Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the latest meeting of the Environmental Audit Committee. We are doing a special session ahead of the COP30 conference, which will be taking place in Belém, Brazil. We have three panels with us today. I am delighted that for the first panel we have been joined by His Excellency, the Brazilian Ambassador to the United Kingdom, Antonio de Aguiar Patriota—I do not know if you have ever heard your name in the Derbyshire accent before, but that is how it sounds. You are very welcome indeed, Excellency. Can I start by inviting you to explain to the Committee what Brazil’s key aims and objectives are for COP30, please? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: Thank you very much for this invitation, which happens just at the countdown to COP30. In fact, we had a wonderful reception at the Museum of Natural History last week, which was attended by both His Majesty and Prince William. Prince William will be attending COP and will be issuing his Earthshot prize in Rio prior to that. Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy and Secretary for Energy Ed Miliband were also present. We had a very good bilateral contact. Maybe I will start by saying that Brazil brings to COP30 a long trajectory of involvement with environmental issues. Some of you will recall that the three major agreements on climate were born in Rio de Janeiro, my hometown, in 1992 at the Environment and Development Conference. Twenty years later we had Rio+20—at the time the biggest United Nations conference ever to be held—and that laid the ground for the sustainable development goals and enshrined the concept of sustainability as, let’s say, the major guidance towards development. Last year at G20 we also exercised leadership in issues relating to energy transition and the interface between finance and climate. I think it is fair to say that Brazil brings considerable experience in this regard. The three personalities involved are the President-designate of the conference, Ambassador Corrêa do Lago, who is an experienced climate negotiator; the CEO, Ana Toni, who is the Secretary for Climate at the Ministry of Environment, with strong links to both philanthropy and the private sector; and the champion, Daniel Ioschpe, who is also a very experienced personality. At the same time, there is no reason to be complacent or excessively confident, because we are meeting for the first time as we experience 1.5° global warming. The expected news from the synthesis report that will be presented to COP will indicate that we are not doing the necessary to stay on this trajectory. In fact, we are heading towards 2.5° or even more. The relatively good news is that if it had not been for Paris, we would be in a much worse position. Here I would say that this week has been auspicious. Prime Minister Starmer confirmed his attendance at COP30. Why is this important? Of course we are very pleased to have as many Heads of State and Government as possible, but it will coincide with the bicentennial—200 years—of relations between Brazil and the United Kingdom. It is very interesting to note how Brazil and the United Kingdom have been working very effectively and demonstrating a very high level of responsibility when it comes to the multilateral approach to international co-operation on climate. To give a very simple and eloquent example, Brazil and the UK are among the few countries that presented their NDCs, their nationally determined contributions, within the established time framework last February, and with ambitious goals that do align with a 1.5° trajectory.

Just bringing you back to the question, what do you see as the key aims and objectives that Brazil is hoping will be agreed and achieved? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: I am getting there. I felt that this was an important introduction to contextualise. Ambassador Corrêa do Lago has issued seven letters to the membership outlining the objectives. In very summarised form, I think the leaders’ summit will represent an opportunity, first of all, to reaffirm the importance of multilateralism in international co-operation on issues of global concern. I need not underline too much the fact that we are living at a very challenging time, even dangerous in some respects, with major players withdrawing from multilateralism. That is one, let us say, global, macro objective. Other than that, we view this COP as an implementation COP. In this respect, it is transitioning from the past 10 years, in which we had to deal with finalising some of the rule-making, or the rulebook, that came out of Paris, into a phase where we now really need to roll up our sleeves and demonstrate the political will and the commitment to change the trajectory. In this regard, we view the leaders’ summit as an opportunity also for some innovative initiatives regarding, for example, fire management and wildfires, sustainable fuels and, as a very important priority for Brazil—again, this week has been relatively auspicious—the establishment of the TFFF, which is the Tropical Forest Forever Facility. You may be aware that yesterday at the World Bank in Washington, the board approved the establishment of the TFFF on an interim basis within the umbrella of the World Bank. The World Bank will be its trustee. Again, here I may say that the UK has been an important supporter in designing the facility. It is innovative and it involves a sponsorship rather than a donor-recipient relationship. It is not strictly constrained to the Amazon region per se. It also involves tropical forests in Africa, south-east Asia and around the world. Our expectation is that it will also signal a transcendence over the north-south dynamics that have been contaminating climate negotiations for a long time in a negative way. To give this initiative the boost that we would like to see it acquire, President Lula, during the recently ended general debate of the United Nations General Assembly, met potential sponsors for the TFFF and announced that Brazil would provide a seed contribution of US$1 billion. Now, for those of you who are familiar with the tensions around the CBDR—common but differentiated responsibilities—concept and the insistence that developed countries should provide funds for constraining or limiting global warming and collaborating in initiatives that will represent progress in this agenda, I think it is a very important milestone and indicator. Of course we would like to see an ambitious declaration come out of the leaders’ summit. However, we are quite concerned by the lateness, for example, of key participants, such as the European Union, in providing their own NDC, and by the reluctance of others also to do so. China has provided one with less specifics than Brazil and the UK have, but still it can be considered a welcome development. Given the very distant positions between fossil fuel producers—the European Union, India, China—and some of the more forward-leaning countries, such as Brazil and the UK, the risk in going for a declaration is that the common denominator would be a very low level of ambition. We are seriously considering issuing a call to action under Brazilian responsibility and inviting countries that are ready to do so to support it and endorse it.

