UN Ocean conference gives 'glimmer of hope' for marine life
The UN Ocean conference has been heralded a success, with more countries ratifying a key treaty to protect marine life and more progress on curbing plastics and illegal fishing in our seas.Nearly 200 countries came together in Nice, France to discuss how to tackle the most pressing issues facing the oceans. The conference ends today.The world's seas are facing threats on multiple fronts from plastic pollution to climate change. Sir David Attenborough said ahead of the conference that he was "appalled" by the damage from certain fishing methods and hoped leaders attending would "realise how much the oceans matter to all of us".
The key aim was to get the High Seas Treaty ratified by 60 countries to bring it into force. The agreement was signed two years ago to put 30% of the ocean into protected areas. Fifty countries had ratified by Friday, but dozens more promised to ratify by the end of the year. This and other progress on plastics and illegal fishing appears to have restored faith in the ability of governments to work together."UNOC has given us a glimmer of hope that the challenges facing our ocean are being seen and will be tackled," said Tony Long, chief executive officer of Global Fishing Watch."As we edge closer to the High Seas Treaty coming into force, governments need to double down - using both transparency and new technologies - to safeguard the ocean," he added.Prior to the UN Oceans Conference confidence in the multilateral process for solving the world's most pressing issues was low.In 2024, key negotiations on biodiversity, plastics and climate collapsed or concluded with limited progress.The aim of the meeting was not to sign a new legally-binding agreement but make progress on previous treaties.Three years ago, countries agreed to protect 30% of land and sea by 2030 to support biodiversity.For international waters this is hard to achieve as there is no clear controlling nation. So, in 2023 countries signed the High Seas Treaty agreeing to put 30% of these waters into marine protected areas.What is the UN High Seas Treaty and why is it needed?Prior to the conference only 27 out of the 60 states needed to bring it into force had ratified. Over just a few days that figure jumped to 50 and countries, including the UK, agreed it would ratify by the end of the year.This is record time for a UN agreement, explained Elizabeth Wilson, senior director for environmental policy at environmental NGO The Pews Trust."We have worked on many different treaties over the years and ratification often takes five years, seven years. "So the fact the High Seas Treaty is on the cusp of it entering into force really shows the global momentum behind working to protect more of the high seas," she said.Major nations including the US and China have not ratified the treaty although they are signatories, indicating their intention to do so in the future.And Russia, which has never supported it because of concerns over its impact on fisheries, said on Friday it would continue with that stance.But US diplomats experienced in UN negotiations praised the progress."From progress on the High Seas Treaty to French Polynesia's marine protected area, UNOC provided the latest proof that when we work together, real accomplishment is possible," said John Kerry, former US Secretary of State and Climate Envoy.
More countries also came forward with promises to put their own national waters into marine protected areas (MPAs) and restrict the most harmful fishing practices.During the week the UK announced it would seek to ban bottom trawling in nearly a third of English MPAs. This has been long been a demand of environmental charities, and more recently Sir David Attenborough, who argue that without such bans the protection just exists on paper.The largest ever marine protected area was also launched by French Polynesia in its own waters, and 900,000 sq km of that will ban extractive fishing and mining - four times the size of the UK.With this commitment and others made during the conference, 10% of the oceans are now in protection. "This is sending a message to the world that multilateralism is important," Astrid Puentes told R4's Today programme on the final day. "We need this leadership. The ocean is a single biome in the planet, it is all connected so we absolutely need to strengthen international law," she continued.However, progress on limiting destructive fishing practices globally has been difficult without the participation of China - which operates the largest fleet in the world.But at the conference its government announced it had now ratified the Port State Measures Agreement - a legal commitment to eliminate illegal and unregulated fishing.
Despite French President Macron opening the conference with a stark warning on the threats from deep sea mining, countries remained split on the issue.Last week 2,000 scientists recommended to governments that all deep sea exploration be paused whilst further research is carried out; just 0.001% of the seabed has been mapped.Despite this only 37 countries heeded the advice and have called for a moratorium on deep sea mining. "More and more states need to call for a moratorium on seabed mining so that we have this regulatory framework in place before any mining activities can happen," said Pradeep Singh, an environmental lawyer and marine expert with the Oceano Azul Foundation.President Trump abandoned the idea of a global approach in April when he declared that the US administration would start issuing permits for the activity. But Mr Singh thinks even without calling for a ban most countries do not support the US approach. At the final meeting of the conference countries passed the Nice Ocean Action Plan summarising their commitments.
