adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

News

COP29 primer: Canada’s priorities at the global climate talks, and the Trump impact

Published

 on

Canada could be an important consensus builder at this year’s international climate negotiations, Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault said, while downplaying concerns that Donald Trump’s presidential election victory could hamper the talks.

“Our window to keep global average temperatures from surpassing 1.5 degrees Celsius is closing fast on us, so we need everyone to be pulling in the same direction,” Guilbeault said in an interview ahead of the talks.

Observers expect the negotiations in Azerbaijan over the next two weeks to be contentious. Countries are set to map out new goals on climate finance and work toward new national climate plans.

Catherine Abreu, a leading Canadian climate policy expert, says there are reasons to be cynical about the outcome of those talks.

Despite 30 years of negotiating, the world’s emissions are higher than ever, around 80 per cent of the global energy comes from fossil fuels, and oil lobbyists have come out in record numbers at recent summits, she said.

Yet, the talks are still “a really importance space,” said Abreu, director of the International Climate Politics Hub.

“The agreements that have been made in (this) space are the bedrock of all climate policy almost worldwide,” she said.

Here is a guide to this year’s international climate talks being held in Azerbaijan, known as COP29.

What is COP29?

It’s the 29th annual conference of the parties that signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, set to run from Nov. 11 to 22.

Many of the world’s most consequential climate agreements have come out of those talks. The Kyoto Protocol, the first international agreement to set binding targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, was adopted at COP3 in Japan in 1997. Nearly two decades later in Paris, the world agreed to try to limit global warming to well below two degrees and aim for 1.5 degrees.

Canada has hosted the talks once, nearly two decades ago in Montreal.

This year, in Azerbaijan’s capital of Baku, the negotiations are expected to centre on a new climate finance goal. In short, negotiators are deciding how much money wealthy countries, which have historically contributed the most planet-warming emissions, should pledge to other countries to help them tackle climate change.

What are Canada’s priorities?

Two of Canada’s major priorities are expected to be reaching an agreement on that new climate finance goal and pushing other countries to come up with ambitious national climate plans.

Under the Paris agreement, countries have to update their national climate plans every five years, and the next round of updates is due in 2025.

Julie Segal, a climate finance policy analyst, says those two priorities are connected. The “litmus test” for success this year will be whether Canada and other wealthy countries pledge a finance goal that can properly bankroll ambitious climate plans.

“Canada should be a player, setting a high bar, saying, recognizing that wealthy countries like our own should be supporting more vulnerable countries in the climate transition,” said Segal, senior manager for climate finance at Environmental Defence, a Canadian advocacy group.

Several assessments have suggested the new climate finance goal could surpass $1 trillion.

Canada has been a broker in previous climate finance talks. After developed countries agreed in 2009 to raise $100 billion annually by 2020 to support developing countries in the fight to tackle climate change, Canada was tapped as one of the countries to help mobilize that financing.

The environment and climate change minister said he’d be happy for Canada to recast its role as a “bridge builder” at these talks.

While he would not comment on some of the proposed dollar figures for the new goal, he underlined the importance of ensuring developing countries can easily access financing.

Who’s going?

While it’s still a huge guest list, the number of COP participants has drastically declined since last year. Initial figures released late last month put the registration at 32,000 participants, compared to the roughly 85,000 people who attended last year’s talks in Dubai.

Canada’s delegation will be led by Guilbeault and includes the country’s climate change ambassador, alongside its chief climate negotiator.

The premiers of Alberta and Saskatchewan are not expected to attend. Both attended last year’s talks, alleging the federal government would not properly promote their provincial interests on the world stage.

Alberta says it’s sending its environment minister this year. Saskatchewan, which spent an estimated $765,000 to host its own event space at last year’s conference, has not announced any plans to attend. The province held a general election last month and inquiries to government spokespeople did not receive a response before this story’s deadline.

How will the U.S. election outcome shape the talks?

Donald Trump’s victory is expected to loom over the conference.

Trump, who has called climate change a hoax and targeted rollbacks of key U.S. climate policies, withdrew from the Paris agreement during his previous term and signalled that he would do so again.

While Trump won’t take office until January, countries intent on derailing ambitious climate agreements in Azerbaijan may be empowered by his return, said Bill Hare, CEO of Climate Analytics, a Berlin-based climate think tank.

“A lot of work has been done to, in the event of a Trump election, make sure the system doesn’t collapse, but still, it will weaken pressure for a positive outcome in Baku,” he said.