What do you see as the key challenges to be overcome? You touched upon some of them there, but we are conscious that ahead of the conference Brazil, has been working tremendously hard to ensure that when people turn up they already know what is expected of them. What do you see as the key challenges to having some kind of commitment that will move things forward in the fight against further global climate change? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: The one key major challenge is the presence of leaders at an event such as this, and the reaffirmation of their commitment to international co-operation through the United Nations umbrella and through the multilateral framework that is provided by the UNFCCC and so on. Beyond that, as we have been observing, international relations have not been going through a particularly constructive and co-operative period. Nevertheless, I would point out that Brazil is in a unique position in many respects to convene countries and to promote some degree of ambition in this regard. Before we held the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro last year, there was an expectation that issues related to Ukraine, to the geopolitical tensions involving major conflicts in the world, would prevent us from reaching consensus. We did manage to reach consensus on a number of areas and to innovate around, for example, the issue of governance. I am confident that the Brazilian expertise, the ability that Brazil has demonstrated in developing a dialogue with countries that represent different mindsets and schools of thought around many different issues, including this issue, will create a, let us say, favourable environment for some co-operative and important decisions. But I think it is very important not to raise expectations beyond a certain level. The fact that the meeting takes place, that leaders attend, that important deliverables materialise—such as the TFFF, among others—is in itself an achievement. When we speak of transitioning from the rulebook to implementation, implementation is a short, medium and long-term endeavour. It does not begin now and end at Belém. It will continue for the forthcoming years. One additional proposal that Brazil has been speaking about, and President Lula mentioned this during his opening statement at the General Assembly in New York, is the one of improving governance related to climate issues by creating a permanent climate council, either under the General Assembly or ECOSOC—there are different modalities that we could look at. This is a recognition that these conferences of the parties, which impose tremendous onus also on the host country, logistically and otherwise, have to some extent performed their role, and we need to be vigilant on a more permanent basis. Perhaps a parallel can be drawn here between, for example, the Human Rights Committee and the Human Rights Council, which created a framework within the UN system to follow human rights violations and to promote human rights co-operation on a more permanent basis.

You rightly identified there that we are hoping that this COP will mark that shift from negotiation to implementation on these commitments. We hear your strictures not to be too expectant, particularly given the sort of geopolitical environment we currently live in. Also, as you rightly said, we are already seeing alarming increases in temperature. We are arguably moving beyond the first tipping point in some of the environmental challenges that we face. What should we be expecting to get agreement on in moving to that implementation phase, rather than continuing to talk about the theory of it? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: One very concrete proposal is the TFFF, of course, but I would also highlight the importance given to the action agenda. The action agenda is centred around the last global stocktake that took place in Dubai at COP28. It established certain guidelines regarding renewables and transitioning away from fossil fuels in an orderly manner and so on. This is where Belém should be seen not as a convening venue for governmental negotiation of targets and objectives, but rather for something that we are calling Mutirão. This is an indigenous concept that we have borrowed from the Amazonian people themselves, and very much used in our colloquial Portuguese in Brazil, which means everyone rising up to their highest possible level of responsibility. The interesting thing about the Mutirão concept is that it does not necessarily require a kind of steering committee to evaluate what is happening where or to monitor or to issue instructions. It is a genuine appeal to a higher level of ambition and responsibility. This is very much the spirit in which we foresee the convening of this action agenda. Here is an area where private sector plays a fundamental role. We would like to see a network established but, again, this will be a process that will not begin and end in Belém. It is an effort that will continue thereafter.

