insiders' notes of the meeting on Saturday morning

i posted a few countries' speeches here, the original update was rather long. It is interesting to see the reactions inside the conference hall, in an all-night meeting. Despite the unfruitful result, I do respect these delegates' efforts, given they are human beings as well.

Su Wei, one high level Chinese delegate, still took time to sign a petition to let some Chinese NGO reps into Bella Center, after not sleeping for a couple days. Maybe the inefficiency came from the tiredness, but there does not seem to be other way. The whole world was watching, putting pressuri on, especially when Hillary totally turned the table against China, forcing it to agree to UN verification of its reduction results (so called MRV).

Rasmussen opened and then suspended the COP very quickly. He then raced through the CMP and put forward the infamous "President's Text". [ Note for those of you who haven't followed, check out http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2009/12/18/a-meaningful-and-unprecedented-breakthrough-here-copenhagen - where Obama shares his "text" created with consultations with a few key countries (China, India, Brazil) He gave countries an hour to review the text and suspended the meeting even as Richard Kinley (Secretariat) leaned over and told him of an impending point of order. Rasmussen replied: "There is no point" (WTF)

As Rasmussen et al. were leaving Venezuela started banging its plate on the table and the whole room started clapping. Rasmussen sat back and watched the chaos unfold! He apologize and said that he hadn't noticed there was a point of order.

The rest of the countries that follow are responding to the process that Rasmussen proposed - in addition to the content of the document that Rasmussen (and the US) proposed.

Tuvalu:

Calls on Ban Ki Moon's presence to recognize that UN Processes are democratic, but what we've seen happen in COP15 has been completely undemocratic, conducted in closed door sessions.

Beyond that, Tuvalu had major problems with the content of the text:

- The text fails to recognize Kyoto Protocol

- International Insurance Mechanism isn't mentioned

- Review by 2015 (too late for our future)

- Science based targets mean 1.5 degrees for Tuvalu's survival, rather than the 2 degrees that is outlined in this document

- Using a biblical image, we're being offered 30 pieces of silver to betray our people

- OUR FUTURE IS NOT FOR SALE

- Tuvalu cannot accept this document

Bolivia:(note: Bolivia is rather applauded for its ambitious reduction commitment as a developing country)

- We are most offended by the process: we haven't had time to read this document; we've just now seen that it is a two page document and without putting this before us - those of us who represent OTHER people.

- Can one hour actually allow us the time to consider the implications for the people we represent?

- Does this represent the democracy of the United Nations?

- Can one hour allow us the time to make such a decision? To consult our constituents?

Maldives:
I commend the work that the Danish Prime Minister is doing and has done to bring a fruitful conclusion to COP15
We have a real danger of UNFCCC talks going the same way as WTO talks or other such multilateral talks. In many issues, this can be tolerated, or can be allowed. Scienc shows that in climate change, this is just not possible. We have a window of seven years. If real, actual measures are not take, gross climate can reach tipping points.

Engaged with more than 25 countries; big emitting countries are refusing to raise their ambitions high, neither are they allowing us to raise our ambitions to a level where world temperatures will not rise over 1.5 degrees. Above 1.5 degrees, many such islands would vanish. This is why we ahve tried so hard for 1.5 degrees to be in the text, and we can migrate from this document to many of our aspirations.

If we cannot have a basic understand of the parameters, we will never have any fruitful decision of these talks. I call on all governments to back this document and not to allow these talks to collapse.

Spain:
- Govt from Sudan

Canada:
- Offensive for government Sudan to associate climate change with the Holocaust and these remarks should be withdrawn

Australia:
- Cynical way that this document has been reviewed by all governments in the room
- Governments made commitments to finance
- That they could be so belittled is adisgrace to this organization and conference - we are not going to ignore the pleas of the Maldives, but we are going to keep on trying

France:
- My country will sign this declaration, we defended the inclusion of 1.5 degrees Celsius because the islands of Maldives should be heard here and only one big emitter country was opposed to that. We found it useful, Mr President, to ahve this type of text, because normal procedures of the UNFCCC leave us in a deadlock, we thought we were facing failure. Heads of States do represent 4 billion people started working, trying to help us, and of course, this text must be imperfect and we can improve these drafts and these texts but we are deeply wounded by accusations and suspicions as we did just try to break the deadlock. We believe that we will be able to use this document to help millions.

Sweden:
On behalf of EU, I want to express strong support for President of the Maldives statement. The reference to the Holocaust in this context is absolutely despicable.

UK:
There is a document that has been created in good faith under a process supervised by you; it is by no means perfect and it certainly has problems for many people. However, in substantive ways, it will make the lives of those around the world better (30 billion short term and 100 billion long-term finance). We can accept this document and get the money flowing OR we can follow the
- Taking this document as a "for information" document will not help

The President of the COP "I am not familiar with the processes here. Can I see how many people would oppose this process?"

United States: there is nothing to apologize for in participating in the Friends of the Chair. This included Heads of State meant to build on what had been going on over past two years and bridge important gaps in what had been done in the past. There was broad participation between about 25 - 30 countries. The President of the US was one of those who attended, and as a part of that meeting that went on for many hours, the President met with leaders of india, China, S Africa and Brazil in a highly engaged process, designed to bring people together.
The results were not perfect, but they are important. A limit of 2 degrees in temperature. It did
Accountability, transparency in all parts
Very substantial financin