date: Fri Oct 12 09:23:34 2001 from: Mike Hulme subject: Re: Third Way to: Huw Spanner Huw, Shame about this - the meeting is indeed going ahead, and with a small USA presence. The rest of the climate negotiating community are gearing up for it. These things happen - and it's not my only climate story that has been squeezed by 11th Sept. One explanation for why the USA signed Kyoto back in 1997 - with unrealistic goals - was that Al Gore, heading the US delegation, was desperate to come back boasting of having secured an environmental deal (his lifelong mission some may say) and thus his judgement was compromised about what, in the end, the USA could deliver. Vanity over pragmatism. Anyway, Bush has done Kyoto no harm in the long-run and one scenario may well see the US forced to join late under pressure from US business - who don't want to be left out in the cold from some big new global (carbon) market place. I envy you in Ecuador! Mike At 17:26 11/10/01 +0100, you wrote: Dear Mike I owe you a huge apology. The events of the 11th September commandeered a lot of space in the mag (which is accordingly very late), and one of the casualties had to be your piece. I was also very unsure that the conference was actually taking place. I hope you will excuse me. If it is going ahead (I've not heard a word of it), and you want to write a retrospective piece, I would be very interested in running one. I do think we need to elaborate on the now ageing chestnut that the USA was remiss not to ratify Kyoto everyone either says it is a disgrace or says knowingly 'Ah, but Kyoto IS flawed' - but I have yet to read an explanation of just WHY Kyoto is flawed (in which case is Britain behaving badly in pushing it?) and just how culpable or otherwise the US attitude is. There just seems to be posturing on one side and nods and winks on the other! I'm off to Ecuador tomorrow with Third Way Travel, but I hope I can catch up with you when I get back on the 29th. With best wishes, Huw