George Lyon MEP in Copenhagen: Face saving, not planet saving agreement

As talks in Copenhagen continue this evening, at least for the moment, spirits are rather low.

America and China produce over 50% of the world's carbon emissions: any deal here tonight will require them work together. Unfortunately, there appears to be stalemate.

Prior to today there was some hope that the US had come to the negotiating table ready to play ball. Hillary Clinton suggested that they might come forward with an offer of more money and concrete commitments.

Unfortunately that looks like it was all posturing. President Obama instead used his speech simply to assert that the US is ready to do a deal if China and others are prepared to be transparent.

China is refusing to budge. There's a bit of a culture clash here as the Chinese perceive international monitoring of their efforts as "snooping" and a breach of sovereignty, or at least that is the reason they are giving for refusing to open up.

That is a real shame. China has to understand that economic development should go hand in hand with political maturity. It is in their own interests to play a full role in international affairs, including the fight against climate change.

The draft Copenhagen Accord continues to look like a face saving, not a planet saving agreement.

Even the leaders' "family photograph" has now been postponed indefinitely. We wait for more news.

George Lyon MEP in Copenhagen: Clinton puts figure on develping nations fund for first time

Conferences like this are always consumed by rumour and speculation, claim and counter claim. Today I heard, from my MEP colleagues, that the EU was considering only putting 25% on the table, instead of the expected 30% that the Parliament were pushing for, in hope of kick starting a deal as the final day of negotiations approaches.

This was quickly denied by a spokesperson, recognising that many parliamentarians, including myself, would see this as a fatalistic move that would only serve to encourage other groups to lower their ambitions.

There is hard news though. One positive was Hillary Clinton’s speech to the Conference delivered earlier today. For the first time she put a figure to the amount of money developing countries need to help their economies grow while keeping emissions low.

She told delegates that it would take $100billion. The US Secretary of State would not put that on the record unless the US had some intention of putting real cash on the table to help developing countries buy into a deal.

With President Obama arriving tomorrow there are now signs that he will put his shoulder to the wheel and go the extra mile to secure an agreement.

So there are some sign of progress but it is becoming increasingly clear that a deal will be political, with no legal underpinning.

At a briefing a few minutes ago, the Swedish delegation, who hold the EU Presidency at the moment, said they were hopeful that a fringe group would be set up to try to clear some of the remaining obstacles to help them move towards an agreed text. Time is running out.

David Maddox: Alex Salmond's international portfolio

1. Scottish Saltires fly in Tripoli as Al-Megrahi, a convicted mass murderer held responsible for the lives of 270 innocents killed when Pan Am Flight 103 was blown up over Lockerbie on 21 December 1988, is welcomed back to Libya as a hero after Mr Salmond's justice secretary releases him.
2. A Nato soldier finds the remain of victims of the Serbs attempts to ethnically cleanse Kosovo. Nato's intervention to stop the murder and forced removal of Kosovans was infamously described as "an unpardonable folly" by Mr Salmond.

3. Robert Mugabe, an international pariah and responsible for the brutal repression of Zimbabweans and the destruction of the country's economy. Mr Salmond was accused of giving Mugabe international credibility by writing to him asking for support on nuclear disarmament.


4. The high point of his attempts to woo America - an audience and photocall with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The politician his minister has just publicly ignored and slighted over the fate of the Lockerbie bomber and the US administration that has been insulted by the hero's reception for Megrahi in Libya.

The question is: If Scotland does become independent do Scots want Alex Salmond and the SNP to be responsible for its foreign policy? Feel free to discuss in the comments section.