299: COP30: Can Brazil deliver a global breakthrough?
Back from his recent trip to Brazil, Tom shares his conversation with COP CEO Ana Toni and our hosts ask, can Brazil turn promise into progress at this year’s COP?
About this episode
This November, Brazil will host COP30 in Belém, on the edge of the Amazon rainforest, in what is bound to be a moment packed with symbolism, high expectations, and global significance. This week, Christiana Figueres, Tom Rivett-Carnac, and Paul Dickinson explore what’s at stake, what Brazil wants to achieve, and whether the world is ready to move from ambition to implementation.
Back from his recent trip to the country, Tom shares conversations with COP CEO Ana Toni and Gustavo Westmann from the office of the Brazilian Presidency, along with insights and impressions he picked up on the ground - from the growing political momentum to the logistical and diplomatic hurdles still to be overcome. Plus, he introduces the team to the concept of mutirão - this COP’s ambition that the path to climate action be built collectively, and through shared effort, cooperation, and solidarity.
With Brazil readying itself to be the focus of the world’s media later this year, we ask: can COP30 be a breakthrough moment for fossil fuel phaseout, nature protection, and delivery on past promises? Or will it risk becoming another high-profile summit weighed down by old divisions and new distractions?
Learn more
🗺️ Get the latest COP30 updates and insights from the official website
💡 Start exploring the Outrage + Optimism archive by listening to our Lifelines VS Deadlines miniseries, co-hosted by Global Optimism’s Fiona Macklin, whom you heard from at the end of this episode
🎤 Leave us your voice notes and questions for upcoming episodes on SpeakPipe
Follow us on social media for behind the scenes moments and to watch our videos:
Instagram @outrageoptimism
LinkedIn @outrageoptimism
Or get in touch with us via this form.
Producer: Ben Weaver-Hincks
Video Producer: Caitlin Hanrahan
Exec Producer: Ellie Clifford
Commissioning Editor: Sarah Thomas
This is a Persephonica production for Global Optimism and is part of the Acast Creator Network.
Full Transcript
Tom: [00:00:00] This week. We talked this week. This week after my trip last week to. After my trip.
Paul: [00:00:08] It's not going well. Thanks, Paul.
Tom: [00:00:12] Hello and welcome to Outrage and Optimism. I'm Tom Rivett-Carnac
Christiana: [00:00:15] I'm Christiana Figueres.
Paul: [00:00:16] And I'm Paul Dickinson.
Tom: [00:00:17] This week we bring you an update on the preparations for cop 30. What's going to happen? What's the strategy and how can we get involved? Plus, we speak to Anna Toni, CEO of Cop 30, and Gustavo Westman, special adviser in the office of President Lula. Thanks for being. So, friends, lovely to be back with you. I have to say, first of all, before we start, you did a beautiful episode last week. I learned so much about Vanuatu, and I was deeply jealous of your exciting travels, Christiana, and how you got to experience this amazing place. So if there are any listeners out there who have not listened to last week's episode, I strongly encourage you to go back and listen to it.
Paul: [00:00:55] I actually went to Vanuatu by interviewing Christiana about her trip there. There was enough that took me there. So I was kind of, you know, zero carbon trip to Vanuatu.
Christiana: [00:01:03] Good job, good job.
Tom: [00:01:04] Well, if everyone who listened had that experience, it was a very low carbon trip to Vanuatu. It was beautiful and it really made me feel like I'd had an experience with the spirit of the place. So amazing work. And this week we're going to talk about the trip that I recently had to Brazil. And we have some amazing special guests who will make appearances later. But just before we get to that, there has been a consequential verdict in the case that we talked about a while ago, which is Luciano Loya in his case against RWE, and we talked a couple of weeks ago about this verdict. Cristiana, before we came on out, I described that as the fact that it was dismissed. But you quite rightly picked me up and said that's not the correct way to characterize it. So why don't you explain to the listeners what happened?
Christiana: [00:01:42] Well, as is usual in these cases, it can everybody can claim victory here. And it really depends on how you want to interpret what the court said. So the court has said that there is not direct, Let's say, direct risk of the glacial lake flooding Luciano's town, and therefore they did not allocate any compensatory funding for it. But what they did say, which I think from our point of view is the important part, is they confirm that companies can be held liable for climate damages in civil proceedings. So that was the whole point of the of the case. I honestly don't think Luciano did this. Well. I know for sure that he did not do this for the money in it or to be allocated any funding. He was suing R.W. this German company for about €15,000. That was.
Paul: [00:02:47] Correct. It was 0.5% of the cost of what was estimated to be the damage caused by the glacial lake bursting onto his town.
Christiana: [00:02:55] So evidently it's not about the money. It's about the principle of the matter. Yeah. The whole point is actually to build the jurisprudence that will be at the basis of future lawsuits. So I think it's a win.
Paul: [00:03:10] I mean, the principle is the key. You know, damages will end fossil fuels, period. Simple. Clear. That's my view.
Tom: [00:03:19] Okay. That's really helpful to explain that actually, because the key point as exactly as you say is the principle. And if we can move forward, the principle is established. Then we get to the point of damages when we can prove the connection. And that is tragically only becoming more and more evident as the time passes and the crisis gets worse. So thank you for explaining that, Christiano.
Paul: [00:03:36] Well, we're going to dig into it in future episodes, so let's move on.
Tom: [00:03:39] Okay. Should we turn to Brazil?
Paul: [00:03:40] Yes. What were you doing in Brazil, Tom?
Tom: [00:03:43] Well, this is my first trip to Brazil for many years. And my first ever trip to Brasilia. I was there for a couple of reasons. I was participating with our groundswell colleagues in a round table in Rio with various members of the government and Brazilian civil society. Looking at preparations for the Cop. And then I went with a delegation of companies that are part of the climate Pledge to Brasilia, and met with different parts of the Lula administration to discuss what the preparations were for the cop. I've got to say, I have had a kind of crash course in Brazilian politics, and I don't know how much of your lives. Youtube, probably. Cristiana. Quite a lot have spent time thinking about the vagaries and the nuances of Brazilian politics, but it is fascinating and complicated. And I learned the phrase coalition presidential ism when I was there. So Lula is, of course, the president, but he is leading a coalition government that he has had to pull together to enable him to get legislation through the Congress, which at the moment is very difficult given the nature of his multi-polar coalition. He has had to, in all things, kind of pass out responsibility for key jobs across government to different people that represent different political persuasions.
