Graham Kennedy: General Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Graham Kennedy: General Debate 
[Sitting date: 13 June 2012. Volume:680;Page:2930. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) 
: 
 Next week the Earth Summit reconvenes in Rio 20 years after the first meeting. I shall be attending—apart from a Cabinet Minister for a few days I shall be the only member of the House to be there. Some 110 leaders attended back in 1992. The global problem of sustainability was on the agenda. A global framework for action was adopted in a genuine attempt to address the global problem with a global approach. Conventions on climate change on desertification and on biodiversity were adopted. Forestry eluded us but we issued ringing declarations about sustainable consumption and production and we called for new concepts to measure the carrying capacity of the planet. In an imperfect world we left Rio back in 1992 thinking that we the international community of States had laid the basis for at least future action to address these daunting problems on behalf of the global community of peoples. 
Twenty years is a long and a short time. It is long enough for us to have been able to follow through with protocols to develop effective action within each framework. This we failed to do at least effectively because it is too short it seems for our international institutions and national mindsets to transform into legitimate global decision-making. And it is long enough for the planet’s continuing degradation and climate instability to become apparent as a result to the intensifying alarm of the scientific community. 
The United Nations Environment Programme’s latest report released last week advises humanity in the following way. Earth’s environmental systems are being pushed beyond their biophysical limits beyond which looms sudden irreversible and potentially catastrophic change. “As human pressures on the earth … accelerate several critical thresholds are close or have been exceeded. Once these have been passed abrupt and possibly irreversible changes to the life-support functions of the planet are likely to occur with significant adverse implications for human well-being.” The chief of the United Nations Environment Programme Achim Steiner says: “Once the tipping points occur you don’t wake up the next morning and say ‘This is terrible can we change it?’.” That is the whole essence of these thresholds. We are condemning people to not having the choice any more. 
So we assemble next week back in Rio geared up to review what we have done since 1992 and preview what we might do in the future. Perhaps the mindset is changing. Very few now query climate change. Most want a switch to a low-carbon economy even as we argue over how to retain it. Most are very worried about the potential for “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system”. At last we are recognising that our international institutions need to be beefed up.  
Rio Plus Twenty will address two major themes: the green economy and an institutional framework for sustainable development. Consideration will be given to forming a Sustainable Development Council to strengthen the UN’s environment programme and establish an ombudsman for future generations. Priority will be given to food security water energy oceans climate change forests biodiversity land and deserts mountains chemicals and waste. A set of global sustainable development goals might be adopted brilliantly eliding from the Millennium Development Goals of 12 years ago. The limitations of GDP and the need to adopt new indicators of well-being may be acknowledged. This of course is by no means enough yet it is not too late to transform this draft into something with real substance. This is not the moment for specific action on climate change; that will occur at Qatar later in December. It is not the moment for specific action on the other themes. It is the moment for political will for changing the mindset and strengthening the institutions. Let us see how we do. “We” means humanity. “We” includes New Zealand. 
It is a shame the New Zealand Prime Minister John Key is staying away. He has no appetite for grim challenge. The fate of the Earth is off his visionary agenda but the other 115 or so leaders will decide. They will decide for him and therefore for us. Whether or not Nicky Wagner is thrilled to be a Kiwi they will decide for us. This is no time for tears no time yet but the challenge ahead is immense.