The issue of plastic pollution is one that is particularly profound for the oceans, but in December talks on reducing the levels of production broke down.There are nearly 200 trillion pieces in the ocean and this is expected to triple by 2040 if no action is taken.Both the physical plastic and the chemicals within them is life-threatening to marine animals, said Bethany Carney Almroth, Professor of Ecotoxicology at the University of Gothenburg."There are more than 16,000 chemicals that are present in plastics, and we know that more than 4,000 of those have hazardous properties, so they might be carcinogenic, or mutagenic, or reproductively toxic," she said. At the conference ministers from 97 countries, including the UK, signed a joint political statement saying they wanted an ambitious treaty to be signed on the issue.But this only included one of the top ten oil-producing nations - Canada. Plastic is made from oil, so any commitment to reduce production could harm their income, the countries claim.Reducing oil production is also crucial if countries want to see a drop in planet-warming emissions and limit the worst impacts of climate change.The oceans are at the forefront of this - 90% of the additional heat put into the atmosphere by humans has been absorbed by the oceans, leading to increasingly destructive marine heatwaves.This conference did not see any new commitments on reducing emissions, but poorer nations did push their richer counterparts to release previously promised money for climate action more quickly."I share the frustration of many small island developing nations in terms of the non responsiveness of international financial facilities," said Feleti Teo, prime minister of Tuvalu."We don't have influence to change their policies but we need to sustain the pressure, meetings of this sort give us the opportunity to continue to tell the story."
Sign up for our Future Earth newsletter to keep up with the latest climate and environment stories with the BBC's Justin Rowlatt. Outside the UK? Sign up to our international newsletter here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
44 minutes ago
- Reuters
Germany to hire 11,000 more military personnel this year, Bild reports
FRANKFURT, June 21 (Reuters) - The German government will provide funds for an extra 11,000 military personnel by the end of the year, an increase of around 4%, tabloid Bild reported on Saturday, citing government sources. The money will be provided for 10,000 soldiers and 1,000 civilian employees for the military by end-2025, the newspaper said, adding the move was part of this year's budget planning to be approved by the cabinet next week. The new jobs will cover armed, air, naval and cyber forces, the report said. Germany's Defence Ministry declined to comment. Germany needs up to 60,000 additional troops under new NATO targets for weapons and personnel, Defence Minister Boris Pistorius said earlier this month, as the alliance beefs up its forces to respond to what it sees as an increased threat from Russia.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Keir Starmer accidentally admits his first year has been a failure
It is the sort of thing a backbencher who is trying to be loyal would say. Which is damning, and particularly so from the prime minister himself, because a core part of his job is communicating the government's 'story'. He was asked in Canada on Wednesday what his biggest mistake had been in his first year in government. 'We haven't always told our story as well as we should,' he said. Most politicians would have bristled at the obvious trap laid by Beth Rigby of Sky News, but Keir Starmer is a surprisingly low-ego politician. No other British prime minister would have bent down to pick up the trade deal papers that Donald Trump dropped. Most other prime ministers would have ignored Rigby's invitation to criticise themselves, especially as the second half of a two-part question, but Starmer came back to it willingly after answering the first part (what are you most proud of? 'Three million extra appointments in the NHS'). He is not self-important, which I admire about him, but he is ruthless and confident. Confident enough not to notice or care that the photographers are recording him scrabbling at the president's feet, and confident enough to give a serious answer to an obviously silly question. Unfortunately for him, it was a bad answer. Communication is not an optional add-on to democratic politics; it is the essence of it. Poor communication is usually an excuse not an explanation. It is the code to be used when a government becomes unpopular but people do not want to imply that the leader is the problem. Poor communications and bad advisers get the blame. It was ever thus: when parliament criticised Charles I's advisers; when Margaret Thatcher was told to get rid of Alan Walters, her economic adviser. Charles I was urged to get his message across better to MPs by denouncing popery; Thatcher was urged to sell the poll tax better by calling it the community charge. In both cases, it wasn't the advisers or the communications that were the problem. So it is with Starmer. MPs grumble about Morgan McSweeney, the prime minister's chief of staff. They blame him for the 'right-wing' policies that they don't like. They have all read Get In, the book about how Labour won the election by Patrick Maguire and Gabriel Pogrund, which portrays McSweeney as the mastermind and strategic genius behind a campaign for which Starmer is often the passive figurehead. This is often developed, by MPs who 'didn't come into politics