CHCH 2020 Climate Change Community Consultation

Image via Wikipedia

attn: Hon Nick Smith, member for Tasman. Minister Responsible for Climate Change.

re: Christchurch 2020 CC Dialog at the Christchurch Convention Center

Dear Nick,

As one of the last to comment/question verbally I spoke of historical 'grievance' and US 1000 tonnes vs China 1 tonne.

Your appropriate response was to acknowledge that such a grievance existed but you took umbrage at my estimate of one tonne for Chinese (and many other developing nations) by the time the USA had emitted 1000 tonnes pp. then went on to point out that Chinese emissions were currently much higher therefore by inference suggesting my differential was of less consequence. Further you added that China was not in support of C&C. While my reference to the historical basis was recognition of legitimate grievance, I argue that failure to address that grievance is masked by white privilege and that ANY government that avoids the responsibility (and negates the social dividend of a rights based solution, surely a National Party Principle) is guilty of culpable genocide, set aside the injustice of failing to improve health equity through social and economic development that improves healthy lifestyle and conditions*, reduces the burden of disease and results in the social capital of leveling up of poorest communities and removing unfair economic arrangements.

When I presented the simplicity, logic and reason for NZ's support for C&C, at the Christchurch Business consultation Treasury officials encouragingly referred to C&C as the conscience behind the ETS.

I am pleased you personally consider its merits so highly and for the first time in a public forum [that I have heard] a Minister of the Crown actually mention C&C let alone in favorable terms.

I defer to the following reports, firstly prepared for

Government of South Australia : Copenhagen, contraction and convergence
www.epnrm.sa.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket...tabid=2732
• Developed nations have high emissions levels (e.g. Au = 28 tonnes/person/year)
• Developing nations have low emission levels (e.g. China = 1 tonne/person/year)
• Global sustainable level (450ppm) is around 3 tonne/person/year
• Copenhagen December 2009

and
For example the Contract and Converge strategy has now been adopted by India, China and many African countries as the basis for future negotiations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/index.php?curid=3040255

As to New Zealand [fast] following Australia these comments should, in my opinion give weight to my question; Why has C&C been overlooked?

Please accept this correspondence as a formal response to your request for feedback. I expect to see C&C given the standing it deserves.

United Nations Association of Australia

http://www.unaavictoria.org.au/media/GMUNC/Resolution_Original.pdf
Invites all Parties adopt a global program of "Contraction and Convergence" that provides for a fair and equitable global per capita emissions target consistent with the principles of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, stabilize the global climate and that ensures temperature rises are well below 2°C (above pre-industrial averages) and
that greenhouse gas concentrations are less than 400ppm CO2-equivalent;

The Australia Institute
https://www.tai.org.au/file.php?file=web_papers/WP104.pdf
The determination of national budgets on this basis is likely to be consistent with the so-called 'contraction and convergence' method of allocating emission allowances. Global emission levels would be reduced (contraction) and per capita emission levels should gradually be equalised amongst developed and developing countries (convergence) over the 21st century.

World Health Organisation

"There is a need to develop conceptual frameworks such as Contraction and Convergence."

I continue to seek the support of your Ministry to assist in bringing C&C architect Aubrey Meyer to New Zealand and would like to make that case in person. This represents an opportunity for New Zealand to both show leadership in CC strategy and maximise our international standing in economic development and social justice. It would be entirely appropriate given that voice to C&C has been avoided in all public discussion documents to date this is done expeditiously.

*Notably in reference to the current obesity issue, the latest British Medical Journal makes the following reference: "This policy [C&C] offers a way forward which is globally just and produces profuse health benefits, such as encouraging more physical function among people in industrialised societies."

Yours faithfully,

sig: Blair Anderson

Another MildGreen Initiative and Social Ecologist 'at large'
http://blairformayor.blogspot.com
http://mildgreens.blogspot.com
ph (643) 389 4065 cell 027 265 7219