Notwithstanding that Claudia accurately refers to UNFCCC as a Convention and nowhere in her piece does the word “organization” appear (nor the word “organisation”, for that matter).

The irony of all this to me, as a former senior officer at UN (at least, that is what my PA Form says I was) is that a lengthy and detailed public “Overview Schedule” for a supposedly important world conference on Climate Change is not the Agenda after all, and does not allow one to discern what is really going on.

Instead, as Roberto testifies, the important stuff takes place in off-agenda “informal” sessions – having other agendas.

This is perfectly consistent with my own experience with UN-related decision-making. Specifically, decisions are reserved for the sequestered few, cloaked in opacity, while everyone pretends to openness and transparency.

So it does not matter how much or little the meeting will cost. No country that believes in open processes is likely to get its money’s worth. Some participants no doubt take this work seriously and work 20 hours a day. They are quite useful as part of the cloak of opacity.

Meanwhile, the sequestered few relax, dine, sip Pimms, and wonder where to hold the Twenty-EIGHTH Session of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI 27).

Roberto Kinley, you speak the truth – you just don’t seem to comprehend how much truth.

Seeing no way to fight Global Warming successfully, the UN is instituting plan B: Teach the climate crowd to enjoy hot weather.

Ben

The sponsors are not paying for a luxury tropical resort. The meeting is taking place in a conference centre offered by the host country and, as a conference centre, is not a place to relax but to work, which happens to be in an area of resorts. Attendees may be staying at different resorts with the facilities you mention, some luxurious some others not, personal taste and possibilities.

If the delegates are working 20 hour days, why are the sponsors paying for the amenities of a luxury tropical resort?

I also think you do lack knowledge for this debate (including on the UN) mand I think that it is important that you and all those that criticise understand before making wrong statements.

Yes, the UN conference is attended by “UN staffers” as you call them, but they are a limited number of people that support negotiations. Again, the conference is primarily made up of governemnts. The conference will receive more than 10000 people (negotiators, NGOs, business and many others); around 150 will be UN staff. But lets go one by one on your points:

- The climate change process has its own budget and receives contributions from countries from all over the world, not only the US. It is not correct nor fair to criticise expenditures of the US government on the UN using the climate change process as an example as budgets are not related. Direct contributions by other countries are more important than that of the US alone. You will be surprised to know that a significant cost of the conference is shouldered by the Indonesian government itself. Not counting resources by research groups, NGOs and other self financed attendees. But beyod that, I think that by no means spending money to solve a problem that will affect me, you, our children and many others is immoral. What is immoral is doing nothing about it.

On your second point, the fact that you call Indonesia remote only reflects the false idea that near is only what is close to the United states. For your information, more than half of the population lives in Asia. Regarding climate change, it is precisely in asia where emissions are becoming most important, notably those from China and India, and also where impacts of climate change are being felt by millions of people which wont not agree with you in saying that the Conference is being held in a remote place. I would rather say that as the happening place is Asia, distant and remote places will end up beiong the US (and I am from your side of the world as well). And for your information, efforts are being made to make conferences carbon neutral: the majority of airtravel is compemnsated and, dependiong on the location, the comnferences uses carbon free eneregy.

Finally, you may not buy that staff work more than 20 hours a day but, frankly, basing your argument on a couple of guys you saw in Africa does not stand strong on your side. I think Claudia is making a shallow analysis of the agenda and I reestate that she has no information whatsoever to argue that people go to Bali to sunbath and have coctails. This can only be said by someone who has not clue at all on what happens in that negotiations and I do not only talk about climate change. I tell you by experience because I was a negotiator in the past and believe me that is is no exageration when I say that it is mostly 20 hours a day during 12 days that this people have to work hard and under high level of stress; statements like that are disrispectful with a lot of people that work away from home and very long hours to solve a problem that is not simple to solve and that concerns you as well. Please acknowledge that.

You also fail to understand…
1. Why this may upset US taxpayers like me who pay federal taxes and are therefore footing the bill for this conference.

2. Miss the point of holding a climate change conference in one of the most distantly located places on the planet – which will force attendees to contribute to the very problem they are supposedly discussing.

And I don’t buy that line about 20 hour days. I’ve worked very closely with UN staff in Africa and seen first hand how your organization operates.

Honestly, it’s immoral.

You really do not have a clue of what you are talking about. There are several misconceptions and a lot of ignorance of your writting, let me clear a couple of them:

- The UNFCCC is not an organisation, it is a convention which belongs to governments. The conference in Bali is by no means an initiative of the UN but of governments, including yours. So, whether things are achieved or not entirely depends on the willingness of governments and not on the UN.

- What is presented as schedule refers to the formal sessions. Most work is undertaken by informal groups which arrive at 7 am and do not stop working sometimes even until the next morning. For most delegates, Bali mean at least 20 hours of daily work for 15 days in order to finding solutions. So in my personal opinion you are being extremely disrispectful with those people that devote their time and patience for finding a solution to a problem that also concerns you

I can go on and on… but I think that the above two points cover most of what you have written.