– For the first time since Copenhagen, we have negotiated on concrete proposals for solutions and decisions. However, it turns out that the distance between the parties in the negotiations are almost as great as before the Copenhagen Meeting “, says chief negotiator Aud Lise Norheim.
Norheim noted it is especially worrisome to see that some countries now seem to go away from the political consensus that was embodied in Copenhagen Agreement, as well as questions which had been previously agreed . The delegation members concern that this attitude may affect the negotiations on reducing deforestation in developing countries, where Norway has worked actively for several years for an international mechanism.
Moreover , Norheim stated that there have been positive discussions about problematic systems to measure , report and track emissions reductions in developing countries and asked to pay attention on the balance between the requirements for reporting and auditing of the countries' commitments, and to gain insight into the developing countries' efforts. She also told that Norway has emphasized that we need to get a better and more systematic follow-up of the developing countries , while we have stricter regulation for the other countries in a new contract.
-The positive thing about these negotiations is that one has seriously started the discussion about the design of a new legal agreement. For Norway it is very important that we have a legally binding agreement that can not be put aside at the first crossroads. Many of the participating countries think that the Kyoto Protocol must be supplemented with a binding contract for the major emission countries and the United States, said Norheim.
She noted how it is unrealistic to establish such an agreement in Cancún and predicted that there will be agreements on a set of specific decisions that address the individual negotiation issues.
Watch David Keith's unusual climate change idea
What is Global Warming?