Tom: [00:04:56] So partly as a result of that, responsibility for Cop 30 sits in many places across his government. The logistics sit in one place, the strategy sits in another, the diplomacy sits in another. And it sort of blew my mind at how they're able to coordinate this across government. I mean, I had the sense they must spend their lives coordinating between different departments. I think it's very complicated. But also, I had a bit of an insight into the way in which they're trying to balance environmental and climate leadership into a country that is really gripped by populist politics. I mean, let's not forget Bolsonaro was in power before the previous election. There's another one coming up next year. And one amazing statistic I came across is. So let me ask you this question. If you were to poll rural Brazilians and ask them, are you in favor of both drilling for oil and gas in the Amazon and increasing Amazonian deforestation to support livelihoods of rural Brazilians. What percentage do you think would be in favor of that policy?
Paul: [00:05:55] Very high.
Tom: [00:05:56] 93%. So that is the context that they are trying to push through environmental leadership on the world stage. There has been a push to start real oil and gas exploration in the Amazon. Lula has come out in support of that. It's currently being blocked by his government. But that just gives you kind of a broad picture of the context that they're in and where they're trying to lead.
Paul: [00:06:16] Good news is the environment's 100% of everything. So it's a bigger percentage. Yes, 100%.
Christiana: [00:06:21] The the next election is October of 2026. Correct? Lula aspires to run again. Question mark. He had said in the beginning that he wasn't going to. But I think he has concluded that he better aspire for a re-election because the alternatives are way too scary for him. So is that is that true? And how does that aspiration, how does that affect how he sees the cop?
Tom: [00:06:48] Yeah, it's a great question, Christiana. And that's I think that's behind it being in Belgium, that's behind a whole load of different decisions that we've seen manifest. My understanding is he will run again and there is a whole array of kind of heirs to Bolsonaro who are lining up opposite him, who want to take on the right wing mantle. And as you just heard, that poll statistic, they have fertile ground to operate in and to try to talk to people and say, you know, these people in Brasilia, they don't represent you. So I think as a result of that, we're seeing Lula walk a very delicate political line where he is trying to lead the world on environmentalism and climate leadership and forests. I really do think that's true. Having met senior people in his administration. But the space he has to operate before he gets accused by his political rivals of putting a globalist environmental agenda ahead of real working Brazilians is incredibly slim. So you see him kind of playing both roles, like pushing for an end of fossil fuels, as we'll hear from certain parts of his government, but then pushing to expand oil and gas drilling in the Amazon, on the other hand. So that's going to be, I think, the nature of this political process that they're trying to undertake.
Christiana: [00:08:00] Yeah, it's such a difficult situation that he's in because he knows from his perspective, it is better for Brazil that his coalition continues in some way, shape or form. And he definitely wants Brazil on the international stage. But it's sort of counterintuitive or actually completely against most opinion in Brazil. It's a very difficult position that he's in.
Tom: [00:08:26] And actually, I was going to ask you Christianity. I mean, you've known Brazilian politics a long time since you were sort of supporting governments across Latin America and developing their strategies for climate negotiations. Was it ever thus in Brazil? I mean, is this what Brazilian politics is like on this issue, or is this different to how you've known it over the years?
Christiana: [00:08:44] I'm really stepping here above my pay grade. Thank you for giving me way too much credit for knowing internal Brazil. I have the sense that Brazil has always had to manage international positioning and responsibility on the one hand, and local interests or national interest on the other. I think they're always tried to manage that. I think they always positioned themselves internationally as responsible political, social, economic agents and then they have a hard time internally. So I think it's always been for them, but it is a starker version of it that they're facing this year in next year.
Tom: [00:09:24] Yeah. And because the election is so soon, right, it's just nine months after the cop.
Paul: [00:09:28] Pandora, Steve Bannon is sort of out of the box now and has sort of infected global politics with the idea that there's a trade off between kind of fossil fuel and deforestation, wealth and the climate. And unfortunately that's what we're up against in every country, I think.
Tom: [00:09:41] So just to get into it, I mean, the first thing I would say just as a very one liner, because I know this is on the minds of so many people in the climate movement who are trying to work out their own strategy for BLM. There's been all these rumors circulating. Will it be in BLM? Will it not be in BLM? It's going to be in BLM. It's going to be in an old airfield to the north of the city. They have been looking at whether or not they could position cruise ships in the town. Those cruise ships cannot be docked in the old town at the bottom of BLM due to dredging issues in the in the river. So they will be docked north of the climate negotiations. So there will be 5 or 6000 beds on those cruise ships. And in the south, in the old town of BLM, is where much of the accommodation is located. Many people are finding it's extremely expensive and I think there will be more beds made available. But the logistics are going to be super tough, so I suspect people will be sending smaller delegations. There will be less people on the ground in previous cops, and we will continue to keep you updated with information as that happens. But that's probably enough on logistics, because that's a subset of our listeners who are interested.
Christiana: [00:10:44] Sorry. I think we owe our listeners 1 or 2 more details.
Paul: [00:10:47] Okay. More lines.
Christiana: [00:10:49] There's no price control on lodgings. So you are charged thousands of dollars per night and the government is not going to step in. And that is true. Is that true?
Tom: [00:10:59] Correct. The government has made a decision not to step in. And I think that speaks again to the politics. Some people are renting homes for as much as the value of the entire home over those two weeks. And you can't blame them, right?
Christiana: [00:11:10] You can't blame them. And so that actually means that there is an inclusion issue here, because it means that those people who are on tight budgets, which is the majority of population on this planet, will not be able to go simply because they can't afford to. So, Tom, I'm going to really push you here. Is this going to be a cop for rich people?
Tom: [00:11:31] It's a fascinating question, and I think that two things will happen. I think that there will be less of the global climate movement going to be as there is in previous years, is, but I think you will see more participation and potentially more accreditation of people local to Belem who will then go and experience the Kop. So I think it will be more locally relevant than many cops that we've seen before, certainly in the green zone, which is the non UN zone, as veterans of the Cop will know in the blue zone. I also think you might see a smaller international delegation of the climate movement and more local people participating. And I think that's kind of what the Brazilians want.
Christiana: [00:12:08] And is there anything to some rumors that I've heard that part of the non negotiating space, the non-formal space, is actually going to migrate over to Rio, and that most of the climate community will be having its meetings and its events in real.
Tom: [00:12:26] It's a great question. So the week before the cop starts, there will be the head of state summit in Belem, which is before it gets designated as UN territory. So it's before the cop starts like a few days before.
Christiana: [00:12:38] But in Berlin.
Tom: [00:12:39] In Belem. But in Rio that week, there will be a whole series of climate related events, such as the Earthshot Prize, of course, Christiana, that you will be there for the C40 summit. Pri in person will be happening in Sao Paulo. So many people who are representing corporates or representing NGOs may decide to just go to Rio for that period and then maybe go to Belem for a night or two, or maybe not even at all. I think that's quite likely how people will end up participating.