to cut support for the disabled', into a fairytale in which Starmer, a proper socialist who shares Ed Miliband's politics (like them), has been taken prisoner by his Blairite chief of staff. If that is an attempt to avoid direct criticism of their leader, it fails, because it makes him look weak and dishonest. But it is also wrong. In the end, the leader always takes responsibility for decisions. Nor is Starmer simply McSweeney's puppet. A telling report in the Financial Times on Wednesday revealed that the plan to treat Nigel Farage even more publicly as the real leader of the opposition came from Starmer himself, and not McSweeney: it was the prime minister's idea to travel to St Helens to deliver a speech as a direct response to Farage's pitch for Labour votes. Farage is the main threat to Labour at the next election, but it may be that McSweeney has doubts about the prime minister himself saying so in public. The 'poor communications' line is just as bad – and it is a defence that Starmer deploys himself. What does he mean when he says 'we' could have 'explained our decisions in the way that might in retrospect have been better'? Could he have said to pensioners on modest incomes, 'We're going to take away your winter fuel payment, but don't worry, next year we will pretend that the economy is getting better and give it back to you'? The reason his government's decisions have not been explained better is that they were bad decisions. In retrospect, as he put it, he should have stopped Rachel Reeves cutting the winter fuel payment. Looking back, he shouldn't have promised to ' smash the gangs ' with no idea how to do it. Looking further back, he should have put someone with his full authority in charge of preparing for government. These are not examples of failing to tell the government's story 'as well as we should': they reveal a government with no story to tell, or even, quite often, with the wrong story to tell. Starmer has shown that he can learn, and he seems to have no fear of U-turning from the wrong policy to the right one. So maybe he can recover from the false start of his first year – but it will be achieved by making better decisions, not by 'telling a better story'.
BreakingNews.ie
2 hours ago
- BreakingNews.ie
EU review ‘paints grim picture' of Israel's actions in Gaza, Taoiseach says
An EU review 'paints a grim picture' of Israel's failure to adhere to international obligations, Micheál Martin has said. The Taoiseach said the report highlights the restriction of food and medicines into Gaza, which he said 'amounts to the use of starvation as a method of war'. Advertisement The EU-Israel Association Agreement is being reviewed after a dozen EU member states backed it last month. The unpublished report has found that there are 'indications' Israel could be in breach of its human rights obligations under the agreement, according to several media outlets. Reacting on Saturday, Mr Martin welcomed the 'substantive and important' report on Israel's compliance with its human rights obligations under the EU-Israel deal. He said Ireland had 'long argued' that clauses on human rights in the EU's international agreement 'have to be respected' and should prompt 'serious consequences' when they are not. Advertisement Back in February 2024, Ireland and Spain jointly called for an urgent review of whether Israel had breached its human rights obligations in the trade agreement. A majority of EU countries did not back the review until last month, prompted by a proposal from The Netherlands. The shift came amid Israel's months-long blockade of Gaza, which has accelerated fears of a famine. A new Israeli and US-backed aid system has been marred by violence. Israel's 20-month military campaign in the the Palestinian enclave has killed an estimated 55,000 people and injured thousands more, according to Gaza's health ministry. Advertisement Mr Martin said: 'I very much welcome the substantive and important report of the EU's High Representative for Human Rights on Israel's compliance with its human rights obligations under the EU-Israel Association Agreement. 'Bringing together the reports and analysis of serious, credible and reliable sources – including the International Court of Justice, the UN's Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the UN Secretary General's Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict and others – it paints a clear and grim picture of a sustained and deliberate failure by Israel to adhere to its international obligations, especially in Gaza but also in the West Bank. 'It highlights a continued restriction of food, medicines, medical equipment, and other vital supplies into Gaza that amount to collective punishment of the civilian population, that amounts to the use of starvation as a method of war. World Dozens of Palestinians killed while waiting for fo... Read More 'It describes an unprecedented level of killing and injury of civilians in Gaza resulting from indiscriminate attacks without proportion or precaution, as well as attacks on hospitals, forced mass displacements and the killing of journalists. All of this with a persistent lack of accountability. Advertisement 'In the West Bank, it reports sustained oppression of the Palestinian population, including through state and settler violence, the appropriation of land, and the use of detention as a form of collective punishment.' He added: 'We will now work with partners to follow up on this important report with concrete steps, and I will be discussing it with my colleagues in the European Council when we meet next week.'