Thank you, Your Excellency. I would like to start by returning to nationally determined contributions. All parties to the UNFCCC are expected to submit new NDCs by February, but over 60 have yet to announce a new one. What is Brazil doing to ensure that the remaining NDCs are not only submitted but are ambitious and of a high standard? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: As the title indicates, they are voluntary. This is a situation where we would expect Governments to behave in the most responsible manner, but you cannot impose more than reminding them of the deadlines and so forth. One grave concern is the European Union in this regard. I am sure you are as well informed as I am that there are different schools of thought within the European Union and different countries with different levels of ambition and so on. It has a co-ordinating challenge to overcome internally, but we would very much welcome the presentation of an NDC that would be commensurate with its own contribution to global warming. Interestingly, China and Russia are on board in this respect. The United States has now withdrawn for the second time. As a relatively optimistic person who tends to look at the glass as half full, what I would say here is that the US has withdrawn before and the system did not collapse. In many respects, I think we need to continue with our efforts and also realise something. John Kerry, former Secretary of State and presidential candidate, often makes the point that within the US there are also multiple different attitudes towards this agenda, with some states, and many in the private sector as well, remaining very much committed.

On the quality, how satisfied is the presidency with the NDCs that have been submitted? Particularly that from the UK, but also those from other high-emitting countries. His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: Excuse me, I am not sure I understood.

Do you feel they are of good quality, essentially? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: Yes. The British and, I would say, the Brazilian also. They are quite specific in establishing a timeline for reaching net zero, which is by mid-century, with ambitious fixed goals for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases by 2035. In addition to this, as you know, Brazil is a very special case because we have the highest proportion of renewables in our energy mix; we are close to 50%, which is way above world average—world average is around 15%. So we start off from a very positive position in that respect, but our emissions are predominantly due to deforestation. I think the positive news here is that under the Lula Government already, if you combine the past two years, deforestation in the Amazon has been reduced by around 50%. We have established a goal to reduce it to zero deforestation by 2030. Many believe that this is a slightly utopian ambition, but this is where initiatives such as the TFFF are so fundamental, because they will channel resources into improving the livelihood of the population who live in tropical forests and who will have alternatives for their livelihoods, rather than contaminating rivers to extract gold or cutting down trees and so on. That being said, a point that Marina Silva, our Environment Minister, often makes needs to be highlighted. Even as we approach—ideally—zero deforestation, there will be serious tipping points for tropical forests due to the rise in global temperatures. So this is actually a collective responsibility. I have to say that as a career diplomat who has now been several decades in this profession, Brazil has gone through a very significant evolution in its thinking and in its international positioning, because it took years—decades—and a real sensitivity to science and international dialogue to accept that the Amazon forest is worth more for Brazil and for the world standing than through other development projects that would compromise its survival. In this respect, what Belém and Brazil bring as President of the COP is also leadership in demonstrating the ability to evolve in conceptual terms, in terms of its international understanding of challenges and its positioning.

Could I ask about methane for a second? What action will be taken to intensify methane reduction commitments among countries at COP30? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: The methane aspect of the equation is interesting. I understand it has been responsible for roughly 30% of global warming since pre-industrial times, yet its atmospheric lifespan is far shorter than that of the CO2, meaning that reducing methane emissions can yield rapid climate benefits within a relatively shorter timeframe. Learning from past initiatives, such as the Global Methane Pledge launched at COP26 here at Glasgow, a trilateral or broader declaration at COP30 could galvanise action across key emitting sectors—agriculture, energy and waste—while demonstrating that major economies from different regions can co-operate pragmatically on shared challenges. This is something that Brazil, United Kingdom and China, interestingly enough, have been discussing. We remain focused on methane as well. I think it would be maybe an exaggeration to call it low-hanging fruit, but it does have its specificities that render it attractive for immediate results.

