Cramer in Poznan: er is vooruitgang geboekt
Dear President, ladies and gentlemen,
The financial crisis teaches us that we cannot lend without security. The same holds for dealing with climate change. We cannot use nature without paying for the negative impact of greenhouse gas emissions.
We can align climate ambitions with our ambition to revitalise economic growth. We are clearly at a crossroad now. Let us move towards a low carbon, sustainable economy.
We need to agree on ambitious mid and long term targets on reduction of CO2-emissions reduction. In order to achieve these targets public and private money for mitigation, adaptation and avoidance of deforestation is crucial.
We will have to build a solid international financial architecture for the mobilization, governance and delivering of financial resources and investments.
In talking with and listening to many of you at various conferences I attended since Bali, for instance in Monaco, Paris, El Calafate (Argentina) and Warsaw, I noticed that three principles regarding the International Financial Architecture continuously emerged: Equity, Effectiveness and Efficiency.
Let met explain:
1. Equity, the financial architecture should meet the needs of all different regions and types of countries and small island developing states.
2. Effectiveness, the financial architecture should generate and mobilize predictable and stable financial flows and investment from both public and private sources, with the carbon market as an important driver. I am convinced that the EU is fully committed to deliver its part to realize the required financial support.
3. Efficiency, the financial architecture should promote actual implementation and link finance to country driven strategies and plans.
I suggest to agree on these principles here in Poznan so they can guide the swift development of the financial architecture.
A second key issue concerning the International Financial Architecture relates to the governance structure. How do we distribute and assign the financial flows generated? For adapation the Adaptation fund is the key vehicle. We cannot leave Poznan without deciding upon an operational Adaption fund.
For the broader financial architecture I feel that the proposals made by G77/China, Mexico and Norway have merits. These proposals deal with the accessability of the funds for developing countries and with the accountability of the money spent. Let us explore the possibilities to combine the merits of all these proposals.
To conclude: We need to step up our efforts. We must continue to combat climate change. Most of the financial flows to be generated to combat climate change need to come from the developed world.
However in distributing and assigning the funds, the developed and developing countries should work closely together. I am convinced that through such joint efforts we can combat climate change.
We are halfway on the road to Copenhagen. We have worked hard and progress has been made. Yet the challenge remains tremendous. We should move faster. We should and we can.
That is my conviction.