Reuters: Poor Nations insist the Rich should not use Covid-19 to Avoid Climate Cash Payouts

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Poor nations are worried rich countries might break their promise to put $100 billion per annum into the UN Climate Fund, though they hope their prompt submission of applications for the money will encourage rich countries to do their bit.

ANALYSIS-Despite the pandemic, frontline nations push ahead on stronger climate plans

Megan Rowling, Thomson Reuters Foundation
OIL REPORT JUNE 5, 2020 / 6:21 AM

BARCELONA, June 4 (Thomson Reuters Foundation) – The coronavirus pandemic may have delayed the 2020 U.N. climate summit by a year, but for Jamaica, COVID-19 was no reason to stall delivering a stronger climate action plan, just completed as the Atlantic hurricane season starts. 

“It is an individual and a collective commitment,” said Gordon of the plans, created to meet global aims to cut planet-warming emissions and adapt to climate shifts, set under the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change. 

There is an expectation, however, that greater effort will be made by the big emitters since as small islands we are making this effort,” she said.

Under the Paris Agreement, about 195 countries agreed to upgrade their climate action plans every five years to try to meet the accord’s aim of holding global warming to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius. 

This year is the first deadline for such revised plans. 

Mohamed Adow, director of Nairobi-based climate and energy think-tank Power Shift Africa, said COVID-19 should not be used as an excuse by countries to shirk delivering better climate plans in 2020. 

Nor should it let rich nations avoid their promise to raise an annual $100 billion in climate finance for developing nations starting this year. 

COVID has shown us that trillions (of dollars) can easily be made available… when the political will is there,” he said, referring to plans for huge coronavirus recovery packages.

Read more:

What can I say; if I had a reasonable expectation of receiving a share of a promised $100 billion per annum payout, I would probably get my homework done on time as well. Clearly the scale of Coronavirus economic rescue packages have raised expectations.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Joel O'Bryan
June 4, 2020 10:07 pm

It’s all a free money-fueled fun and games party until we run out of OPM.
– me.

h/t: Margaret Thatcher

June 4, 2020 10:14 pm

It’s not the poor little islands that are being swallowed by the ocean, it’s Norway.

Reply to  noaaprogrammer
June 5, 2020 5:37 am

Huh? The many tide gauges in Norway show relative sea level to be unchanged or falling. Seems the ocean is being “swallowed” by Norway.

Reply to  DHR
June 5, 2020 7:09 am

Of course Norway isn’t being swallowed by the ocean, but this large landslide is quite spectacular:

— and someone will probably attempt to attribute it to climate change.

Reply to  noaaprogrammer
June 5, 2020 9:03 am

Dissolved CO2 does weaken rocks. However it will take about a million years for the impact to be noticeable. However we are talking climate science so panicking now is understandable.

Dr. Ivan Murray
Reply to  noaaprogrammer
June 6, 2020 1:30 pm

Climate change:

You’ve got to be taught
To raise the fear
You’ve got to be taught
From year to year,
It’s got to be drummed
In our dear little ears
You’ve got to be carefully taught.

Reginald Vernon Reynolds
June 4, 2020 10:31 pm

It would be reasonable if the poor people actually got the money but we all know that they don’t, maybe few bucks at the end of the day. The serious money is taken by the administrators, the dictators and executives of charities and NPOs. Bottom line it is theft.

Reply to  Reginald Vernon Reynolds
June 5, 2020 3:22 am

As the old saying goes: “Foreign aid consists of poor people in rich countries giving money to rich people in poor countries”. Never was a truer word said.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Graemethecat
June 5, 2020 4:59 am

Thanks for reminding us of that, Graemethecat. That is exactly what happens.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
June 5, 2020 8:22 am

I neglected to add that certain rich people in rich countries also benefit, namely the fat cats running the NGO’s.

Reply to  Reginald Vernon Reynolds
June 5, 2020 7:14 am

I always win this argument with the line “Why are we taking money from poor people in rich countries and depositing it into the Swiss bank accounts of the tyrants, despots, and dictators ruling poor countries?”

Reply to  TomB
June 5, 2020 9:05 am

With a portion of it being kicked back to the politicians who support these programs, in order to keep the gravy train running.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Reginald Vernon Reynolds
June 5, 2020 6:30 pm

“The serious money is taken by the administrators, the dictators and executives of charities and NPOs.”

Don’t forget the bankers, they will be wanting their customary fees and commissions.

Really, is 7% all that much?

June 4, 2020 10:38 pm

I totally object to the idea, for example, that hard working Australian taxpayers’ money should be given to foreign countries as part of a United Nation’s agenda to redistribute wealth from rich countries to poor countries.

Sovereign nations must be left to decide their own foreign aid policies. The ‘new world order-one world government’ UN should butt out.

Reply to  Mervyn
June 5, 2020 4:08 am

im sure china would be happy to loan them enough to go broke n be unable to repay and lose their islands

June 4, 2020 10:43 pm

“Australia won’t give money to Green Climate Fund, says PM”( 8 October, 2018).- Climate Home News.
“The country won’t withdraw from the Paris Agreement but it’s not obliged to follow UN recommendations either,”Scott Morrison said.
“….we don’t get led round by the nose by these organisations,” Morrison told 2GB.
Clear enough.
The A$200 million donated by Australia was a scandalous waste of Federal funds.
There was even a report ,which I hope is false, that some of the Green Fund revenue was paid out to China as a developing Country!
What a farce these people are.

Paul J
Reply to  Herbert
June 5, 2020 5:39 am

Herbert,although a lesser figure,I reckon the $100 million Aussie PM Gillard donated to the Clinton Foundation was even more scandalous.Made my temperature hotter.

June 4, 2020 11:03 pm

Following this latest UN demand, Australia should immediately withdraw from the useless Paris Agreement. Regardless, of that, Australia is not obliged, currently, to follow UN recommendations, as Scott Morrison has said. There are many better things that can be done with the money involved, than passing it over to dictators, administrators, overheads of charities, or worse still, China.

June 4, 2020 11:21 pm

Bend the knee to the new bosses seems to be a frequent delusion.

June 4, 2020 11:36 pm

The ecological footprint of developed world is at it’s highest levels,there is an urgent requirement of making rich countries responsibility to bear the compensation cost.

Tom in Florida
June 5, 2020 4:35 am

Urgent requirement by whom?

Tiger Bee Fly
June 5, 2020 7:50 am

Congratulations on creating a sentence in which every single thing you’ve said is a stupid lie.

June 5, 2020 9:07 am

The reality is that the ecological footprint of developed countries is orders of magnitude less than that of poor countries.
Rich countries have the resources to protect the environment. Poor countries don’t.

Beyond that, how are you hurt if a forest in a rich country is cut down?

Chris Hanley
June 4, 2020 11:43 pm

The poverty of African nations is at least partly self-inflicted.
For instance Kenya where the ‘energy think-tank Power Shift Africa’ is based “has high levels of corruption according to Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index” (Wiki):
comment image
The bright green land-locked country to the south is Botswana that “has transformed itself from one of the poorest countries in the world to an upper middle-income country” (Wiki) and has done so through the rule of law, representative government, independent judiciary and sensible fiscal policies.
Emergency aid aside, wealthy countries should stop treating African nations like children.
Only Africans themselves are able to tidy up their respective acts and then like Botswana would not need outside help, so long as they ignore lectures from wealthy Western weather worriers.

Michael in Dublin
Reply to  Chris Hanley
June 4, 2020 11:51 pm

+10 🙂

Steve (Paris)
Reply to  Chris Hanley
June 5, 2020 1:29 am

Well said

Reply to  Chris Hanley
June 5, 2020 2:48 am

it’s a misconception that the countries in Africa are poor, the bulk of the people are poor, but he hierarchy are quite well off

Michael in Dublin
June 4, 2020 11:49 pm

Too many nations are poor because of incompetence and mismanagement, corruption and bribery, greed and theft, unworkable political ideologies and more. When countries, with substantial mineral resources and adequate land, with weather that favors plentiful food production, cannot feed themselves the problem is not a lack of financial aid.

Why have people, throughout history, been able to turn around miserable situations and establish prospering communities? Perhaps it has been work or starve? Certainly hard work and human ingenuity have been key factors. On the other hand huge sums of aid have disappeared with no obvious long term benefits. This can be seen across the African continent decades after the end of colonialism. Climate cash is but another scam only enriching the administrators, politicians and their favored cronies. It will not reach and help millions of small farmers to adapt to climatic conditions and become productive.

Reply to  Michael in Dublin
June 5, 2020 9:09 am

Look at India, when I was a kid, India was the poster child for extreme poverty.
Then they dumped socialism and started getting wealthy.

Coeur de Lion
June 4, 2020 11:55 pm

One needs to check out the activities of the Green Climate Fund, its salary scales and what the money has been spent on so far. Last time I looked there were a number of worthy little schemes – viz Mozambique flood relief – of an ‘aid’ nature – ‘approved’ (who by?) but not started.

June 4, 2020 11:55 pm

Climate science has turned into full on prostitution. If someone were wanting to give me a million bucks, I would say CAGW is real, but I still wouldn’t really believe it. And it wouldn’t change the weather or the climate, but for a million bucks, most people will say anything. Not that the poor folk of the world would probably even see a peso/penny from any wealth transfer from the First world to the Third world anyway.

Since the Paris Agreement still has China as a developing nation and subject to receiving payments while taking no action on emissions anyway, I would think the Paris Accord is as dead as whipping a dead horse back to life again. Especially now that that everyone is broke after the Wuhan/China virus was unleashed on the world. Of course, much still awaits the outcome of the USA election in less than 5 months and then we are all in the scheme of things, Third world if the Democrats are elected.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Earthling2
June 5, 2020 5:07 am

“Since the Paris Agreement still has China as a developing nation and subject to receiving payments while taking no action on emissions anyway”

Nice work if you can get it.

This ole world has a lot of very stupid officials running it. China must love how easy it is to take advantage of these idiots.

Then along came Trump.

Reply to  Earthling2
June 5, 2020 1:42 pm

The best analogy seems to be “carbon indulgences”.
Eventually, the “carbon Martin Luther” will show up to nail his Ninety-five Theses to the door of the UN.

June 5, 2020 12:05 am

Since the issue is global climate change caused by global emissions, only a coordinated global climate action plan will work. The UN took on that job and failed. The Paris Agreement is not such a plan and not really a global emission reduction agreement.

Although the UN pretends success in terms of the so called paris agreement, it has actually failed to replicate its Montreal Protocol success. Otherwise this issue that we are discussing would not have existed.

June 5, 2020 2:46 am

China only signed up to Paris because it required them to do nothing , and to judge themselves if they done even if that .

Tom Abbott
Reply to  knr
June 5, 2020 5:10 am

“China only signed up to Paris because it required them to do nothing”

Yeah, Obama was desperate to get China signed up to the deal, so he made it real easy for them.

June 5, 2020 5:07 am

The “poor” nations do not need green[backs]. They need to develop people and resources to produce food, water, shelter, other basic necessities, and luxury goods, too.

Tiger Bee Fly
June 5, 2020 5:43 am

“Climate finance” – is that anything like “racial capitalism,” a wonderful term I saw coined by a NYU prof in her piece justifying the riots?

Reply to  Tiger Bee Fly
June 5, 2020 8:26 am

The PC term in the US for rioters and looters is “Undocumented Shoppers”.

June 5, 2020 8:57 am

Green Climate Fund = Green Slime Fund

Let yourself breathe the truth.

June 5, 2020 11:38 am

Clearly, that promised $100 billion per annum payout must be based on the proportion of the pollutants and the effort to reduce them.
Well, in that case, China is first in line to make those payments .. and don’t let them make those COVID-19 excuses.

June 5, 2020 1:02 pm

Why wouldn’t the poor nations want their fair share of colored paper?

Stephen Skinner
Reply to  PaulH
June 6, 2020 3:36 am

Isn’t it paper of colour?

William Astley
June 5, 2020 2:37 pm

The CAGW oversea scam and local scam required rich stupid countries.

There are still, plenty of stupid countries.

The sad reality is the rich stupid countries, are poor now. We kick that darn can down the road for decades… and now the dang rain day is here and many countries are at the limit of their borrowing….

… and the idiot countries have no idea how to balance a budget or how to create a business friendly place.

Delingpole Enjoy Your Furlough Your Grandchildren Will Be Paying For It

Kenan Meyer
June 5, 2020 3:19 pm

They don’t need any money from “rich” countries. All they need to do is replicate what makes “rich” countries “rich”: operate a large printing press.

Stephen Skinner
June 6, 2020 3:35 am

Stop economies to ‘fight’ a virus:
comment image

Robert Lyman
June 8, 2020 6:01 am

The story here is not that the poorer countries want the $100 billion per year “committed” to them, but that it is absolutely obvious that the actual contributions to the Green Climate Fund may less than 2% of that, as has occurred up to now. Many of the INDCs submitted to the UN in 2015 were conditioned on the wealthier countries providing the funds. As it is now clear that they will not, the poorer countries are, under the terms of the Paris agreement, relieved of their conditional commitments. That is only one of the blows to the credibility of the COP21 framework. As of now, of the ten largest country emitters, only one (the EU) stands any chance of meeting the emissions reductions commitments by 2030. For how long can the climate-obsessed media and governments ignore the reality that the world is not even remotely on a “decarbonization” path?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights