Fijileaks
  • Home
  • Archive Home
  • In-depth Analysis
    • BOI Report into George Speight and others beatings
  • Documents
  • Opinion
  • CRC Submissions
  • Features
  • Archive

Ro Kepa: 'Fiji should also allocate land specifically for climate refugees'

13/12/2015

10 Comments

 
Picture
PictureSpeaking from experience
STATEMENT ON THE HISTORIC SIGNING OF THE CLIMATE CHANGE AGREEMENT
 
While I have some reservations, I welcome the agreement this morning of the Conference of Parties.
 
I am glad that almost 200 Nations have finally agreed that the age of COAL has ended. It is not clear whether the Prime Minister, who was supposed to be “leading the charge” for small island countries to reach an acceptable agreement, was present when the final deal was agreed.

The agreement is signed. Implementation is now needed.

So let us ensure that Fiji is one of the nations that define the success and victory in the Paris COP 21 Agreement. We should immediately start tackling pressing local issues of pollution that are turning Fiji into a giant rubbish dump and a despoiler of our own precious natural resources.

Fiji should also allocate land specifically developed and financed for climate refugees. These parcels of land should not be sold or leased.  In my traditional capacity, I will look into the option of calling the Great Council of Chiefs to meet so we can discuss this.
As the Indigenous community in Fiji, we have been welcoming immigrants and settlers’ since-pre European contact. 

Many chiefs and their people genuinely care for our Pacific neighbours.  It would honour our ancestors to free up parcels of ancestral property for Pacific neighbours displaced by climate change from their homelands.

It is time to challenge the Fiji Government to do a few things immediately to meet provisions of the Paris Agreement. Fiji should now invest in improved technology and help Fiji citizens and Pacific regional partners deliver on the ambitious goals in the agreement.

I hope that the agreement will encourage more funding for scientific climate research in Fiji.
 
Fiji should also decrease their INDC carbon cap to about 50%, or even 80%, and prepare the nation to move into a development cycle based on renewable and sustainable energy. 

The Paris document sets the goal of limiting the world's rise in average temperature to "well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius."

It is clear that negotiators appear to have opted for the weakest language around a long-term goal for phasing out fossil fuels. Before this, the text had options for specific dates for carbon cuts, and even specific percentages relating to cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. 

On “loss and damage” and whether the agreement should recognise some countries will suffer irreparable harm from climate change, the United States opted for a protective provision which was not necessarily in the interests of the Pacific Islands.

The US insisted any wording about loss and damage should not suggest liability or compensation or open any possibility of legal action against US companies.

Vulnerable island states like Fiji and Kiribati and many countries that support the idea of an ambitious agreement, are insisting that climate science requires global warming to eventually be contained below 1.5C immediately. I am very pleased with the support from nations like Canada, Brazil and St Lucia’s who made it clear that the inclusion of a 1.5C target was non-negotiable.

The COP 21 Paris Agreement is also the result of a far-reaching effort by nations, businesses, and citizens to reorganise the global economy on a journey of low-carbon growth, signalling the age of CARBON IS OVER. 
 
This historic agreement makes it mandatory to firstly, leave no one behind. It calls for policies to protect the poorest people and the most vulnerable of nations, by calling on all to hold the increase in temperatures to well below 2C and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5C.

Secondly, the agreement sends a much needed signal to empower provision of massive sums of public and private sector investments needed to drive economies towards a carbon neutral world whilst ensuring that there is the necessary finance to provide resilience for developing countries like Fiji.
Thirdly, it changes the global ethos of development. The agreement makes it mandatory that nations accept that there is no development without tackling climate change.

I agree with Climate Reality founder and former Vice President of the USA, Mr Al Gore when he says “No agreement is perfect, and this one must be strengthened over time, but groups across every sector of society will now begin to reduce dangerous carbon pollution through the framework of this agreement.”

I have a copy of the Paris Agreement, and I will make it available at the Fiji Opposition Office in Parliament and will be providing copies to NGOs and relevant stakeholders. 
 
Authorised by                                                                         
Ro TEIMUMU KEPA
Leader of the Opposition


Picture
10 Comments
rajend Naidu
14/12/2015 12:50:05 am

I can understand David Attenborough being at the Paris Climate Change conference to urge world leaders to take urgent action on arresting climate change and the risk it poses to the planet and the more vulnerable coastal communities and small island nations.
I can understand Al Gore being there.
They have a track record of commitment on this.
I am still trying to figure out why Fiji had to take 40 people to Paris?
What is their expertise and what is their track record of commitment to combating climate change and it's consequences?
Could someone provide a list of the people who went to Paris?

Reply
On-Song
14/12/2015 04:09:43 am

i had that already figured out; the group that went to Paris were on an outing befitting the current lifestyle of those in Leadership in Fiji. How on earth could they be lecturing the world on any such changes to the environment when not one of them, nor any in Parliament, has objected to the chopping of all those grand old trees lining the road from the Airport to Martintar in Nadi. In the name of progress and modern development we've seen the destruction of the environment and the creation of very unhealthy conditions when all is done; leaving our school children in Namaka Public and Mt St Mary exposed to the heat and dust next year because they have lost the natural cover and shade - including all those who live in that corridor from the airport towards Nadi town; what a friggin shame!!@#$

Reply
Also
14/12/2015 12:38:28 pm

And all those the cutting and clearing of mangroves near Lami and in Raiwaqa - total mindless destruction of ENVIRONMENT in the name of bull-shit development (Chinatown in Raiwaqa).

Uday
15/12/2015 07:07:18 am

Why 40 people to Paris ?

Well, the Puppet likes to take his own Boci Guards, Food-tasters (french cuisine) and a few Nappy changers as well. The rest are just good for nothing hangers-on.

Reply
Vili
14/12/2015 05:36:52 am

The Opposition Leader seems to be of the view that the refugees if they do indeed come, will be resettled as a group on traditional land.

There are other options too that should be explored. For example, purchase of available freehold land as the government of Kiribati have done.

Another option is to distribute the refugees throughout the urban and peri-urban areas in Fiji housing similar to that of the Lagilagi project at Jittu Estate and Koroipita etc. The idea is to integrate the refugees into Fiji society in areas where they can find employment and participate in Fiji's national life. The refugees will prefer this option to that of being isolated in rural areas on traditional land.

We have to be careful that we don't end up creating internationally-funded 'ethnic enclaves' for refugees who will enjoy higher standards of living than their Fijian hosts. This will breed resentment and social problems.

The GCC option proposed by the Opposition seems to be based on the idea of 'ethnic enclaves' located on traditional land. It could potentially be a recipe for social unrest.

The 'integration' model in urban areas close to medical, education and employment services etc is the way to go.

Sa dri yani

Reply
Rustam
14/12/2015 12:11:37 pm

Climate refugees, if settled in Fiji, need to be assured of protection and preservation of their cultural identity, cohesion and continuity. The refugees would need their own social and cultural support systems to bear such upheaval. And at most, the views of the refugees themselves would need to be listened to and accommodated.

If settled in traditional lands, an amicable agreement needs to be reached between the land-owning units and the refugees.

But there should be no questions about our readiness to HELP the People of the Pacific is such a need arose.

Reply
And...
14/12/2015 12:45:41 pm

There MUST also be guaranteed one or two (depending) seats reserved for the Climate Refugees in the Parliament. That's only to be Fair. And they should be exempt from being called Fijians, if they so chose NOT be called Fijians.

Vili
14/12/2015 10:57:27 pm

@ And

I disagree.

The refugees must be prepared to accept Fijian citizenship (after meeting its attendant conditions), contribute to the national economy and vote as Fiji citizens. Those on Kioa and Rabi islands have done that successfully. They are the benchmark.

We cant have two nationalities living within the same geographical space.

The idea of having a "state within a state" is a recipe for political turmoil. Just look at Lebanon as an example.

Tuivou
15/12/2015 07:02:25 am

You see, first there will be global warming and then there will be global cooling - and then all the Climate refugees can go back to their islands. No need to change our fraud Constitution to give them seats.

King Rat
14/12/2015 07:46:00 am


It would make more sense for a legal framework for the acceptance of climate change refugees to be drafted as a precursor to any debate on this issue.

Debate on the issue should be conducted on the floor of parliament because it is a 'national interest' issue.

The GCC does not exist. It makes no sense to reconstitute a moribund body. It would be a waste of time and money to go along with the Opposition's idea.



Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Contact
    ​[email protected]
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture