Morning:
8°c
The world leaders gathered at the G8 summit in L'Aquila cannot, at least, be faulted for a want of optimism.
They have announced a target to limit global warming to just two degrees above pre-industrial levels by 2050.
They are to cut carbon emissions by 80 per cent by the same date.
These are admirable goals. They tell us that the leaders of the biggest industrial countries have taken on board that carbon emissions have increased, are increasing and ought to be diminished.
Unfortunately, they have not been matched by clarity in the way of interim targets or anything specific about how they are to be achieved.
Even more to the point, developing countries have not signed up to the agenda.
Today, the leaders meet their counterparts from countries that are rapidly industrialising, including China, India and Brazil.
These states are understandably reluctant to accept any green targets that interfere with economic growth, especially in a recession.
It doesn't help that the Chinese premier has had to return home to deal with pressing domestic difficulties, but even before this summit, China made clear that it would not be retarding its economic development to meet concerns about carbon emissions.
There is some point to targets — though the further off they are, the less likely they are to mean anything at all — because they focus policy-makers' minds.
But grand ambitions are no substitute for short-term practical change.
One of the good models for developing nations is, in fact, Japan, whose targets for cutting greenhouse gases are relatively modest, but which has developed a coherent approach to the problem.
Much of the country's energy needs are met by nuclear energy but more to the point, the Japanese have devoted real effort into developing clean technologies.
They (and China) are the biggest producers of solar panels. Japan is trying to link the price of the things consumers buy to the carbon cost of their production.
It demonstrates that it is possible to be a manufacturing nation without being an environmental menace.
By all means let us do our best to meet the new 2050 targets. But without stiff interim measures, they are hot air.
Afghan morass
Seven British lives lost in seven days. That is the real price of the country's involvement in Afghanistan.
It made for an unfortunate backdrop to the speech by the Defence Secretary, Bob Ainsworth, yesterday justifying the Government's policy in the region.
Yet his warning that more lives would be lost was put in context by the Lib-Dem leader, Nick Clegg, who broke with the cross-party consensus by saying that: “If you send people to war, you must supply the resources they need, or you should not send them at all.”
He meant soldiers blown up in vehicles that cannot withstand roadside bombs.
There is a point to the British involvement in Afghanistan, even if it has been eclipsed by the US surge, including in the British area, Helmand.
Most Taliban bases may be in Pakistan, but they should not have a safe base in Afghanistan too: Mr Ainsworth is right that there is a national interest at stake.
But it does not help that the Government's justification for its Afghan policy has shifted so much, ranging from the initial support for aid workers to Harriet Harman's declaration that we have improved education for the Afghans.
The justification is that Afghanistan under the Taliban would foster Islamic extremism that finds an outlet in attacks on us.
That is a real goal but alas, it will indeed cost more lives to fulfil.
The EU and the City
The Mayor, Boris Johnson, is sounding the alarm about the possibility that EU directives to enforce European standards on alternative investments such as hedge funds may drive investors from London. He is right.
This is Europe's real financial centre. And it is we who must set rules to meet our needs if the City is to preserve its position and see off competition from New York and Hong Kong.
Reader views (1)
Yes, but. Our Prime Minister is going to lecture them on economics. They'll no doubt be overwhelmed by his generosity of spirit and his all-embracing knowledge of the subject. Berlu will give up his birds, Sarko his snappiness, Angela her angst and Barack will reel back in joy for being Brown's buddy. Let us have more G8s. And a summit of the RINKZ Group also - Russia, Iran, North Korea, Zimbabwe - to which Gordon has been invited, one hears, to lecture them too. On enlightened democracy....
- John Problem, Hackney UK, 09/07/2009 22:06
Report abuse
