Briefings from Bonn-7

ON TO GHANA: PARTIES LEAVE MATTERS PENDING FOR THE NEXT SESSION IN ACCRA

SBI Contact Group Adopts Draft Texts

The SBI Contact Group on the National Communications from Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention met today to discuss the draft text on agenda items 3 (a) and 3 (c). The G77 with China expresses its great difficulties with several paragraphs in the draft text on agenda item 3 (a). The G77 expressed its desire to move this issue forward and have an agreement in Poznan that will accommodate the concerns of the developing countries. The EU and many other parties lamented the inability of the Contact Group to arrive at a clean text to a give a clear mandate to the CGE¹ and expressed the hope that this process will be taken forward at Poznan.



On agenda item 3 (c) the discussion centred on Paragraphs 7, 8 and 9 of the draft text. The G77 with China and the US and Canada proposed that Paragraph 8 be replaced with a new Paragraph under which the SBI invited the GEF to provide information on the operational procedures to ensure the timely disbursement of funds to meet the agreed full cost incurred by non Annex I parties who wish to apply for funding from their subsequent national communication. The US insisted that Paragraph 8 be restricted to only one specific national communication rather than subsequent communications, while Brazil differed with such a reading arguing that the words subsequent communications implied a sort of continuity in the process of giving national submissions. However, the EU suggested that the SBI cannot issue guidelines to the GEF. Canada and the G77 did not agree to this understanding but nevertheless approved the draft text in a spirit of compromise. Paragraphs 7 and 9 were also deleted in a spirit of compromise. Thus, at present the draft text on Agenda item 3 (c) stands adopted after deletion of Paragraphs 7 and 9 and inclusion of the G77 proposal replacing the erstwhile Paragraph 8.² The SBI Contact Group on Financial Mechanisms under the Convention adopted the draft text on the fourth review of the financial mechanism³. The co-chair of the Contact Group declared that sincc the entire text of the Annex is in square brackets the Parties can approach the Secretariat individually at any time to point out omissions in the draft Annex without raising new points to be included. The draft Annex was accordingly adopted by the Parties.

AWGKP Plenary:

The discussion points before the Chair were the Agenda Items 3(a) to 3(d). On all of these, the decision was unanimous. The Chair observed that on various related matters like inclusion of new gases under the GHGs, and on the Agenda Item 4 relating to methodological issues there is a need for devoting more time for clear understanding of the issues. Since the parties met over the issues at the informal meetings, the decisions at the plenary were all unanimous. As a part of the interventions from the civil society, CAN⁴ has iterated the fact there is a high degree of lack of clarity on the compliance system. Further, they submitted that the nuclear issues should not be part of the climate negotiations. They also sought for removal of asymmetries in accounting, coherence of LULUCF discussions with the biodiversity and indigenous rights issues within the provisions of AWGKP. The CAN was in favour of commitments for the aviations and maritime fuel under the UNFCCC arrangements. Japan noted that the LULUCF is important and needs both bottom up and cooperative approach. The conclusions on emissions from bunker fuels would be important to reach. China noted that there had been slow progress in the sessions especially on the issue of mitigation by the Annex 1 parties whereas minimum progress is critical. It hoped that this will be better in Ghana and that extraneous issues should be refrained from. Indonesia cautioned that care should be taken with regard to LULUCF and Annex 1 parties should be careful and the focus should be on reduction of emissions from the traditional energy sectors. It stated that the inclusion of nuclear activities in the CDM is against the Marrakech accords. Venezuela pointed that Annex 1 parties should consider inclusion of the only country which is the only one not part of the protocol. India noted that it seems like the group has beaten around the bush and the commitment too specific quantitative reduction was not witnessed, which is the key issue. It also seconded China’s remarks.

Contact Group meeting on SBI Agenda 13(a) and 13(c)⁵

SBI contact group reconvened its meeting today to discuss the remaining paragraphs of the draft text on Agenda Item 13 on Arrangement for Intergovernmental Meetings which was discussed yesterday. G-77/China suggested to modify the paragraph 8 on accommodation in Poznan and the cost and availability of hotels by adding a sentence suggesting that Government of Polan should take concerns of developing countries on board and ensure smooth facilitation of arrangements for them. G77/China also suggested to add a line stating that this issue will be finalised by the Bureau on behalf of SBI. Qatar raised a concern that a UN holiday which is a Muslim festival will fall in the second week of COP14 and CMP 4 to be held in Poznan in December 2008. Qatar stated that it is difficult for Muslim country ministers to stay in Poznan on that day. Keeping this in view, he suggested that the high-level segment, supposed to be held during the second week of Poznan meeting should be either held in the first week or in the last week of the COP. This concern was endorsed by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. The co-chair replied to this by saying that this is out of their mandate of work since the date of holding Poznan meeting has already been decided. However, the SBI contact Group will definitely request the Bureau to look into this matter and try to fond out some solution to this. The issue of deciding the venue for the meetings to be held in 2009 as given in paragraph 13 was deliberated at length. The UNFCCC secretariat explained that the venue of COP-14 has already been decide and will be held at Copenhagen. In the year 2009, four meetings under UNFCCC have to be organised. Out of which, the venue for two has already been decided and preparations have started for organising them. The secretariat requested the group to provide them with flexibility in deciding the venue for the other two meeting also given the high amount of cost involved, which is to major extent taken care off by the secretariat itself. The group agreed to this request unanimously. EU also stated to remove the document reference given in this paragraph suggesting options for venue. In addition to this, Australia suggested that each party should look at the availability of facilities available in their own country and then provide suggestion of hosting the meeting accordingly in their respective countries.

AWGLCA Plenary:

There was unanimity among the parties on the Items put forward for disussion by the Chair. However, the submissions by the Trade Unions and the civil society groups at the Plenary iterated that the progress was slow and has been loaded with extraneous clauses that needs to be sorted out in future for the meeting the mandate of the AWGLCA.

Centad Team                                                                 12 June 2008