GREEN FAITHFUL GATHER AGAIN

How much will it cost us taxpayers this time to send delegates to the Paris summit?

WHEN the thousands of delegates and hangers-on meet in Paris for the 21st UN conference on climate change in December, few of them will consider the amount of carbon dioxide they are to push into the atmosphere as they take trains, planes and motor cars to get there – and of course, talk, and breath out.

But this is not the only irony. A bigger one is that millions of tax-paying citizens are paying for this circus. Some may have made individual donations to make it possible for delegates to make the trip, but a great many others have not – at least not voluntarily.

At the last UN conference on climate change held in Lima, Peru, our own government spent taxpayers’ money sending 80 government delegates to attend, 76 of them flying in from South Africa. The local diplomatic corps was there already.

Add their travel time, some touring and shopping expeditions the 76 each probably spent 12 days in Peru at South African taxpayers’ expense. Not too shabby, as they say. As it is highly likely that those who enjoyed the delights of Peru are now looking forward to a Paris sojourn, it is worth listing just a few of those 76 who made it to Lima last time, courtesy of Joe Public. Here they are. Read it and weep. Her Excellency, the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs; Her Excellency, the Deputy Minister, Department of Environmental Affairs; the chief director of international climate change relations and negotiations, Department of Environmental Affairs; the deputy director-general Multilateral Agreements International Relations and Co-operation.

The list continues

And the deputy director-general of environmental advisory services, Department of Environmental Affairs; the deputy director-general of climate change and air quality, Department of Environmental Affairs; the chief director of international governance, Department of Environmental Affairs.

And the chief director of climate change adaptation, Department of Environmental Affairs; the chief state law advisor, Department of International Relations and Co-operation; the chief director, senior specialist advisor monitoring and evaluation, Department of Environmental Affairs; the chief director of clean energy, Department of Energy.

And, the chief operating officer, Environmental Affairs; the specialist scientist, Department of Water and Sanitation, Water Research Commission; the director of international climate change relations and negotiations, Department of Environmental Affairs.

And, a man from the Department of International Relations and Co-operation; the director of atmospheric quality information, Department of Environmental Affairs; the director, Department of Environmental Affairs; and the director of climate change adaptation-socio-economic sectors, Environmental Affairs.

And not to forget the office administrator from the Department of Environmental Affairs, and the registry clerk from the Department of Environmental Affairs.

All the above are civil servants whose attendance is deemed essential since they deal with South Africa’s response to the alleged world-threatening issue of climate change and the theoretically deadly effects of carbon dioxide.

It would appear from their titles that none of these people were elected, holding their positions by virtue of the needs of us poor citizens who pay their salaries, that is, they are our servants. Nice work, if you can get it. Now imagine what this climate change junket cost the South African taxpayer by totting up the 76 airfares to get to Lima and back, the cost of 76 hotel rooms, 76 per diem expenses, entertainment allowances, meals, for example.

We doubled that

Britain sent only 36 government delegates. We doubled that. Assuming the British delegation had the same travel and accommodation costs at the (then) exchange rate as our lot, we spent R6 840 000 on providing a jolly nice holiday for our servants.

As an outraged South African environmentalist put it: “What contribution did these people make to improve our country for the benefit of its citizens? What did they bring back from the meeting in Peru that will help address the plight of poor people in this country?

“What contribution did the ‘office administrator from the Department of Environmental Affairs’ make to the meeting? Or the ‘registry clerk from the Department of Environmental Affairs’?

“How can the use of public funds possibly be justified for such people to travel overseas to attend an international meeting supposed to address matters of science and technology?”

Nobody seems to have asked such questions – not even someone in the Treasury, it would appear – because surely, surely, anyone who did ask would have cut the numbers at least in half and preferably much more.

Scanning the list of 1 342 organisations that souped it up in Lima one discovers such gems as the Buddhist Tzu Chi Foundation, the World Association of Girl Guides, the Solar Energy Industries Association (of course), the Maryknoll Sisters of Dominic, and Women in Europe for a Common Future.

Greenpeace, WWF, Christian Aid, Friends of the Earth and Oxfam together sent 148 people. Did their donors know? Just asking. Seven attendees from the Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University were there too.

Also to be seen in Lima was Mick Jagger’s daughter representing the Bianca Jagger Human Rights Foundation. Her own research assistant accompanied her.

So, what are the chances that this year our government will not be as generous with our money when the Paris climate conference tickets need to be booked?

Let us hope that whoever signs the cheques this time makes a show of caring for the environment by cutting down the C02 emissions involved.

For a full list of South Africa’s Lima holidaymakers see http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2014/cop20/eng/inf02.pdf

It would appear that none of these people were elected, holding their positions by virtue of the needs of us poor citizens who pay their salaries.