Christiana: [00:13:06] Yeah, the night or two is not quite an option because most of the lodging you have to buy it for the whole two weeks or not. Isn't that.
Tom: [00:13:14] True? I think that's true. And the prices are, I mean, 25, $26,000 for two weeks. I mean, it's bonkers. Now, that may come down when the official beds are released from the cruise ships. They're going to be posted there, but it's not going to be it's not going to be cheap. So during my time in Brasilia, I spoke to Ana Toni, CEO of Cop 30, as we were walking around the enormous and beautiful Foreign Affairs building And obviously we are facing a very difficult geopolitical context to host a cop. That was actually where I started in my first conversation with her. So let's listen in to what she said. Anna, it's so nice to see you. We've had it. I've had the privilege of spending some time with you this week. We were together in Rio and we're together now here in Brasilia. You just gave this very inspiring message to a group of businesses gathered here in Brasilia around the cop. I just want to start off six months to go. How are you feeling?
Ana Toni: [00:14:01] I'm feeling good. Despite of what's happening. The geopolitics, you know, military wars, trade wars.
Tom: [00:14:08] It seems like a quite a difficult moment to run a cop if i'm honest.
Ana Toni: [00:14:11] At the same time, I feel that people really wanted to. In this moment of difficulty, people get together and wants to do things together. So the big word is togetherness feels that when you have a big problem, united all of us. So I feel united. I feel that people wanted to to really strengthen multilateralism and the importance of us together combat climate change. So I'm positive, but that's also by my nature.
Tom: [00:14:41] Yeah, there's a lot of positivity here in Brasilia, which, I.
Paul: [00:14:43] Mean, she's expressing what I think is the genius of Brazil, the call to collective action. And it can strike a chord from Tokyo to London, from Mexico City to Lagos can light up the world.
Tom: [00:14:54] 100%, Paul. And that call is what's what we need to hear, right? We have become used to focusing on our own part of this challenge. But there needs to be these moments of collective effort. And I think what the Brazilian government and Antonio in these great leaders are calling us to is to step forward at this moment when it's really needed, needed more than ever.
Paul: [00:15:11] By the way, I think you did a fantastic job of being roving reporter.
Tom: [00:15:14] I wish I'd brought more recordings because there were some amazing people, but we've got some great stuff coming up and I just want to set up. There are essentially four areas that we need to cover off in this podcast to help listeners understand. And this is how the Brazilian government itself is dividing up what needs to happen. There is the head of state summit that, as we've already said, will happen a few days before the cop in Belgium, the negotiations themselves and what Brazil is hoping to deliver through the negotiating process. Then there's the action agenda, which is all of the other non-state actors. And then finally, there is a word that many listeners may have never heard before, which is the mural mural. We'll put how to spell it in the show notes. And this is the desire of Brazil to create a big global movement that we are all participating in. So think of this as the layers of an onion with the head of state, some in the middle, and the negotiations, the action agenda, and then the mural, which is the critical context that all of this happens within.
Christiana: [00:16:08] So, Tom, let me let me ask you this. The head of State summit is going to take place in Belém, but before the UN conference starts. Why is that.
Tom: [00:16:20] So? Actually, a question ahead for you is has this ever been done before? Have they ever actually assembled heads of state while it's still national territory before it becomes UN territory?
Christiana: [00:16:28] No, it's quite creative.
Tom: [00:16:29] I think it's to do with logistics mainly. I think that the number of beds available in Belgium and how stacked and full the city will become. I asked a couple of people and they said they thought about this and thought about then adding as many as 100 or 120 heads of state into this very compressed logistical context, and they decided to just reduce the pressure and do it before. So I think it's as simple as that. Nevertheless, the opportunity of this head of state summit happening immediately before the Cop is to send a strong signal to negotiators, as you know better than anyone, Christiana, in order to try to drive them to actually deliver something really meaningful in the subsequent two weeks. So I think there's a few things we can maybe touch on that we might see come out of that head of state summit. And I think at the core of this, of course, is the next round of nationally determined commitments under the Paris Agreement. I can't believe I've explained this to you. Countries come back to the table every five years and provide their next round of commitments. This year in Brazil is the deadline for countries bringing forward their 2030 to 2035 commitments. And this is a really difficult political context. They were supposed to be in in February.
Tom: [00:17:39] And right now only 21 have been submitted. As we know well, Christiana, big, ambitious years are usually presaged by a big bilateral deal between the US and China to set the tone for the ambition. That's obviously not coming this year. So there's a lot of hope that actually the EU will play a big role to bring the world together. But the EU has not yet agreed to its own 2040 target. So there's a lot happening in the EU to try to bring them forward and then think, could there be an EU China summit? Would that enable them to show the world where we need to get to? The president has been traveling a lot, trying to speak to partners in the EU, in Saudi Arabia to bring forward this ambition that hopefully will land before we all get to Berlin. But the final moment that they hope will be delivered is that in Belgium? Countries will come back to the table with their nationally determined commitments that take into account the global stocktake that came out two years ago to actually get the world back on track to 1.5 degrees. But as we know very well, with the US completely absent from the negotiations. That's a really tough ask.
Christiana: [00:18:46] Okay, I have two reactions to that. The first, I have a pain at the bottom of my stomach to think that the country of Brazil needs to provide for security for X number of heads of state. How many heads of state are they expect?
Tom: [00:19:02] 100 100 to 120.
Christiana: [00:19:03] Okay. I mean that already gives me a pain at the bottom of my stomach. Because if you do this within the UN conference, then the UN security is completely deployed.
Tom: [00:19:14] That's a great point. I hadn't thought about that of course. Yeah.
Christiana: [00:19:17] But assuming and I, I definitely assume that they have considered this and that they are ready to step up to that. But the other thing, Tom, I am surprised that your comment is that they expect the EU to step up because that comes out of the paradigm that we will continue to see leadership from the usual suspects. On this podcast, we have discussed a couple of times that perhaps Brazil, this cop may be the beginning of new leadership of the BRICs, being that Brazil is one of the BRICs. So I wonder if in conversations with them, did they have any comments about the fact that in the absence of the United States and the EU, still uncertain about what it's doing, are they mobilising the BRICs? It seems to me like such a huge opportunity to change the paradigm of leadership 100%.
