The ADP has just resumed after a long 'huddle' (basically a standing meeting involving all negotiators occupying as little space as possible), but the COP plenary is yet to reconvene after choosing to break nearly four hours ago, and shows no sign of doing so in a hurry. When it's come to making predictions, rumours have flown between 'informants' from negotiating teams and NGO delegates tired enough to accept, at this point, any reason to justify leaving. It's anyone's guess when this will finish - CAN International has been taking bets and so have the New Zealand diplomats. Right now, noone's really sure what's going on - probably not even the negotiators. Based on past experience, I won't be surprised if they're still going when I leave on Sunday morning.
Nevertheless, this all has a sense of disappointing predictability about it. At each COP I've attended, deadlines have been pushed back and ignored, and negotiations have gone overtime. Every year, everything is left until the last minute, when in desperation and exhaustion the Parties scramble to assemble something. Anything. And then frame it to the mainstream media as a success - or, at least, not as a failure.
By the time they come to agreement, many negotiators - and even entire delegations - have left, their governments unable to afford to reschedule flights or pay for extra accommodation. Others run out of energy and willpower to do their jobs properly, approving texts they haven't been able (physically or mentally) to read. 'Consensus', the system upon which the negotiations here is based, becomes a farce. Equity isn't even a consideration.
There's still plenty they need to get through. Tonight, there are three key things left on the table: finance, loss and damage and the ADP's overarching roadmap. Word is that the finance text, which proposes a structured approach for ensuring countries pledge (and meet) commitments for climate finance between now and 2020, isn't actually too bad - hardly ambitious, but still progress. We'll see if it survives the night. The loss and damage negotiations, though, are rife with conflict; the developed states - particularly the USA - are unwilling to support a proposal which based on their historical contribution to the problem, would give them the obligation to compensate vulnerable states for losses resulting from climate-related events. While it's considered by most of civil society as a moral responsibility, it can only mean additional economic losses for developed nations who already face the expense of significantly restructuring their economies to curb emissions. And finally, negotiators are yet to finalise a road map to get them to 2015 - the deadline for the new international agreement that's effectively been postponed since the landmark 2009 Copenhagen summit.
It's a lot to get done when your conference is meant to be officially over.
While they work, we'll do our best to stay awake. For now. Already, in the next room, someone's snoring.
