Today's Date:

Speech given by M. Nicolas Sarkozy, President of the Republic, at the conference on Climate Change

Ladies and gentlemen,

I should like to begin by thanking the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon. In taking the initiative of convening this Summit meeting, he reminds us that the climate challenge is collective and universal and that we, the United Nations, must make it our top priority. There is no alternative. Division between us means certain failure. So we each have a role to play, even though our responsibility differs.

Our meeting today is an important political signal. World public opinion is watching us. We haven't got the right to remain immobile. We must give a decisive impetus.

I for my part wish to say that actively addressing this climate challenge will be an absolute priority for France.

Let us be clear: we, the industrialized countries have a special responsibility; France will set the example by setting harsher rules for itself than those laid down in a multilateral framework.

I wanted to make the climate issue a major focus of my country's foreign policy. During my first trip to Sub-Saharan Africa, for example, I went to Gabon, to the Congo Basin forest, to give a clear signal that France's priority will be to enlist in the battle against deforestation. Countries like Gabon can't be left to face up alone to the responsibility of maintaining a forest which the whole world needs.

I want to draw attention here, as Head of State of a member country of the European Union, to the extent to which the climate challenge lies at the heart of European policy.

We have no choice. The economic and scientific findings on global warming are indisputable. We could hesitate on the course of action when we didn't know. Today, we know. Doing nothing would be nothing short of criminal vis-à-vis the planet's future, regardless of the continent. Failure to act would mean accepting a point of no-return, reached as soon as the average world temperature rises 2ºC. 2ºC more, and we won't be able to turn the clock back. It's now, right away, immediately that we have to take our decisions.

Yet meeting the climate challenge is not beyond our reach. We must set objectives for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. If we don't set ourselves an objective, we won't do anything. The target of a 50% reduction in emissions by 2050 is an absolute priority to prevent a global disaster.

The European Union has set itself a target of a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. Over the same period, we have decided to improve our energy efficiency by 20% with a target of producing 20% of our energy from renewable sources.

As for France, and I'm speaking before the Minister for Sustainable Development, Jean-Louis Borloo, we have enacted legislation requiring a 75% reduction of our emissions by 2050. Ladies and gentlemen, for me this is a matter of credibility. What weight would my words have at this rostrum if I asked the others to do what we ourselves were incapable of doing? And the industrialized countries – and France is one them – must set the example. All the developed countries and major emitting countries must commit to these objectives.

The climate challenge calls for global solutions, and, ladies and gentlemen, I mean that the United Nations is the only effective and legitimate framework for providing this response. This response will be universal or there won't be one at all. Only the United Nations can guarantee it.

Our first goal is to find the way to achieve "clean" growth and I want to defend this idea here today. We haven't got to choose between saving the planet and growth. We need to have growth and save the planet. So we need a growth that consumes less energy and fewer raw materials. A new economy must be invented.

The technologies for "cleaner" growth exist. Hybrid and electric vehicles, carbon capture and sequestration, the new fuels and, of course, all the so-called "low-carbon" energies, including nuclear. Nuclear isn't a taboo word. France has opted for nuclear energy. We don't want to force it on anyone, but we are saying that in a world where there will no longer be any gas in a century, and in 40 or 50 years no more oil, we can't be content with saying: "nuclear energy is frightening, we're not talking about it". We must talk about nuclear like all the other renewable energies. Let me add that France is ready to help any country which wants to acquire civil nuclear energy. We can't have an energy for the future for the Western countries and have Eastern countries which can't get access to it. Indeed, this is the best response to those who want, in violation of the treaties, to acquire nuclear weapons. When it comes to civil nuclear energy, France is prepared to help any country wishing to do so to obtain it.

There is a second goal: to protect forests. Deforestation and forest degradation account for 20% of greenhouse gas emissions. The planet must keep its forests in good condition. And the countries that contribute to this effort – I spoke a few moments ago about Gabon – the countries contributing to safeguarding the forests for the world must be remunerated. This must not be a burden on them. They are contributing to world balance. It's a service they are performing for all. Financing mechanisms should also be expanded. We must think about ways to include forests in clean development mechanisms.

The third goal: adaptation of the populations and countries most vulnerable to climate change. The desertification, extreme weather events and rising sea levels which the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka spoke about are challenges to security and even survival. We others, the developed countries are duty-bound to show solidarity.

I consider that financing this is not beyond our reach. The investment can be deemed unprecedented: 1% of global GDP, according to the authoritative Stern report. But think about the cost of not making it: 5 to 20% of world GDP. It will cost us far more to do nothing than to act. We haven't got to choose between spending something and spending nothing. We have to choose between expenditure which will prevent disaster and ten-times higher expenditure which won't prevent any disaster. That's the choice we face. So, the question is not whether we can finance these investments, but "how” to finance them.

How? Carbon emissions must come at a price – and I say this to President Wade, an agrégé (1) in economics from a French university –, and whether this price is set by the market or through taxes is of little consequence, carbon has a price. We're having this debate in France. The European Union led the way by setting up a carbon market and I see that a number of regions, States and economic sectors are today following suit.

I am convinced that this market will expand and I will support, in the name of France, all projects pursuing that objective. But the approach must in future be by sector, and no longer only by country. A portion of the emission credits must be auctioned. There must be a strong expansion of clean development mechanisms allowing "polluting" companies to invest in the ecological development of the emerging and developing countries. Let us be bold enough to allow all to join the carbon market voluntarily, with flexible carbon emission objectives.

The carbon market, I say here, holds out great hope. It will provide innovative and far more plentiful financing.

The market can't of course be the only answer. Public financing will also be indispensable. Financing adaptation is the priority for Africa and the countries most exposed to the effects of global warming. France devotes over €430 million of official development assistance to projects contributing to fighting climate change. In future all the projects we finance in developing countries will be compliant with national plans to combat climate change and will be assessed according to their impact and their viability. We can't say at the UN that there has to be development which is clean and go on financing development which isn't. This in no way constitutes new conditions, but quite the contrary adds a new dimension to the partnership with developing countries. Adaptation support is an imperative. I call on all industrialized countries to commit to it.

I would also like to call for the coordination of the often modest funds managed by the international financial institutions. Action on the ground must be coordinated as efficiently as possible. This, too, is an issue for discussion at the United Nations.

Beyond the question of what financing we adopt there is the issue of what future we choose. No country can reasonably plan its development without taking energy and climate issues on board. And no one can imagine passing on to our children a doomed, unliveable-in world. History will judge us not on our speeches but on our ability to take decisions, ladies and gentlemen, and do so now, right away, immediately. France will, if you wish, rise to the occasion./.

(1) The agrégation is a postgraduate examination for the teaching profession.