Tom: [00:20:19] And so I don't think obviously leadership can only come from the EU. They are definitely hoping the EU will step up and encourage China to go further, but that's not what they're relying on wholly. And in fact, a senior official said to me, a very nice moment actually, where she said, when you come here, do you feel optimism? And I was like, yes, I really do. I mean, everyone is like, we're going to do this. And they said, if you go to India, do you feel optimism? And I said, yes, I do. And they said, look, this is the thing. You go to the BRICs countries and you feel optimism and excitement and possibility, and they are very much pushing their BRICs colleagues because Brazil has come forward already with its NDC. They want to see India, China, you know, Russia, who knows South Africa and the other members of the BRICs step forward and take the lead here. However, the feeling I also got because I did ask that exact question, Christiana, is unless you see some commensurate partnering, mirroring leadership that comes from the EU and from others, that hand is not so strong that they expect the BRICs to step forward in the absence of all of those traditional what used to be called annex one country stepping forward. So there's still a degree of waiting to see what comes out of the EU before we see this leadership come forward from the BRICs.
Christiana: [00:21:32] Fair enough. Fair enough. But I think that that balance that you speak of is a pretty new balance. Yeah. Heretofore, we expected leadership to always come from developed countries. And the fact that there is I don't know if an expectation, but certainly an opportunity for some developing countries to step forward, I think is very exciting.
Paul: [00:21:53] Yeah. A Brazilian businessperson explained this to me once, saying, you know, when you start to see the direct flights from Sao Paulo to Mumbai, you'll start to realize that the axis has changed and that not everything is going via Europe or the US or whatever.
Christiana: [00:22:06] Yeah, exactly.
Tom: [00:22:07] Now, the other thing, which I think is likely to be landed at the head of state summit, is the Tropical Forest Forever facility. And this is something which is being developed very extensively and actively at the moment by the Brazilian government. And it is the creation of a new fund, which is pretty innovative in its nature to create a flow of revenue that can facilitate and encourage countries that have a large amount of standing tropical forests to preserve those forests. The Tropical Forest Forever facility is such a great idea that countries put money in. It generates a return, and that return is used to encourage countries that have significant tropical forests to keep it standing. How is that going? Because it feels like such a difficult moment to capitalize a new fund.
Ana Toni: [00:22:50] I think it's the right moment because also there is big doubts about how much more money can we get from donations. So yes, it's a difficult time where countries are diminishing their aid budget. At the same time, we're not asking for aid. We are asking for investment. It's a low return investment, but is investment. So what we are saying if you want to be part of the solution, get your money that you have invested in a pension fund. Continued investing in a secured manner that you get 3% or 4%. You get that return, and we use the money to generate more than 3 or 4%. And then this money is what is going to be remunerated in the people that are protecting the forest. So it's a different way of thinking is a public private.
Tom: [00:23:42] It could be donor countries, could be pension funds. It could be anyone who capitalizes.
Ana Toni: [00:23:46] Absolutely.
Tom: [00:23:46] Got it.
Ana Toni: [00:23:47] Absolutely. Especially pension funds. Yeah. Because those are obviously we will need.
Tom: [00:23:52] Long term patient capital.
Ana Toni: [00:23:53] Yeah, exactly. Those is because they spread between what they need for return secure return 3%. Triple A 3%. How do we use that money to generate more than 3% 4 or 5. And the difference between 3 and 4 and five. That difference is what's going to be remunerated. The farmer or the indigenous persons that is protecting the forest.
Tom: [00:24:19] I mean, what is astonishing about that idea is the delta between 3 and 4%, and the return you can get can save the world's tropical forests. I mean, people need to understand.
Ana Toni: [00:24:26] And why a pension fund or a government would not want to be part. Yeah, they're not losing absolutely anything. Yeah.
Tom: [00:24:34] This is an innovative idea. It's an innovative mechanism where money is put in and there's a return generated, as we said there. And the delta is actually what's provided to these countries. There are clearly challenges around where the money would be deployed. How what would the safeguards be. But I think it's actually a really interesting model, and I hope to see that they can capitalize it. They're seeking to raise 125 billion by the time of the Cop. And it seems to me a difficult moment to be raising money, but a bold initiative and quite exciting. What do you both think?
Christiana: [00:25:02] I think it's a brilliant idea, and I think it begins to crack the nut of what is the finance model, or the financial flow model that you can create in order to invest into forest restoration and forest preservation. So I think it's a great idea, and I have it from a very credible source that the current conception, there are quite a few loopholes and perverse incentives that could end up changing the impact of it to exactly the opposite to what it is intended to do. So I guess here, just a word of caution. Just to make sure that this very good idea actually gets executed in a good way.
Paul: [00:25:46] Yeah. A couple of decades ago, someone said to me that something like this had been proposed. And the idea, the fear was that anyone near a forest would buy a chainsaw and say, where's my money? Because it's you. You've got an incentive to be paid to not cut down a forest. But if there are proper government controls, look, you know, everyone wants free money and it's only said nobody's losing anything. But there's also money to to pay farmers, for example. Well, that does mean that someone's losing something. But, you know, guess what? Pension funds. The public invest in their best interests for the long term and the elderly invest for their grandchildren. So there is a business case for this. Actuaries can understand that, and it just requires the sort of the wisdom and the good judgment of pension fund trustees, of which there are many with a lot of wisdom and a lot of good judgment.
Tom: [00:26:26] Yeah. No, I completely take some of the concerns around this, but I think that what I take heart from and the same very good source that you referenced, Christiana, I think I spoke to the same person and I think that these are addressable. So we need to sort of like identify how we can make sure those safeguards are put in place. Now our production team are going to kill us in a minute because we've taken up most of the time, we should be a lot further on in this agenda. So let's move on and start talking about the other issues. Let's take a quick break first. And when we come back we will talk about the negotiations. Welcome back everyone. And one of the things that we talked about as a critical outcome that the Brazilian government is thinking around, is the negotiations under the INF treaty themselves. Clearly, since the Paris Agreement and then the finalisation of the rulebook and the implementation plan. There is less to negotiate, and this is more now about how do we pivot to action. But one thing that I think the Brazilian government are really feeling like they have a responsibility to navigate is language in the text that will come out of the cop around the end of fossil fuels. Listeners may remember that in Dubai, there was language in the declaration that was around transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, and there is a lot of pressure on the Brazilian government to take this further in the negotiated outcome that comes out of Belém. And this is something I spoke both to Ana Toni about, but also first to Gustavo Westman, who is the special adviser for international affairs in the office of President Lula. So let's start off by listening to what he had to say about this issue into the office. I'd also just like to ask you about a couple of the difficult issues in negotiations.
Gustavo Westman: [00:28:05] Sure.
Tom: [00:28:05] Go ahead. So in particular, one of the things that has come up so much in recent years is around fossil fuel phaseout. Do you see any possibility that there is a pathway there to introduce that? Because it's been very difficult in recent years in the negotiation to find any landing ground that we can agree on.