Excellency, you have spoken about the importance of the Tropical Forest Forever Facility. You have also spoken about the tipping points, and you will have seen the Global Tipping Points report that came out just this month. That report talks about the way in which there has been drought and the El Niño effect over the past two years. It also says that we are looking at approaching those tipping points, not in forests at the moment, but in coral reefs, and that the more one tipping point is breached, the more it is likely to be in the other. You may also have seen the report from the Met Office, which said that long-term forest dieback is now, it believes, a significant risk with a temperature change of just 1.3° by 2100. Earlier this morning some of us had the pleasure of talking to your Archbishop for Belém, who was in Parliament with us, and she spoke about the way in which the rains had depressed. I think she said the humidity had gone from 80% to 20%. That of course has an impact on the ranching that takes place more in the south of the rainforest. There seems to be a vicious cycle, that as the forest is eroded, the rains then do not come down on to the land where it is necessary for the cattle ranching, and that breeds more demand from those farmers to encroach on the forest. You talked about Mutirão and the importance of a collective community endeavour here. How are you mobilising Mutirão to enable those in the north who are seeing the loss of rainfall and those in the south to come together to stop it further driving the demand for erosion into the forest? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: Your diagnosis is absolutely correct. We have been experiencing extreme weather episodes throughout Brazil, including floods in the extreme south and droughts in other parts of the country that have raised the level of alarm in the Brazilian Government. I think it should raise the level of alarm internationally as well, because today Brazil has become an extremely competitive agricultural producer and exporter, to some degree a breadbasket for many parts of the world, and it can continue to develop its agriculture without having any impact on forests, just by rehabilitating degraded pastures, for example, and increasing productivity. In many parts of Brazil, three harvests are possible, so productivity can increase without any of the negative environmental impact that we are concerned with in the forest. That is why, since Dubai, when this process was initiated, which the UK has taken an active participation in, to create an innovative financial mechanism that will bring together sponsors—we do not call them donors—from around the world, developed countries—

Investors, indeed. They are properly investors, aren’t they? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: Yes. It is not only developed countries; it is not, “Oh, you polluted the world and now you must pay”. We are looking at countries like the United Arab Emirates, China is following closely and others, of course—the UK, Germany and Norway have been very much at the forefront of these discussions. I would not minimise the role that the UK can play, given its place here in London as a financial centre. It was a key topic during the London Climate Action Week this year. Something that encourages us also is the interest that Prince William, for example, has taken in this initiative. He has shortlisted the TFFF for his Earthshot prize to be announced. We hope it will win, but just the fact that it was shortlisted is a bit like an Oscar nomination.

Let me ask you though about the investment. I think you have predicated returns of $3.4 billion annually; that is if we get to the full fund. It is said that that would be used to pay tropical forest countries up to $4 per hectare annually. Is that enough? Of course a large part of that will be predicated to local indigenous people—it is absolutely right that it should be—but is $4 per hectare really enough? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: I am not a specialist in finance. The information I have is that these numbers were not arrived at arbitrarily. They are the product of very expert calculations. What I could say more intuitively is that it would represent a tremendous step forward with respect to the current situation for a start.

I am with you. His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: You also mentioned the fact that a parcel of these resources would go into the indigenous communities. I think this is also worth highlighting. For the first time in our recorded history, let’s call it that, since the first Portuguese settlers arrived in Brazil 500 years ago, we have today a Ministry that deals with the indigenous people under an indigenous Minister, Sonia Guajajara, whom some of you may have met—she was here for London Climate Action Week. She is leading one of the circles. There are four circles that have been created in the preparatory process and that will submit reports at COP30—circles of people that bring together the indigenous, not only from the Amazon, but from the rest of the world. By the way, we hosted a conference of the Amazonian countries in Belém in 2023 that had a strong indigenous component. They are already working on their priorities. They are strong supporters of the TFFF, and they will receive 20% of the benefits that accrue to the different Governments. Just to mention in passing the other circles, there is one—

Excellency, let me interrupt you, because I know the Chair will have to move us on, and there are further questions I want to put to you. What are the key issues that need to be resolved before the TFFF can be launched at COP30? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: The most important issue that needed to be resolved was resolved yesterday, which was the positioning of this facility within the umbrella of the World Bank. Moving forward, what you need is for countries to commit, to support and to contribute with resources. In this respect, I think Brazil is leading by example through this announcement. I would add that during the roundtable that President Lula organised in New York three or four weeks ago, the UK was represented by Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper and continued to demonstrate very strong support. Rachel Kyte, whom you all know, has also been instrumental with her World Bank and financial experience in detailing the initiative.

