2 to 17 metres over the next 50 years. The effects of severe climatic disturbance - involving frequent and devastating storms, flooding and drought combined with crop failure - will pose unprecedented strain on human civilization.

The probability of this occurring cannot be assessed with accuracy. But the precautionary principle, accepted by the international community in 1992, makes it imperative that humanity acts now, given what is at stake. That year we undertook to achieve climate stabilization in time for ecosystems to adapt naturally, ensuring that food production is not threatened.

That vital global objective is not being achieved. The only mechanism to that end, the Kyoto Protocol, took 16 years to become operative - critical years while the world steadily increased emissions. And Kyoto itself is palpably inadequate. Even if fully implemented, it would do little to curb the full effect of climate change - shaving perhaps 0.2 degree off the projected 3 degree increase. And let us be realistic - the full achievement of Kyoto is not about to occur. Only a Green New Deal, genuinely applied around the world and here at home, can turn this around.

Meanwhile, as we fail our modest preliminary goal, we bicker within the international community over burden-sharing for the next. The North refuses to cut any further until the South accepts binding obligations. Yet the North emits four times more per capita than the South.

The principle of humanity requires us in the North to reduce our per capita emissions while those in the South maintain theirs. A framework for contraction and convergence is the only equitable way for the global community of peoples to proceed, the only legitimate way of resolving the global crisis. It is not clear that the international community of states is up to the task.

Mr. Speaker, we have this year, 2009, to reach a binding global agreement. This is our moment of truth. Failure to reach agreement on at least 30% cuts by 2020 will spell catastrophe for humanity. If we engage in a lingering denial or inconclusive argumentation, we fail our citizens, morally, intellectually, politically.

At Poznan, the Minister said climate change was "one of the greatest challenges of our age", and New Zealand was determined to play a positive role. At home, another Minister remains sceptical of the 'alarmist claims' over climate change. At Poznan, the Minister said his Government "fully understands and accepts its long-standing international obligations under Kyoto." At home, his ministerial colleague continues to hope the ETS will be rescinded. With cognitive dissonance of such breathtaking proportion, who needs enemies in our collective fight against climate change?

As we slide serenely into the sea, let us recognise that, just as water finds its own level, a species that fails to foresee disaster ahead, or sees it yet wilfully denies its portent, deserves an inevitable Darwinian fate.

ENDS

© Scoop Media