Gustavo Westman: [00:28:22] Well, Tom, that's the white elephant in the room. Right. So we're very concerned about it. And I think we all know that we have to start discussing the phase out of fossil fuels. We can no longer keep giving a blind eye to this matter. The problem is how to do so. As I was telling you before, Brazil has always been very vocal and active in the climate agenda. But once you start hosting a cop, it's a very different perspective because you have to reach consensus. So by by having this responsibility, we have to be very cautious on how to deal with different issues. We're still working on that. I think we will not be able to avoid the discussion, but how to present it and how to engage different countries into that conversation is still an open question. I believe after Bonn, we may have some more clearance on how to to deal with such a central matter, but we are concerned about it and we want to to put or to take the white elephant out of the room.
Tom: [00:29:24] Gustavo really set out the issues there. However, when I pose the same question to Ana Toni, she highlighted an interesting way forward that was around a partnership between both producers of fossil fuels, but also consumers.
Ana Toni: [00:29:37] I mean, the debate about fossil fuels that we have seen. First, it's important for us to remember we decided we are going to transition in a way. And for that, we need the producers and the consumers of fossil fuel agreeing on how that transition will happen. It's not just for producers or for consumers. It needs to be a joint because it needs to be orderly. We have some good news. We saw what now China seems to have peak emissions. Just gives us a lot of hope on how that trajectory is going to be. There is still a big fight on. When are we going to be picking fossil fuel? I think that's a big debate. The International Energy Agency versus OPEC. What is the date of peaking or not peaking? And I think that's a little theoretic. What is going to make fossil fuel going down or a spike in fossil fuel. Is implementation right. Is implementation of the commitments that we have made. And everybody can again contribute. So I hope that in our cop negotiation action agenda we all face, what we need to face is how are we going to transition away from fossil fuels.
Ana Toni: [00:30:50] It's not anymore if but it's the how. And I feel that we have made that discussion a little bit like black and white, right or wrong. And I think there are very difficult choices that we need to make as as US producers, all consumers, and we have to highlight what are those difficult choices that we need to make and why are we not making them? It's as if somebody else is not making them. But what are they? And I think if we can highlight what are the difficult choices we need to make. For example, many countries, they are not dependent on fossil fuel. They are dependent on the money from fossil fuel, right? For their budget, their public budgets. This is a problem for many countries. Many countries depend on fossil fuel to pay their international debt. So can we make this debate a little bit more granular and see from country to country what the solutions for transitioning away could be? Because I think by doing so, we would be able to be more constructive. Load MoreAna Toni: [00:31:54] Yes. Because again, it's not just the dependency on the few is the dependency on the money and is on the dependency on the political power that the fossil fuel have. We have those three big dependencies and we need to be conscious about that. Debate them openly. No, it should not be a taboo to debate them, but we need to go forward. That's the only thing we know.
Tom: [00:32:16] Amazing. Anna, let's go and find your office. Yeah. All right. Greg, thank you. So interestingly there in that comment from Anna, Tony, what we have is potentially a way forward that would form a partnership between producers and consumers. And I think this potentially could be a landing ground for the negotiations. I'm really interested in your views, Christiana. If the Brazilian government introduced text that says we are calling on fossil fuel producers to reduce their output, then you get into a situation where a small number of countries are being asked to carry the whole burden. But as Anna Tony sets out, actually those countries need that revenue sometimes for international debt or for other issues, and that includes Brazil. And going back to the political context we talked about at the beginning. So some kind of partnership between producers and consumers feels like it has to be where this nets out. Would you agree?
Christiana: [00:33:00] I think it's difficult for consumers to reduce their consumption unless they have a systemic alternative easily available to them. Let's just remember, producers, you put out two hands, and that's sort of the number of countries that produce fossil fuels. But consumers it's everyone. Yeah. So it's a very, very different you know we're not. This is apples and oranges.
Tom: [00:33:23] Well I think what it is is if you if you were to have an agreement that producers would reduce supply, but you did nothing about consumption, then what you would get is a situation where the price begins to spike, the supply gets constrained, and it just feels politically unrealistic to expect countries to do that. But if instead you had a partnership where you would say consumers need to reduce their consumption of fossil fuels by switching to electric vehicles, by deploying renewable energy, by changing the amount of fossil fuels that they consume that are ultimately causing this challenge. And as that is reduced, then producers also need to reduce their supply of fossil fuels into the marketplace. So together, if those two things can be balanced, then you have an orderly transition between producers and consumers away from fossil fuels.
Christiana: [00:34:11] I mean, that's interesting, but as we've heard on other episodes, that's happening anyway, right? We have heard, you know, from quite a few of our friends here on the podcast that demand for fossil fuels is definitely shrinking, certainly for coal, but also for oil and gas. And that in reaction to that, fossil fuel companies are actually no longer investing in expanding their own oil fields. So the fact is that both independently of negotiations, right. We have to really remember always that negotiations are one world. But in the real world, that is actually already happening because demand is going down and at least reserves are going down, if perhaps not act of supply.
Tom: [00:34:57] But isn't that isn't that ever the case, Christiana? When the real world starts to move, then at the end of the day, the governments kind of formalize what's already happening. And that's a good thing that actually what we see is that the real world moves. Production and demand begin to be eroded. And then you can follow that up with a collective declaration that we will now commit to delivering what is already happening in the world. Now, that doesn't mean that collective declaration doesn't have value. It does have value. But if it was trying to change the world just by a declaration, it wouldn't work.
Paul: [00:35:27] Because I was saying it's, you know, fossil fuel phaseout is the elephant in the room that language is trying to find. I guess increasingly adult language about that isn't going to work, Christiana.
Christiana: [00:35:37] Well, I guess I'm more on the Tom side that it's a matter of the politics or the political language or the agreement language getting up to speed with what is happening in the reality. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Which is a good thing.
Tom: [00:35:52] It's a good thing. And actually, when politics reflects back to us what's already happening that still has a value, right? That still we're all suddenly able to see it. So it's like a mirror that reflects the world. Yeah. So I think that that gives me great confidence that that's your reaction, Christiana, that maybe the world is ready for that kind of statement, which would be quite an outcome, I think, from Belgium in a way, even though it's just formalizing what's already there.
Christiana: [00:36:14] I'm just having a hard time seeing my way through to that kind of language.
Tom: [00:36:19] And I think actually your instinctive reaction that the pathway to that language in a negotiated outcome remains hard is actually a point of real interest. I consistently heard from the Brazilian team, look, this is hard and we don't know how we're going to introduce this. We want to do it. And we think it's to do with a partnership between producers and consumers. And we're optimists. So we're going to have a go. But there's real jeopardy here. So the fact that your instinct is you can't see a pathway to that language is really interesting. And we should stay connected to that throughout the year.
Christiana: [00:36:48] Yeah, I would I would venture to throw out another crazy idea since, you know, this is the marketplace for crazy ideas.
Paul: [00:36:54] Now's the time.