Guilbeault played down those concerns, underlining that President Joe Biden’s administration was still representing the U.S. at the talks.

“I’m very confident that the U.S. will continue to be the important partner that it’s been for these negotiations now for many, many years,” he said.

Guilbeault suggested Elon Musk, the billionaire Trump backer and Tesla chief executive, may help influence the president-elect to embrace electrification.

A brief glossary of climate policy jargon to help navigate COP29

Catherine McKenna, Canada’s former environment minister, said climate policy conversations can be dominated by acronyms and jargon.

“It’s hard to express the urgency or the opportunity on climate when we talk in really weird ways,” she said.

To help cut through the jargon, here are some common acronyms and phrases expected to come up at this year’s talks.

NCQG: The new collective quantified goal. That’s the name for the new climate finance goal set to be at the heart of this year’s negotiations.

NDC: Nationally determined contributions. That’s what the United Nations calls national climate plans that have to be updated every five years.

Net-zero emissions: This describes the scenario where planet-warming emissions that are added to the atmosphere can otherwise get absorbed, leaving the balance at zero. It doesn’t mean all emissions would stop entirely, but it means that any greenhouse gases that humans emit could be trapped by carbon-absorbing forests and wetlands, for example. Canada has a legislated goal to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.

IRA: Inflation Reduction Act. That’s the U.S. law that earmarked $369 billion in incentives for clean energy and climate programs. Trump has said he’d hold back unspent funds.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 10, 2024.



Source link

Continue Reading

News

‘Do the work’: Ottawa urges both sides in B.C. port dispute to restart talks

Published

 on

VANCOUVER – The federal government is urging both sides in the British Columbia port dispute to return to the table after Saturday’s collapse of mediated talks to end the lockout at container terminals that has entered its second week.

A statement issued by the office of federal Labour Minister Steven MacKinnon on Monday said both the port employers and the union representing more than 700 longshore supervisors “must understand the urgency of the situation.”

The statement also urged both sides to “do the work necessary to reach an agreement.”

“Canadians are counting on them,” the statement from MacKinnon’s office said.

The lockout at B.C. container terminals including those in Vancouver — Canada’s largest port — began last week after the BC Maritime Employers Association said members of International Longshore and Warehouse Union Ship and Dock Foremen Local 514 began strike activity in response to a “final offer” from employers.

The union said the plan was only for an overtime ban and a refusal to implement automation technology, calling the provincewide lockout a reckless overreaction.

On Saturday, the two sides began what was scheduled to be up to three days of mediated talks, after MacKinnon spoke to both sides and said on social media that there was a “concerning lack of urgency” to resolve the dispute.

But the union said the talks lasted “less than one hour” Saturday without resolution, accusing the employers of cutting them off.

The employers denied ending the talks, saying the mediator concluded the discussions after “there was no progress made” in talks conducted separately with the association and the union.

“The BCMEA went into the meeting with open minds and seeking to achieve a negotiated settlement at the bargaining table,” a statement from the employers said.

“In a sincere effort to bring these drawn-out negotiations to a close, the BCMEA provided a competitive offer to ILWU Local 514 … the offer did not require any concessions from the union and, if accepted, would have ended this dispute.”

The employers said the offer includes a 19.2 per cent wage increase over a four-year term along with an average lump sum payment of $21,000 per qualified worker, but the union said it did not address staffing levels given the advent of port automation technology in terminals such as DP World’s Centerm in Vancouver.

After talks broke off, the union accused the employers of “showing flagrant disregard for the seriousness of their lockout.”

Local 514 president Frank Morena said in a statement on Saturday that the union is “calling on the actual individual employers who run the terminals to order their bargaining agent — the BCMEA — to get back to the table.”

“We believe the individual employers who actually run the terminals need to step up and order their bargaining agent to get back to the table and start negotiations and stop the confrontation,” Morena said.

No further talks are currently scheduled.

According to the Canada Labour Code, the labour minister or either party in a dispute can request a mediator to “make recommendations for settlement of the dispute or the difference.”

In addition, Section 107 of the Code gives the minister additional powers to take action that “seem likely to maintain or secure industrial peace and to promote conditions favourable to the settlement of industrial disputes,” and could direct the Canada Industrial Relations Board “to do such things as the Minister deems necessary.”

