I'm sitting as i write this blog, in the opening high level plenary session on Wednesday 12th December at the UNFCCC in Bali . I just introduced myself to our Australian Minister for Climate Change Penny Wong, the Environment Minister Peter Garette and finance Minister Wayne Swan. I encouraged them all to take on a leadership role here in Bali and not to just sit on the fence (which I’m afraid Australia will do.) Having ratified Kyoto was a great positive step – however unless Australia takes the lead the remaining developed countries wont follow suit, as a result the developing counties such as the G77 will also not feel the urgency of acting either. Despite this problem seeming to form here in Bali I am still humbled by the words of key leaders speeches during this opening plenary session, they are speaking from the need for action.

The time to act is now and unless we act there will be serious consequences; this is the sentiment resonating throughout the corridors in plenary sessions and within meetings taking place all around Nusa Dua for UNFCCC. Science suggests a silver lining, but only if we take these findings seriously. What Bali is looking for is a ' Bali breakthrough' - looking to the leaders to find solutions to climate change. The eyes of the world are upon us now and we recognise that everyone is part of the problem - and it is up to this conference to develop a process in which we need to create a roadmap for the solution. A recurring keystone issue here is that the impact of climate change effects us all, but the effects are not being felt equally, those who are impacted the most are those from developing nations. The UNFCCC has has an ethical obligation to protect the most vulnerable - this is why we need developed countries to support the developing countries to support those vulnerable nations

We are here to chart a new course. The issue which i have been tracking here is reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation in developing countries (REDD). Finding a agreed solution on REDD is an important key agreement being discussed here in Bali . The international youth caucus believe that since deforestation contributes about 20 per cent of global emissions, policies and measures must be developed, agreed and implemented to reduce these emissions and prevent further deforestation and forest degradation. Parties now agree to investigate market and non-market options that are environmentally effective and consistent with sustainable development objectives that are also inclusive of local communities and indigenous rights i. REDD must be a key component of the Bali roadmap.

Forests is such and interesting issue to track here in Bali - because of the emphasis and pressure for action on the issue. Indonesia recognise that importance of forests at Bali . Real forest conservation is needed to protect biodiversity. And reforestation is also important. But these broader agendas may bog down the negotiations on REDD on stopp ng current forest loss. The good news is that forest degradation (which means emissions from logging and other human activity) is being included as an important part of the discussions. Data from Australia and elsewhere show 40% of the carbon stored in a forest is released when a forest is logged. In tropical countries logging is usually just the first step on the road to complete deforestation. We hope the discussion stays on the central issue of deforestation and forest degradation so it becomes part of the final post 2012 package to be negotiated by the 2009 Climate Conference.

Some of below is political jargon – but in regards to following the issues below are the key points when underpin what needs to happen through lobbying and communication – write a letter to Rudd and encourage strong leadership and funding support to enable Australia

* technology transfer in crisis: blame US, Japan , Canada , Australia for messing it up. Ask for info from developing countries. Its an essential part of the final package.
* technology is a priority. EU must work with G77 countries to build support that creating a new international framework on technology transfer with a serious process to back it up.
* problems with CP13 decisions: push retaining emissions ranges, push strong mitigation text
* set up the blame game: we see there are countries that want to move forward (G77 initially signaling flexibility on addtional measures, etc) old foes doing bad things to alienate developing countries by undermining tech. transfer, ranges, etc(US, Japan , Aus, Canada ) and therefore causing more polarization -- China reacting with IPCC etc
* President needs strong process, work with other key parties