@Walter Hinteler,
More than 100 countries reject draft treaty as ‘unambitious’ and ‘inadequate’
Plastic pollution treaty talks stall one day before deadlineTalks on the world’s first legally binding treaty to end plastic pollution have stalled just one day before the negotiations are due to end.
More than 100 “high ambition” countries rejected as “unacceptable” and “unambitious” a draft treaty text that does not limit plastic production, nor address chemicals used in plastic products.
The main sticking point at the talks, now in their third year, has been whether to cap plastic production or to focus on issues such as better design, recycling and reuse.
More than 100 “high ambition” countries have pushed for a plastics treaty to include strong, legally binding measures with a limit on plastic production, in order to address plastic at source, and many have said toxic chemicals in plastics need to be controlled.
But oil and plastic producing nations, including Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran, the so-called “like minded group” which has reportedly been supported by the US, as well as the chemical industry, reject production limits and instead want the treaty to focus on measures such as waste management and recycling.
At a meeting in Geneva on Wednesday, many countries rejected the latest treaty text presented by the chair, Luis Vayas Valdivieso. They said they were “extremely concerned” or “disappointed” by the low level of ambition it contained.
Columbia’s delegate, Sebastián Rodríguez, rejected the draft text as “completely unacceptable”, while Julio Cordano, head of delegation for Chile, said it contained gaps and shortcomings which did not reflect the scale of the problem.
Panama’s delegate, Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez, also said it could not accept the draft text as a basis of negotiation and that its red lines had been “spat on and burned”.
The negotiators had “only 30 hours” to find a solution to end plastic pollution, not “just a political solution” he added.
“This is not ambition, it is surrender” he said.
The UK’s head of delegation, Jane Barton, said the text was the “lowest common denominator”.
“We need an effective treaty for our people and for our planet,” she said. “Time is running out.”
The new draft contains one mention of plastic production, in the preamble reaffirming the importance of sustainable plastic production and consumption. An article on production from a previous draft has been removed. There is no mention of chemicals. A reference to the “full life cycle” of plastics in a previous draft has also been removed.
Kenya described the draft as a “waste management” instrument, which had “no democratic value” for states seeking to limit plastic, while Mexico said it represented a “crisis in multilateralism”.
Dennis Clare, a negotiator for Micronesia, said: “Some parties, including ours, are not even willing to engage on that text, it’s a step backward.”
“It certainly seems like it was very biased toward the like-minded countries [Saudi, Russia, Iran etc]. There’s problems across the board. There’s no binding measures on anything. There’s no obligation to contribute resources to the financial mechanism. There’s no measures on production or chemicals. This text is just inadequate.”
Speaking ahead of the release of the chair’s text, Juan Carlos Lozada, a member of the house of representatives of Colombia, said: “If the production keeps growing at the rate it has grown in the last decades, we have no hope for 2050, 2060. So if the treaty doesn’t have those elements, those key elements, there’s no treaty. I’d rather not have a treaty if we’re not going to have a very robust treaty.”
Andreas Bjelland, the head of Norway delegation and the co-chair of the high ambition coalition, also speaking before the release of the text, said: “To keep production as part of the finalised treaty, that is important. If you look at what we agreed on in the mandate … sustainable production and sustainable consumption was explicitly mentioned. So there should be provisions to be able to work with that and develop that over time.”
Greenpeace described the new text as a “gift to the petrochemical industry and a betrayal of humanity.”.
Graham Forbes, Greenpeace’s head of delegation, said: “By failing to address production or harmful chemicals in any way, this text glorifies the industry lie that we can recycle our way out of this crisis, ignoring the root cause: the relentless expansion of plastic production.”
The treaty talks will continue on Thursday.