Christiana: [00:36:56] I think it would be really interesting if the cop could call upon the International Development Bank system to offer financial support for those countries that are dependent on their fossil fuel exports, especially small, poor countries that are dependent on that for the international financial system to offer financial support for economic diversification, because that's where it's really stuck. There are a handful of fossil fuel exporting, very poor countries that really depend on that, and they should be supported in economic diversification so that they can have over an X number of years, that they can then begin to bring down or to decrease their dependency on fossil fuel exports and move over to other kinds of economic activities and exports.
Tom: [00:37:51] That's an interesting idea. And I would just pitch in. You know, in a world with populist narratives on the rise. The idea in any way that we're going to pay Petroleum Exporting countries to stop producing petroleum, as we know and you know, this better than anyone, is going to have difficult political ramifications, right? So how those things land is, that's always been the challenge with that kind of solution, hasn't it?
Christiana: [00:38:14] Yeah, but it's different. I mean, the what has been on the table is to pay them to not export or to not drill. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about financial support for economic diversification, which is very different than paying them to not extract.
Tom: [00:38:33] To not drill. Yeah. I mean, it may be presented in a different way, but you're right that the core of that, of course, is very different. This is such an interesting conversation. We should delve more into some of this stuff. I mean, that's obviously only one tiny piece of what is hoped to be delivered in the negotiations. There's things on adaptation, things on finance, but I think we probably need to move on or they will hopefully return to this topic.
Christiana: [00:38:53] Yeah, but but Tom, I'm hoping I'm hoping that Brazil. And here's a question for you. There are many people around the world, me included, who are looking to Brazil to be able to open up the web of issues that are being considered to including things like human health, land, forestry production, ocean issues, all of these other issues that are not spelled out in the Paris Agreement, but that we know are intricately interdependent of each other and absolutely critical for climate success or for climate progress. Indigenous issues. To add one more to the list. So did you have any conversations about that with Brazil?
Tom: [00:39:45] I did, and I think that they do have an ambition, particularly to Centralize those issues that are, you know, core to Brazil and who she is. And so, of course, that includes forest and nature and includes indigenous people. But one of the ways that I understood them to be approaching this issue is to think about, you know, the mandate from the UN, f c is next round of nationally determined commitments, taking into account the global stocktake. Now, the global stocktake is in some ways narrow and in some ways broad. It talks about more ambition transitioning away from fossil fuels, focus on nature loss and damage adaptation. But it doesn't really push the real envelope around a much broader range of things. That includes human livelihoods, oceans. So I think we'll see that partially happen, but I don't think we will see the agenda being completely broken open in Belem to incorporate all those other features.
Christiana: [00:40:41] I guess it's much more of a principle matter whether these issues are recognized Ized as being interdependent to climate or not.
Tom: [00:40:51] That I think we.
Speaker5: [00:40:52] Will see.
Tom: [00:40:53] That. I do think we'll see. Okay, now I have a horrible feeling that we've continued so long on these early issues that we're now going to lose. You, Christiana and Paul and I are going to have to continue on our lonesome.
Speaker5: [00:41:02] Is that correct?
Christiana: [00:41:02] Yes.
Speaker5: [00:41:02] I'm very sorry.
Tom: [00:41:03] This is the first time we've ever actually run into a clash. So very sorry to listeners that we now lose Christiana Figueres. But it's been lovely to chat to you about this.
Speaker5: [00:41:10] Sorry, guys.
Paul: [00:41:11] The sound of hundreds, thousands of listeners switching off. But there's more, there's more, but without Christiana.
Christiana: [00:41:16] Alrighty.
Tom: [00:41:17] Lovely to see.
Paul: [00:41:17] You. See you next.
Speaker5: [00:41:18] Week.
Christiana: [00:41:18] You will.
Christiana: [00:41:19] Bye bye.
Tom: [00:41:21] All right, Paul, are we going to soldier on alone?
Paul: [00:41:22] Let's do.
Tom: [00:41:23] It. So now, as we started at the beginning, there are four different areas ahead of State Summit's negotiations. And now we're pivoting to the action agenda. Now, the action agenda really is where much of the action, pun intended, is these days in a cop, because this is all about implementation. And actually what I would point to is that much of the way in which the cop team is setting out and communicating its agenda is in these periodic letters that come from the Cop president. And the fourth letter is going to be forthcoming in about a week, but that will cover specifically all of the areas of the action agenda that the presidency is prioritizing. They're going to be looking at issues like finance and energy transition, social development, cities, things that really tie together human livelihoods and well-being with the climate agenda. So that's going to be their broad focus that has not yet been put out into the world. But we can definitely anticipate that the Brazilian government will begin to really pivot and push companies and investors and cities to really come to Belem with meaningful commitments.
Paul: [00:42:22] Tom, look, this these gigantic cups, as we I mean, we're going to come to this later. Actually, I think it discussed a little bit the governments coming together are incredibly important. But guess what. It's bigger than the governments now. So there's all these cities, there's all these corporations, there's all these investors. And this is something you and I spent our careers on. And the point being that, yeah, you've heard me say this before, the government is sort of, you know, between 20 and 40% of the economy in most countries. So the majority of what's going to get done isn't the government, it's the private sector. So that's where the action agenda is so incredibly important and where there's no limitations to what corporations and investors can do. No limitations at all. So we can have much more imagination and theoretically, more optimism with the action agenda.
Tom: [00:43:00] 100%, and actually the high level champion for climate action who will largely lead the action agenda. Dan Yoshiki I met him when I was in Rio. Really great guy. Vice chair of the Brazilian Chamber of Commerce and led the B20, which is the busiest engagement around the G20 that Brazil also hosted last year. Deep experience really understands what brings business to the table. And, you know, great tradition of good friends like ours, like Nigel Topping and Gonzalo Munoz. So I think what we will see is him beginning to get his arms around that agenda and really bringing a deep bench of commitments from the non-state actor community as part of the action agenda. And that's something that we will come back to you as that shapes up. So now should we turn to the final part, which is what's called the mutirão? Can you pronounce it, Paul?
Paul: [00:43:42] I can pronounce it three seconds after you say it, and then not after that. Not because I'm incapable of pronouncing words, but because I have a classic trope of fear of mispronouncing, which then causes me to worry too much and then mispronounce the one thing I'm trying to avoid doing.
