The Council of Canadians firmly believes the success coming out of the recent UN climate negotiations (December 2009) was not what happened in the official negotiation process (in fact, the Copenhagen Accord is a significant step backwards in achieving a fair climate agreement that advances climate justice) but what happened in the streets.

With our op-ed in the Ottawa Citizen, we argued that the climate justice movement transformed Copenhagen into the second coming, direct descendant of Seattle.

The Bolivian government’s announcement, shortly after the failed Copenhagen climate negotiations, to host a People’s Summit on climate change (April 19-22 2010, Cochabamba Bolivia), has created an important space for the perspectives and voices of the Reclaim the Power action we highlight in this op-ed and in our report-backs from Copenhagen, to be heard.

Conference organizers report that more than 10,000 people are expected to attend the summit, with many more participating via the Internet, and in campaign actions on the final day of the conference, April 22nd, which marks UN International Mother Earth Day.

The conference is described as open to peoples of the world, social movements and Mother Earth’s defenders, and invites  scientists, academics, lawyers and governments that want to work with their citizens. You can read the Bolivian government’s call for the conference here. The objectives include identifying alternative proposals from civil society and movements for international climate action. The process involves 16 participatory working groups that have begun discussions which will culminate in meetings during the Conference identifying areas where consensus emerges. The Conference also includes plenary panels, self-organized events and space for dialogue with governments.

The goals include identifying concrete lobbying items for future UNFCCC negotiations as well as progress on innovative proposals such as working on the organization of the World People’s Referendum on Climate Change, analyzing and developing an action plan to advance the establishment of a Climate Justice Tribunal and defining strategies for  action and mobilization to defend life from Climate Change and to defend the Rights of Mother Earth.

The Council of Canadians will be present in Cochabamba, As part of our newly launched “Climate Justice: Take Action for People and the Planet” campaign and the Blue Planet Project’s international water justice work (you can read a recent article by Maude Barlow on climate and water justice here), we will be participating in working groups, co-hosting a panel on the tar sands with the Indigenous Environmental Network as well as panels on water justice, meeting with government officials as well as global climate and water justice allies and be an active participant in developing social movement strategies for the next major round of UN climate negotiations in Mexico (November 2010).

Building on our experiences in Cochabamba, we will work with our membership, allied groups and organizations in continuing to build a Canadian climate justice movement. Our recently released climate justice statement and campaign action areas identifies some “next steps,” we’ll also be looking towards Canadian mobilizations in November during the Mexican UN climate negotiation (one exciting possibility includes the world-wide call for people’s assemblies on climate justice).

Thanks to the generous invitation of the Nova Scotia Environmental Network (NSEN, http://www.nsen.ca), I’ve spent yesterday and today in a flurry of activity focused on green jobs. I received this invitation as co-author of the report the Council of Canadians produced alongside the Canadian Labour Congress, Green Decent and Public (http://canadians.org/energy/documents/climatejustice/green-decent-public.pdf) and as the Council’s energy campaigner. The purpose of the visit was to engage with local residents, activists and organizations, to initiate, through NSEN, an exciting and promising discussion on green job potential in Nova Scotia.

Environment Minister Jim Prentice announced on Saturday, January 30th, that Canada has submitted an emission reduction commitment of 17 per cent from 2005 levels to the UN – the same target the U.S. announced to the UN this past Thursday.

As reported by the Canadian Press, “Throughout the Copenhagen negotiations we maintained that our clear policy was to support the outcome of Copenhagen and also to align our clean energy and climate change policies with those of the Obama administration,” Prentice said.

Last night, I attended an event hosted by the Toronto Climate Campaign. It featured panelists giving first hand analysis of the Copenhagen negotiations from the perspective of wanting to build a vibrant movement for climate justice in Toronto. Sitting behind a table hosting a banner, “you can’t prorogue climate change” was a stellar panel featuring Kimia Ghomeshi from the Canadian Youth Delegation in Copenhagen, Dave Martin from Greenpeace Canada, Carolyn Egan from the Steelworker Toronto Area Council, and keynote speaker, Clayton Thomas-Muller of the Indigenous Environmental Network.

Here are some highlights from the evening – the good, the bad and the ugly (then back to the good!) coming out of Copenhagen.

Today, I spent an hour with a large group of teacher candidates (around 400 plus people) talking about climate justice. I was invited to present to the group on the Council’s experiences in Copenhagen as part of the climate justice movement. My presentation was part of the final session of 8 classes comprising a social justice module within a larger required course called professional foundations. 

Here are some highlights from my presentation and the subsequent discussion.

As reactions roll in, it is clear that the Liberals are far from gaining needed support for the revised energy agreement between New Brunswick and Québec (and with good reason) and that their party image continues on its downward spiral.

You can read some our responses to the revised deal in my previous blog, More spin? New deal proposed for sale of NB Power.

As reported in the Globe and Mail, the new deal has not placated Premier Danny Williams concerns: “In a telephone interview from St. John’s, Mr. Williams said the deal announced this week is an improvement, but could still hurt Atlantic provinces that want to export clean power to New England. “I have serious concerns based on the past behaviour of Hydro-Québec,” he said.”

In the face of serious public opposition, the Liberal New Brunswick government has been forced to go back to the table over plans to sell New Brunswick (NB) Power to Hydro Québec (HQ).  Announced yesterday is a new deal with Québec for the future of NB Hydro.

You can read a summary of the Agreement on Energy between the governments of Québec and New Brunswick here

To read Council responses to the original Moratorium of Understanding (MOU), see “Council of Canadians says NB Power should remain Public,” our open letter to the Premier, Energy Minister and Party leaders and our action alert.

Here are some initial thoughts about the new deal.

As described in our recent op-ed “Why we took to the streets” featured recently in the Ottawa Citizen, the Council of Canadians team in Copenhagen believes the true success came not from the Bella Centre, but from the streets. It was the coalescing of movements, strengthening analyzes of the false and real solutions to the climate crisis and the composed response of demonstrators in the face of severe police response that tells the true story of success – the second coming, direct descendant of Seattle.
So what happened during the final hours of negotiations? Honestly, it’s all quite confusing and things have yet to fully be clarified.

Copenhagen Accord: background on what happened

Reporting back from a packed room (not kidding - room seats 40, there are over 100 people here) at the Klimaforum (people’s alternative summit in Copenhagen) at the, Join the international movement against the Canadian tar sands panel.  Moderating the panel is Clayton Muller Thomas, tar sands campaigner with the Indigenous Environmental Network. Included on the panel is Eriel Deranger, an Athabasca Fort Chipewyan community member and Rainforest Action Network (RAN) campaigner, Jess Worth, New Internationalist editor and UK tar sands campaigner.

Brace yourself - this is a long blog. I felt that the discussion was so informative and powerful that it was worthy of relaying to readers here.

Preface: Deforestation is accountable for 18% of carbon emissions in the atmosphere (source: Friends of the Earth: REDD myths). REDD is meant to reduce deforestation.

The basics of market-based REDD:

Part 1 Putting a price on carbon stored in trees (ie. Money trees).

Part 2 Create credits to purchase this carbon. When credits are purchased, there is a promise to not to cut down forests and plantations that absorb carbon.

Part 3 Allow corporations to buy these credits to ‘offset’ their ongoing emissions. Ie. Invest in carbon credits = buying permits for continuing to pollute.

Part 4 Since REDD credits are calculated as little as $4 USD, corporations can opt to buy these credits and continue to pollute. Buy a forest here, continue with coal fired power there.

Huh? Wait. What??

I know. Sounds like a joke. It’s not.