The first week and a half of discussions at the climate talks in Copenhagen have been marred by the entrenched positions of various countries (including Canada), perceived slights by developed nations and at least two protest walk-outs by delegates from developing nations. These same stresses are likely to make any sort of agreement in Copenhagen impossible to reach, according to Jonathan Cocker, a Toronto-based Partner with Baker & McKenzie who has been in Copenhagen during the summit.

“My sense is, there is not going to be a deal here that’s going to involve an obligation upon the developing world to adhere to targets,” says Cocker. “That is a non-starter even though most of the G77 probably could agree to such a deal. In principle, they won’t agree. I think this is going to be a failed conference.”

Developing nations are keen to see the provisions of the Kyoto Protocol remain in force because it does not impose any obligations on them. Cocker believes this will continue to be a stumbling block.

“The idea of targets is abhorrent to most of the developing nations,” he explains. “That is going to be a problem. At the same time, among the developing nations, there is obviously a spread with respect to how quickly they are developing. The countries that have been developing more quickly, including the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China), say that they are still developing, and therefore there should be no obligation upon them to meet emissions targets either, because it is the industrialized nations’ that have been able to industrialize without any emission targets whatsoever. That’s a familiar refrain.”

Canada’s pariah status
Meantime, Canada continues to be considered a “fossil” among developed nations.

“Canada is something of a pariah here, quite frankly,” says Cocker. “We are number one as what was previously referred to as the “Fossil of the Day” – Canada is notorious for being the most obstructionist in the meetings. We’ve won that award four times already. There’s a chart you can see at the summit that shows us literally off the charts. That’s pretty frustrating. My sense is that Canada has lost its goodwill on this issue, and that most people at the summit are saddened by what Canada has not done, the position that the government has taken. On the science side, we ally ourselves with the Saudi Arabians – the two countries in the world that are still skeptical of the science, which is pretty frustrating. This is not a judgment, but I am just surprised that no other industrialized nation has the same perspective as we have.” 

Asked what he would consider a real win for industry coming out of this meeting, Cocker notes that a cap-and-trade system that would apply to Canada is something that needs to happen.

“That is certainly what we would hope comes out of this,” he says. “Most regulated enterprises would actually do better under a cap-and-trade system than a pure compliance system. The ability to trade is a benefit, and a cost reduction for some of the enterprises that would otherwise simply have to reduce their emissions. We’re conscious here and in Canada that the oil sands probably could not comply with almost any firm target so we think that cap and trade is probably in their interests and ultimately in the interests of most Canadians.” 

< Prev		Next >