COP26: reading between the 97 clauses of the weak decision

The 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties(COP26) was not just "Blah Blah Blah". Greta is wrong, COP26 has not failed. OK it may have not achieved its ridiculous, impractical phase-out of coal, but it did pass the agreement that is now called "CMA-3", and it's a cunning plan as Baldrick would say. The whole document is worth reading and I suggest you do. It's only 10 pages, and on first reading seems bland, harmless and full of good (idealistic) intent. However, there are real, tactical directions that will enable this innocent document to become the manifesto/mandate for climate change activists and bureaucrats around the world and fund their intent.

The official label for the COP26 decision dated 13 November 2021 is "FCCC/PA/CMA/2021/L16 Advance Version 16.2", a totally forgettable, bureaucratic term, now known in the media and by climate change activists as "The Glasgow Pact (TGP)".

The opening context has interesting idealistic and moralistic sentiments such as:

• Noting the importance of ensuring the integrity of all ecosystems, including in forests, the ocean and the cryosphere, and the protection of biodiversity, recognized by some cultures, Mother Earth, and also noting the importance for some of the concept of 'climate justice', when taking action to address climate change…
• Recognizing the important role of indigenous peoples, local communities and civil society, including youth and children, in addressing and responding to climate change, and highlighting the urgent need for multilevel and cooperative action"

This "Kumbaya my lord" opening sets the tone and high moral ground that the authors believe gives them overarching power/rights to inflict their social reengineering on the global society and economy, and if necessary the right to "geo-engineer" the planet to fulfill their mis-guided and flawed cause, namely "Net Zero Emissions", a phrase synonymous with 2021, and almost as dominant in the media as the "COVID-19 pandemic". Interestingly, this document on climate change mentions poverty issues 5 times, thereby emphasising the social engineering/wealth transfer aspects of this political document. The key elements are:

1. Science.Expresses alarm and utmost concernthat human activities have caused around 1.1 °C of warming to date; stresses the urgency of enhancing ambition and action in relation to mitigation, adaptation and finance in this critical decade. 97% consensus science was the rally cry by that master of oratory President Barrack Obama. The words in this section of the TGP are not science, but emotional rhetoric, just as "consensus" is anathema to real world scientists (except climate modellers!). That's it, the science lesson is over (enough said, it's settled!) and the next 8 topics are pure politics, demonstrating that the COP process has little to do with actual climate science.

2. Adaptation. This section states unequivocally that "climate and weather extremes and their adverse impacts on people and nature will continue to increase with every additional increment of rising temperatures". Again, these "settled" impacts are far from that and indeed real climate scientists looking at actual climate records refute every element of these claims. This subtle statement is now the commandment that will be followed by climate change activists, no questions asked, but pure justification for all the tactics to be used to promote "adaptation". Indeed, the TGP sets out a two-year program to develop these tactics under the new IPCC sub-quango named "the comprehensive two-year "Glasgow–Sharm el-Sheikh work program". Adaptation, capacity building and technology is essential for developing countries. Critically, TGP urges bureaucrats around the world to use the influence they control using adaptation to drive local, national and regional planning. This Glasgow-Sharm el-Sheikh (G-SelS) work- program is ill-defined and will be developed by bureaucrats as the roadmap to attain global wealth transfers (presumably the $100 billion per annum money chest that the global developed world leaders committed to during the opening week).

3. Adaptation finance . This is where TGP shows that its key aim is to ensure it gathers the funds to deliver its actions (assuming they will be defined by the" GSelS"). Developed country world leaders have committed to delivering $95 billion this next year, but TGP wants this to be a multiyear commitment (i.e. they want permanent funding that will allow longer term expectations to be met. When the developing countries want more, that gravy train will be full and will arrive regularly to prop up their often failed economies/governments. But this is not enough. This section calls for "at least a doubling of financial commitments by 2025 over the 2019 contributions" and calls upon the financial world to "explore innovative approaches and instruments for mobilising finance for adaptation from private sources". Such a hi-level proclamation sounds innocent and perhaps is an ambit claim, but given that TGP claims the science settled, one wonders if these "calls" are a statement of intent, that we will never have any control over, as it will be negotiated by the 1000s of senior bureaucrats who feed handsomely on the IPCC gravy train. These same bureaucrats can only provide updates on actual expenditure of the various programs 2 years in arrears, so COP26 figures were delivered for 2019.