Liam McHugh-Russell, assistant professor at Schulich School of Law at Dalhousie University, said Section 107 “is very vague about what it allows a minister to do.”

“All it says is that the minister can refer a problem and a solution to the Labour Board. They can ask the Labour Board to try and solve the problem,” he said.

“Maybe the minister will try to do that. It remains to be seen.”

The other option if mediated talks fail — beyond the parties reaching a solution on their own — would be a legislated return to work, which would be an exception to the normal way labour negotiations operate under the Labour Code.

Parliament is not scheduled to sit this week and will return on Nov. 18.

The labour strife at B.C. ports is happening at the same time another dispute is disrupting Montreal, Canada’s second-largest port.

The employers there locked out almost 1,200 workers on Sunday night after a “final” offer was not accepted, greatly reducing operations.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 11, 2024.



Source link

Continue Reading

News

Man facing 1st-degree murder in partner’s killing had allegedly threatened her before

Published

 on

LONGUEUIL, Que. – A man charged with first-degree murder in the death of his partner in a Montreal suburb was out on bail for uttering threats against her when she was killed.

Shilei Du was charged today with the killing of 29-year-old Guangmei Ye in Candiac, Que., about 15 kilometres southwest of Montreal.

Sgt. Frédéric Deshaies of the Quebec provincial police says their investigators were called by local police to a home in Candiac at about noon on Sunday.

The charges filed at the Longueuil courthouse against 36-year-old Du allege the killing took place on or around Nov. 7.

According to court files, Du had previously appeared at the same courthouse for allegedly uttering threats to cause death or bodily harm against Ye on Sept. 7.

Du pleaded not guilty the following day and was released on bail one day later. He had been present in court on the uttering threats charges on Nov. 6.

Du, whose current address is listed in Montreal, was arrested on Sunday at the home where Ye was killed.

The case is scheduled to return to court on Nov. 19.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 11, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

News

Wisconsin’s high court to hear oral arguments on whether an 1849 abortion ban remains valid

Published

 on

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Wisconsin Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Monday on whether a law that legislators adopted more than a decade before the Civil War bans abortion and can still be enforced.

Abortion rights advocates stand an excellent chance of prevailing, given that liberal justices control the court and one of them remarked on the campaign trail that she supports abortion rights. Monday’s arguments are little more than a formality ahead of a ruling, which is expected to take weeks.

Wisconsin lawmakers passed the state’s first prohibition on abortion in 1849. That law stated that anyone who killed a fetus unless the act was to save the mother’s life was guilty of manslaughter. Legislators passed statutes about a decade later that prohibited a woman from attempting to obtain her own miscarriage. In the 1950s, lawmakers revised the law’s language to make killing an unborn child or killing the mother with the intent of destroying her unborn child a felony. The revisions allowed a doctor in consultation with two other physicians to perform an abortion to save the mother’s life.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion nationwide nullified the Wisconsin ban, but legislators never repealed it. When the Supreme Court overturned Roe two years ago, conservatives argued that the Wisconsin ban was enforceable again.

Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul filed a lawsuit challenging the law in 2022. He argued that a 1985 Wisconsin law that allows abortions before a fetus can survive outside the womb supersedes the ban. Some babies can survive with medical help after 21 weeks of gestation.

Sheboygan County District Attorney Joel Urmanski, a Republican, argues the 1849 ban should be enforceable. He contends that it was never repealed and that it can co-exist with the 1985 law because that law didn’t legalize abortion at any point. Other modern-day abortion restrictions also don’t legalize the practice, he argues.

Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper ruled last year that the old ban outlaws feticide — which she defined as the killing of a fetus without the mother’s consent — but not consensual abortions. The ruling emboldened Planned Parenthood to resume offering abortions in Wisconsin after halting procedures after Roe was overturned.

Urmanski asked the state Supreme Court in February to overturn Schlipper’s ruling without waiting for lower appellate courts to rule first. The court agreed to take the case in July.

Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin filed a separate lawsuit in February asking the state Supreme Court to rule directly on whether a constitutional right to abortion exists in the state. The court agreed in July to take that case as well. The justices have yet to schedule oral arguments.

Persuading the court’s liberal majority to uphold the ban appears next to impossible. Liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz stated openly during her campaign that she supports abortion rights, a major departure for a judicial candidate. Usually, such candidates refrain from speaking about their personal views to avoid the appearance of bias.

The court’s three conservative justices have accused the liberals of playing politics with abortion.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending