Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Non-Governmental Organizations Kicked Out of Global Warming Conference - Again
The UNFCC Secretariat decided late tonight to kick out most participants from non-governmental organizations, claiming the action is necessary due to security concerns.
After spending most of the day waiting for details on how I could obtain one of the prized 1,000 passes to enter the Bella Center for the Thursday session (down from 7,000 passes awarded today), the UNFCCC once again broke its word by reducing the number of passes it will award tomorrow from 1,000 to 300.
I attended a meeting of the Research and Independent Non-Governmental Organizations (RINGOs) group (of which the National Center for Public Policy Research is a member), which is tasked with distributing passes to groups such as ours. RINGO was given 20% of the passes.
Attached is video in which Marilyn Averill of RINGO describes how its 60 slots will be divied up. Twelve passes were to be used by leaders of RINGO, 40 would be given by lottery to RINGO groups that attended the group's meetings this session, and just eight would be distributed by lottery to those that are on the RINGO membership list, including those that attended the group's meetings.
Special consideration was given to groups that participated in RINGO's meetings because RINGO wanted to encourage greater participation – something that should have been irrelevant to the decision.
Significantly, due to the utter incompetence of the UNFCCC (or perhaps feigned incompetence), many members of RINGO (including yours truly) were unable to participate in the meetings because they were standing outside the Bella Center trying to gain entry.
The RINGOs lottery was clearly a sham. The Pew Center, Stanford University, U of California Santa B and others advocating action on climate change received more than one pass – statistically, a rather unusual result. Not a single one of the 60 passes went to an organization from the right.
(Please note: Marilyn Averill appears on my video because she announced the decisions of the RINGOs management, but she is not responsible for what it decided.)
The security concern cited was the growing violence from environmental organizations, including the environmental organizations' vow to take over the Bella center.
If that was the case, why did they restrict the number of passes available to RINGOs, and not just put a limit on those awarded to environmental activist groups?
A response to a question I posed is illuminating.
The sharp limits on participation weren't about ensuring security. They were about stifling voices.
And that may be the best reason of all to stop this treaty dead in its tracks.
Posted by David A. Ridenour at 10:34 PM