4. Mitigation. TGP reaffirms that the goal is to limit "global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels". Yet it admits that emissions are "estimated to be 13.7 per cent above the 2010 level in 2030". What they don't highlight is that India, China and Russia are the main source of this increase, while developed countries such as Australia, UK, USA, EU have been the countries which have actually reduced emissions. This flies in the face of common-sense. It seems those who are reducing emissions, are being asked to pay $100 billion painto "funds" that will use "innovative financing" to supply countries with funds, despite their increasing emissions. But, when you apply a simple forecasting model, the pattern of a $20 billion per 3 years, means that by 2030, the demand may reach $160 billion. But that's nothing compared to one estimate (GZANZ) that puts a $130 trillion tag on "transforming the economy for net zero".

5. Finance, technology transfer and capacity-building for mitigation and adaptation . Interestingly this section starts with the message that climate change impacts have been exacerbated by "increased indebtedness as a consequence of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic". This ambit claim does not come from analysis or indicators with logical links, but again illustrates that TGP is focused on global wealth transfer. This section contains 20 clauses. As they say, the crux of any issue can be found by "following the money" and this section provides the core rational for TGP.

These 20 clauses rely heavily on another draft document known as the Climate Finance Delivery Plan. It's another softly worded document that outlines how to extract money from developed countries and hinder their expenditure on nasty climate unfriendly industries, through means of restricted financial access, namely stopping banks lending to coal projects, while offering "concessional climate finance" for developing countries. The "New collective quantified goal on climate finance" is another" sub agenda document which sets in place an "ad hoc work program" Throughout TGP, it urges greater transparency in the funds provided by the developed world, yet never mentions the need for equal transparency for those receiving the funds in the developing countries, a common trait in all UN financial matters.

6. Loss and damage This section starts from the premise "that climate change has already caused and will increasingly cause loss and damage and as temperatures rise, impacts from climate and weather extremes". It assumes that "vulnerable" communities (like atoll islands in the Pacific) need financial support. Despite the fact that numerous studies have shown that the status of these vulnerable communities is not due to climate change, and that many of those used to "illustrate" the grave nature of their plight (sees Spectatorrehash of Timecover). As sympathetic as we might be for the dire economic social, environmental and political issues of these small Island communities, they are actually just another propaganda topic for climate change cultists/media, much as the penguins, walruses, polar bears and Eskimos are. The only thing these "pathetic/innocent/ dumb animal" objects have is not climate change threats, but their attractiveness to media/advertising executives, just as animal cruelty nasty pictures are used ruthlessly by animal charities to generate funds. The section asks that the "Executive Committee of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage due to Climate Change" works with COP26 bodies to provide an implementation plan that can delivery funding to those who claim to have suffered " Loss and Damage", despite the fact that such loses and damages have yet to be proven.

7. Implementation Resolves to move swiftly with the full implementation of the Paris Agreement. That says it all, carte blanche… just do everything we committed to in COP21. The whole section is based upon another background document known as "Modalities and procedures for the operation and use of a public registry referred to in Article 4, paragraph 12, of the Paris Agreement".

The president of COP26 was reduced to tears on the Saturday as he tried to explain the last-minute changes made to the deal, dubbed the Glasgow climate pact. India and China had pushed for the replacement of a pledge to "phase out" coal with one to "phase down" its use. His closing words "I apologise for the way this process has unfolded. I am deeply sorry" received empathy and a standing ovation form the COP26 luvies from 197 countries' delegates. For rational scientists and centrist economists, the Indian word change is a good start to reverse the climate change cultism. But the bloated COP/IPCC/UN gravy train trundles on. TGP has many tricky clauses in it as highlighted in this article. At COP 27 (Egypt), the 1000s of bureaucrats will re-group and with the help of the media will try to forge ahead on their quest to rid the world of fossil fuels and compensate vulnerable and developing countries like India and China, using the West's dwindling treasuries.