Following statements from Parties, the Chair of the meeting, Michael Zamit Cutajar of Malta (who is also Vice Chair of the AWG LCA) said that the provision of data as regards the undertaking of mitigation efforts by Parties is a means of accountability and as a way of demonstrating credibility in such efforts. He said that the provision of data is also necessary for obtaining recognition as a means for credit, both in terms of political and financial credit.

In relation to the MRV issue, Cutajar asked Parties to consider what should be “measured, reported and verified”, by whom and if there was a need for capacity building in this regard. He also suggested that Parties focus on Articles 4 and 12 of the Convention, which relate to commitments of Parties and the communication of information related to implementation respectively.

[The Bali Action Plan, in Para 1 (b), addresses enhanced national/international action on mitigation of climate change, by developed and developing countries. Para 1(b) (i) states: “Measurable, reportable and verifiable nationally appropriate mitigation commitments or actions, including quantified emission limitation and reduction objectives, by all developed country parties, while ensuring the comparability of efforts

among them, taking into account differences in their national circumstances”. Para 1(b) (ii) states: “Nationally appropriate mitigation actions by developing country parties in the context of sustainable development supported and enabled by technology, financing and capacity-building, in a measurable, reportable and verifiable manner”.]

South Africa said that there was a need to look at needs of developing countries to improve their quality of life and to ensure economic growth. It was committed and willing to undertake national mitigation actions according to its national circumstances. As regards 'MRV' for mitigation commitments of all developed countries and their comparability of efforts, there was a need for a robust compliance system. It said that the BAP dealt with 3 aspects of 'MRVs' wiz. (i) 'MRV' for mitigation commitments of developed countries ; (ii) for developing countries, it is the 'MRV' of deviation of emissions growth from baseline, conditional on support by developed countries of finance and technology and (iii) 'MRV' of the means of implementation (i.e the provision of finance and ! technology by developed countries).

Saudi Arabia said that the time for developing countries to take some kind of binding commitments is not now. The sooner and the more is the delivery of finance and technology to developing countries, the more realistic it is for achieving a positive outcome in Copenhagen.

On the 'MRV' of developed countries mitigation commitments, it said the BAP is unclear on the form of national communications and reporting. As for the 'MRV' in relation to developing countries, it is the 'MRV' of mitigation actions which are nationally appropriate as well as the 'MRV' of finance and technology which is enabled and supported by the developed countries. It said that there was a need to achieve both together and for a system that delivers both 'MRVs' together. There is need for a new mechanism under the Convention for developing country actions, in which the commitments on resources are pooled together and reported and there are pledges from developing counties for mitigation actions. There then has to be a system to match the resources with actions needing support, which provides for reporting on both sides and can also be verified. As regards unilateral a! ctions by developing countries, Saudi Arabia said that the system can issue credits for action.

France speaking for the EU said that in relation to 'MRVs' for developed countries; their mitigation commitment reporting can be through national communications and in the provision of national inventories on GHG emissions. For 'MRV' support to developing countries, support is based on needs for mitigation actions and can be delivered through a variety of ways. Any mitigation actions of developing countries have not been recognised. 'MRV' could be a tool for recognition, it said. It also stressed the need for accountability and environmental integrity. The 'measuring' (of mitigation actions) could be done at national level through internationally agreed guidance and needs to include outcomes and results. It suggested building on the existing guidance of the IPCC. Verification needs to be at international level under the UNFCCC and independent expert review processes are to be put in place, it said.

Papua New Guniea said that developing countries try to reach their aspirations in meeting sustainable development objectives. It said the 'MRV' should also be on sustainable development.

New Zealand said that in relation to 'MRVs' developed and developing countries want to know what mitigation actions are taken and should be recognised. It said that 'MRV' is the foundation to measure against progress on commitments which are quantified and verifiable and that this applies to both developed and developing countries.

Japan said that there was a need in the improvement in quality of data especially in developing countries. Australia said that all countries have common responsibility respond to address the climate challenge and that a key objective is for all major economies to do national mitigation actions. It stressed a clear need for auditing of data that is provided by Parties.

Philippines shared an experience of how undertaking mitigation action was difficult. It gave the example of using wind power, which was a public private partnership, where an important conditionality for such purchase of the technology was to pay the market price.

Mexico said that all Parties have obligations to undertake mitigation actions consistent with the principle of common but differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities. It said that National inventories on greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) are needed for all developing countries. Finance is needed for their national communications. Many developing countries are taking national actions and that such actions should be supported as suggested by South Korea..

Malaysia said that developed country Parties must implement their commitments, stressing that the lack of implementation of these commitments has prevented the stabilisation of GHGs. It called for deeper commitments in the second commitment period for annex 1 countries and for developing countries to be enabled to undertake sustainable development.