Tom: [00:43:57] I know how you feel. The danger of Muritao is ever present, but mutirão. So the mutirão is actually, I think, the masterstroke of the Brazilian COP. But they are going to need a lot of help, and I think this is somewhere that listeners to our original optimism can play an outsized role in the world. So the mutirão is the idea that actually this is not about a small group of governments in Belgium or even a small group of governments in Belgium, and a much larger group of non-state actors like cities and businesses and investors. This is all of us. This is actions that every single one of us needs to take. And I think what they've really identified very clearly is that the challenge of climate is a challenge of agency. We all feel like we are disconnected from each other, like we're on our own. Like we don't know how to deal with this key issue. However, the mutirão is the idea that we should all feel like we are part of this great shared endeavor. So first of all, I asked Anna Toni for some broad reflections on what she really meant by the mutirão.
Ana Toni: [00:44:58] I think what we need is to everybody realize that if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. And each of us in our daily lives, in whatever position we are, we can be part of the much around you as a consumer. What your choices as a consumer. Every day you choose which transport you're going to use to your work. You as a voter, who you're going to vote, you as a leader, a CEO. The choices you make if you do the right thing. Together, we can fight and combat climate change. So before I feel that everybody felt that you need to go to a cop to do an action agenda for a climate agenda, or you need to be a leader. Whatever leader is, Everybody can do it. All of us are leaders of climate change. If we use the powers we have, all the powers we have to change the reality. We know that climate change, unfortunately, is inevitable. But also the transition is inevitable. And if we together can speed that up, less people will suffer. And that's exactly what we want.
Tom: [00:46:01] And then after that discussion with Anna, later in the week, I was having a conversation with Gustavo Westermann, and he got into a bit more detail around exactly what the mutirão might look like when it's implemented. Do you mind if we carry on our conversation? I don't drive, so.
Gustavo Westman: [00:46:16] So I don't like it.
Tom: [00:46:19] All right, so we're heading down through Brasilia from the hotel where we just recently had our meeting. And Gustavo, our generous.
Paul: [00:46:25] Chauffeur, was.
Tom: [00:46:26] Speaking to a group of companies who are here trying to think about how they can contribute to climate action. At the Cop. It was a really helpful meeting. Your message was super inspiring, and I'd love to just pick up on this concept of the mutirão. All. And first of all, to commend you for it, because this is what's missing, right? The idea that at a cop, a small group of companies or countries are going to come together and solve this problem for all of humanity has always been a fantasy. And so we've had to get to the point where everyone feels like they're part of it. But it's so hard to do. Many people feel disconnected from climate. How do we get to a point where everyone feels like they're part of this great mutirão effort that we are all involved.
Gustavo Westman: [00:47:04] In?
Gustavo Westman: [00:47:04] Another very, very, very tough question, but I believe this meeting is a reflection of what we can do and how we can do it by engaging different stakeholders in the process. For example, we had huge companies in this meeting, just to name a few. Mastercard, Microsoft and so many others. So the amount of people these these companies can reach and the power of the message they can live is is immense. It's huge. So something that caught my attention during the meeting, and I'm really glad about it, actually, was that not all of them were thinking about the strategy or the contribution they can give along the process by leaving this message, by mobilizing, by engaging.
Gustavo Westman: [00:47:44] By engaging the people they speak to.
Gustavo Westman: [00:47:46] Exactly. So they were really focused on being in Berlin during Cop 30. And okay, that's fine. That's part of of their strategies. But the contribution they can give is so much more relevant if they manage to mobilize the billions of people they have access to. To be more aware about the climate issue. Of course, they have their own commitments on ESG. They had zero announcements they're intending to make. That's huge. But the real difference, I believe, will be changing the minds of their clients, their networks, their stakeholders. They engage.
Speaker10: [00:48:22] With. Okay.
Tom: [00:48:23] Now it's impossible to deny the importance and the relevance of this issue. But Paul, what do you think about the practicality of it? I mean, this is not something that we have not thought of before, but it's something that is very hard to do. As everybody in their busy lives remains focused on their day to day. How do they really deliver this? What is needed to make this moment of mutirão feel like a great endeavor, rather than just feeling like an attempt by a government a long way away to do something that we don't really understand.
Paul: [00:48:53] Well, I mean, it's about how you look at it. I'm definitely not going to give you any quotes from Churchill, but, I mean, the idea that you sort of win a war by talking about it and thinking about it a certain way is very important. I loved what she said when she said it's not if, but how. Right. That's a really powerful statement. She said there's difficult choices. She says we're not making them. And then she says, as if it was someone else. And I thought that was a sort of genius phrase, but it always seems to be about other people in other places. And it's not. It's about us now. And this is actually partially about the fidelity of governments, their capabilities, their competence. You know, the dependence in money and political office. But something broader, which I think is is about framing this. I was incredibly excited also when Gustavo talked about the unique power of major companies, and he mentioned a meeting with Mastercard and Microsoft. I mean, you know, companies spend $1 trillion a year with a TI, $1 trillion a year in communications and how the private sector influences the customers. To be honest, I think one of the reasons why society might be in danger is because we have this gigantic global crisis, climate change and the broader ecological crisis, and to some extent, the social crisis.
Paul: [00:50:04] But let's focus on the ecological one. And then you have an enormously trivial private sector in a sort of massive dialogue about not very important things, and it's undermining everybody's trust in everything. So I think the invitation to sit here is to say, actually, we will come together and we will deal with this and the businesses that lead on that and the governments that lead on that and the citizens that lead on that. And if you, Tom, and if me, Paul, lead on that, we're part of something bigger. And, you know, the Union makes the force. And together we can get this done. And I think there's a narrative emerging in this incredible cop, which is, more than anything, a sort of convening media, five dimensional holographic dream show for the world. Yes, it'll have these awful Daily Mail headlines saying everybody fails on everything, but there'll also be the potential for a for a sort of spirit of light. That's what I hope for. Yeah.
Tom: [00:50:57] So. Well said. I completely agree, and I think that's where I would actually call on listeners to say, we're going to need your help. Yeah. If this is going to be more than just a slogan that comes out of the Brazilian presidency, it's going to be because we, the listeners to this podcast, actually decide that we're going to help those who we have influence over and we speak to, to actually incorporate this and turn it into a moment of togetherness. So that's the critical thing I would take away from here. I would also say to you, Paul, I thought of you very much when I was in Brazil because as I was going around with these companies, we went into several meetings with senior government representatives. And when the doors closed, they said to them. We need you to speak out and lobby your governments and to lobby legislatures because they are not hearing from you. They're hearing from trade associations that don't represent you. And unless you actually put your views of leadership to your government, we will not get to where we need to go. And we have concluded that that's a missing piece. So I know that's very close to your heart. So I thought I would tell you that in public.
Paul: [00:51:56] Stops on the on the chief executive's desk of the corporation, not in the in a myriad of trade associations they don't know about.
Tom: [00:52:03] Now, now, Paul, we're coming to the end of our conversation, and I know that our production team are going to be mad at us because there was a whole bunch of stuff we were supposed to do that we didn't even get to. But anyway, such as it is now, I do want to play to you, Fiona macklin, who you, of course, ran the lifelines versus Deadline's miniseries. We were together in Brazil, and after we come out of one of these meetings, we had a little bit of a chat about our observations in real time. So let's just have a listen to that.
Fiona Macklin: [00:52:25] I think one of the key things that we need to clarify collectively is what is that mutirão towards? What are we trying to collectively work towards?
Tom: [00:52:34] It means shared effort right.
Fiona Macklin: [00:52:36] Exactly. Shared effort. But to what end. And so I think what's really coming into focus for me is the need to really start clarifying what success will look like, what are the key outcomes that we need to be collectively running towards. So, Tom, I mean, as a political strategist, if you were in the shoes of Andre de Lago, the Cop 30 president right now, what would you be doing? Who would you be meeting with to to set up for the conversations at Cop?
Tom: [00:53:02] Well, look, I mean, I think one of the challenging things about a cop these days and the brilliant things is that they are almost so broad in scope that no presidency can keep track of what's actually going on. And that's something we should applaud, right? That's because the climate movement and the effort to take action on climate has broadened so much. At the same time, the presidency do have an important job. Cops are ultimately multilateral negotiations to reach shared commitments on collective challenges. And I think one of the things that I would say, and that we have touched on in these meetings, is that it's really important for Brazil to define success for itself. So it can't do everything, but it has a lot of power to do a limited number of things. A big part of that, of course, is going to be the national step up. We need to see another round of nationally determined commitments from countries that close the gap to 1.5. So that's going to be an important part. And then I think it will be important for the presidency to pick 1 or 2 other key issues. I mean, maybe it's forests, given that it's Brazil, or let's define that collective challenge that has jeopardy in it and then really work towards it so everyone knows what the outcome is. Because I think sometimes it can be so broad that people are unable to put their arms around it. So I think that's that's one of the challenges and the opportunities.
Fiona Macklin: [00:54:16] And I think, Tom, relatedly, one of the things that I'm really coming away from these few days with is as the presidency and the leadership of copper crystallizing that vision we can't afford as the as the other actors involved in pushing climate action, we can't afford to wait. I mean, when you start a running race, you don't look around, sort of see who's going to lead, and then try and keep up with them. And I think one of the invitations that's been clear from Ana Toni.
Tom: [00:54:43] Just to clarify that's how Fi deals with the running race, which is much more ambitious than I.
Fiona Macklin: You don't wait around. Um, and I think what Ana's really invited us all to, to think about is how can we not wait to ask for permission, but rather forgiveness? I mean, by the sense we need to all be cracking on, and we shouldn't be waiting for coppers. A silver bullet to deliver all the actions that are necessary. So whilst, of course it's a really important moment in time around which to build momentum, there are lots of things that all of us can be getting on with that that we need to be driving really pragmatic, relevant solutions. Now that will help shape the cop vision 100%.
Tom: [00:55:19] So I completely agree with that. And that goes for every day of our lives from now on. And the moment of cop has to be, you know, you win these things by moments of breakthrough. And we know and that's why we're here. And the Brazilian government certainly knows that this moment that's coming up in November has to be a real moment of breakthrough. Look at that. There's no cars after all. All right, let's go. Let's, let's let's go across and see if we're in the place where we're supposed to be.
Paul: [00:55:42] Yeah. I mean, he's a genius. And, um, she sort of sums it up. Some of this is kind of like, you know, the world. We need more ambition and that kind of stuff that you've heard before. But I think her phrase, what does success look like is an incredibly important point. And I started to think before this episode is like, we should think of the cops almost as like a kind of a poetry pot, you know, it's somewhere where holistic ideas can kind of nest. I mean, she says, don't wait for permission, right? She says, just kind of go for it. Paris was a notable success. Right. But but it's time to sort of pull out of a more unified view of this. And I think there are metaphors. You've heard me say this before from the digital revolution. You know, governments had a role in that. You know, we're going to have fiber optic cable. Are we going to have bandwidth for mobile devices? But in the end, digitization is bigger than governments. It's an all society thing. And I reject the model of the Cop that all human efforts which are currently insufficient, are sort of based upon everything, everybody turning up at some kind of high table of the cop and drafting some piece of paper or something. This is about us seeing each other at the scale and level of ambition that allows us to deliver. And that's what I think can come. And that's what I took from the spirit of, of your conversations there, because, you know, if not now, then when and if not asked, then who? This is it. We can. We must, we will, as you said at Paris.
Tom: [00:57:04] I mean, Paul 100%. And I think this is the point we've been trying to get to for so long with cops. This is no longer about a multilateral government negotiation. Of course, governments still need to cooperate. But this is about a global endeavor, and it's going to be clunky. It's going to be difficult, and people are going to be able to say, you know, you can't do that. You can't bring the whole world with you. But actually, I really salute the Brazilians for having a go. They're the first ones who've come up with this concept and been bold enough to say, this is about every single citizen and individual in the world, and we don't know how we're going to reach them, but we know that's what's needed. And it might not be successful this year. But if it then does become successful in future cups, we'll look back and see the genesis in the mutirão. So I have huge admiration. I was blown away by the optimism and sense of possibility that I saw in Brasilia. I have no idea if they're going to be successful. I don't know if they know if they're going to be successful, but I think they deserve our support. I think they deserve our backing and encouragement, and I hope that listeners to this podcast will decide that it is part of their job, at this critical moment in history, to step in and make that happen.
Paul: [00:58:07] Just to say, this is not a dream factory. Just remember what Anthony said. China's emissions appear to have peaked and are falling. Yeah, that changes everything.
Tom: [00:58:16] Listeners may not be aware of just how thick our briefing book was for this podcast, Paul. And yet we've got through, I think, a few less than sort of ten, 15% of it. So apologies.
Paul: [00:58:25] Wait, I've got 72 other things I want to say.
Tom: [00:58:28] And listeners will not be denied that. That's something for everyone to look forward to. And I would just reassure everybody that this is a topic that's going to form a major part of our programming for the rest of the year. So there's so much to talk about in terms of what's going to come forward in Brazil, how the world is preparing. So please do remain engaged with us and send us your questions. Unhappily, that's not the strongest basis on which to ask for questions, given that we've got lots for this episode and didn't have time to answer them. But we will get to those and we'll get to the additional questions that may come in. So please continue to reach out. We know this is a topic that people are hugely interested in and concerned about, so please continue to share us your questions and show us your thoughts and we'll come back to it regularly throughout the week.
Paul: [00:59:07] In the show notes.
Tom: [00:59:08] Lovely to see you. Thanks for listening, everyone. We'll see you all next week.
Paul: [00:59:11] Bye for. now