Speech by President Lula at the session '10 years of the Paris Agreement: Nationally Determined Contributions and Financing'

At the first Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm in 1972, Brazilian geographer Josué de Castro highlighted the difference between growing and developing.

He said that growing is easy — but that developing in a balanced way is such a difficult goal that no country in the world had been able to reach it.

Nationally Determined Contributions represent the path to realizing the ideal of sustainable development.

According to the International Energy Agency, last year emissions grew less than the global GDP.

This shows that it is possible to consider a new economic model without sacrificing wealth generation.

It is feasible to work for a just transition in which the Global South has the opportunities that were denied to it in the past.

We can advance towards the future while claiming from those who have historically benefited the most from emissions that they live up to their responsibilities.

The regions that are at risk of becoming uninhabitable are in Latin America, Asia and Africa.

The islands that may disappear are in the Caribbean and the Pacific.

Omission is a way of sentencing once again those who are already condemned on Earth.

Brazil proposes that this COP in the Amazon recognize the role of indigenous territories, traditional communities, and protection policies as instruments of climate mitigation.

Making COP30 the COP of truth demands recognizing science and undeniable progress.

It also means admitting an unpleasant truth, however: the world is still very far from achieving the goal of the Paris Agreement.

That Agreement is based on the understanding that each country will do its best to prevent a warming of more than one and a half degrees.

What we have to ask ourselves today is: are we really doing the best we can?

The answer is: not yet.

One hundred countries, representing almost 73% of global emissions, presented their Nationally Determined Contributions.

For the most part, the new NDCs have advanced by covering all economic sectors and all greenhouse gases.

Nonetheless, the planet is still heading towards a warming of around two and a half degrees.

As far as Brazil is concerned, Belém will be the place where we will renew our commitment to the Paris Agreement.

This means not only implementing what has already been agreed upon, but also adopting additional measures that can bridge the gap between rhetoric and reality.

Therefore, it is essential that we leave COP30 with the commitment to accelerate the alignment of our NDCs with Mission 1.5, with which we committed in Dubai.

Without adequate means of implementation, demanding ambition from developing countries is unfair and unrealistic.

The Baku to Belém Roadmap shows that, with political will, we have alternatives to reach the goal of one trillion, three hundred billion dollars a year.

Today only a small part of climate funding reaches the developing world.

Most funds are still offered as loans.

It makes no ethical or practical sense to demand that developing countries pay interest to combat global warming and deal with its effects.

This is reverse financing, flowing from the South to the Global North.

Debt exchange instruments for climate action have already proven viable.

Facing climate change should be seen as an investment, not an expense.

The increasing demands of adaptation will require even greater funding efforts.

Without adding private capital to the mix, the numbers will not add up.

Individuals or companies have appropriated most of the world wealth generated over the last four decades.

Meanwhile, national budgets have shrunk.

According to Oxfam, a person who belongs to the richest 0.1% on the planet emits in a single day more carbon than the poorest 50% of the world's population in an entire year.

It is legitimate to demand a greater contribution from those people.

The minimum tax on multinational corporations and the taxation of the wealth of the super-rich can generate valuable funds for climate action.

Carbon markets can also become important sources of public revenue—but they will only gain scale if countries move in the direction of common parameters.

This is the goal of the Open Coalition of Regulated Carbon Markets launched by Brazil, China and the European Union.

This multilateral effort still has some pending tasks.

It is crucial to define better methodologies for the accounting of climate financing.

International trade requires environmental rules that are equitable and collectively decided upon.

Multilateral banks must be bigger, better and more effective.

The proposal to create a Climate Council—, which I have already had the opportunity to present to the G20 and the UN General Assembly—is a way of giving the implementation challenge the political stature it deserves.

I call on all of you.

There is no solution for the planet outside multilateralism.

There is only one Earth. Only one humankind. The answer has to come from everyone, for everyone.

Instead of abandoning all hope, we can build together a new era of prosperity and equality.

Thank you very much.