Could I ask you about a matter that has clearly been initiated by what happened under your previous president in Brazil? That is the moves in the EU and also in the UK under schedule 17 of our Environment Act to introduce supply chain legislation to avoid the transformation of forests into land for agricultural production. This is something that you will know has run into delays in the European Union and also here in the UK. This Committee is very supportive of the Government taking a stance on that. How supportive is the presidency now of that legislation? With your previous President, it was more difficult, shall I put it that way? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: Let’s put it this way: we have serious methodological questions about these pieces of legislation. We believe that they do not take into consideration the specificities of different countries in the tropics, for example. Another element is, for example, the fact that Brazil already has by far the cleanest energy mix among G20 economies—much cleaner than the European Union or the UK does. In some respects, we feel that advancing with this kind of legislation is like punishing the best student in a class in a developing country, because he is not responding to standards that have been fabricated somewhere else in a highly developed world. I would also submit here in the House of Commons, where you are all politicians, that it presumes that there could be a more responsible Government in Brazil. What we have seen is the opposite. What we have seen as the alternative to what I consider the highly responsible Government that we have today is a highly irresponsible Opposition. To punish the highly responsible with these measures that do not take into account the specificities of tropical environments is, to us, something of questionable wisdom.

Thank you. Finally, I remember Alice Amorim at COP29 from the extraordinary office for COP30, where she spoke very powerfully of Brazil’s efforts to reduce dependency on fossil fuels. Earlier you talked about auspicious moments. Is it an inauspicious moment that we have just had the announcement from Petrobras about the licensing for oil and gas in the mouth of the Amazon river, given that 29 of the IBAMA technical staff said that they urged the Government to deny the environmental licence, pointing to the risk of massive biodiversity loss in a highly sensitive marine ecosystem? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: Let me answer that by saying that in my experience—this is my fifth post as ambassador for Brazil—I have yet to come across a country where there is no internal debate about how to explore and develop certain natural resources that it may have at its service. I do not think the UK is any different in this respect. There is a very active debate going on as I speak today regarding whether you should pursue additional exploration of the North sea oil and so on. It would be unreasonable to expect that Brazil is in a category of absolute virtue and commitment. In fact, some of the countries that have ruled out exploration of oil, like Colombia, have had to increase very significantly their imports from elsewhere without contributing to the transition from fossil fuels.

Let me ask the question in a more positive way. President Lula, who I have huge respect for, has said in the past that the revenues that come from the exploration of oil and gas are precisely what will be used to turbocharge the move towards renewables and a net zero economy. Are there specific pieces of legislation that are taking that and hypothecating the resources that will come from those oil and gas licences into all of the action that you want to do and the world is with you on? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: Let’s put it this way: the authorisation for drilling is the first decision, and this is 500 km away from the seashore. Several of the requirements that had been presented by the Ministry of Environment, by Marina Silva—who is, let’s say, the spokeswoman for the more sceptical view of this endeavour—have been met. This is advancing within a very careful and very attentive agenda towards everything environmental in Brazil. I am sure that if the decision comes to explore at some point, it will be within a general philosophy of remaining committed to our NDC and being very attentive also to the moment when production should peak. I think this is a similar debate that takes place here in the United Kingdom and in other parts of the world. Other than that, I do recognise that there are different schools of thought within the Government regarding this matter. It is not an easy one for the President to arbitrate on. Q14            John Whitby: Your Excellency, could you elaborate on the Baku to Belém road map to $1.3 trillion and how the UK might support its goals? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: The Baku to Belém initiative is based on calculations by a very eminent British specialist on the matter, Lord Stern, who identified this particular threshold of financial resources that will be necessary for us to stay on the right trajectory. A report will be presented by Brazil and Azerbaijan that will look at different elements in the contributions to the maximum resources for us to deal with this challenge: scaling up concessional finance; optimising climate funds; reforming MDBs to scale up sustainable finance; boosting domestic capacity and investment frameworks for climate finance, including country platforms; developing scalable and innovative financial solutions for private capital, mobilisation and so on; and strengthening regulatory approaches for climate finance. The TFFF itself can be seen as an innovative idea and project that contributes to this impetus that we would like to see. I have not seen the report myself, but I was mentioning before that, in addition to the Circle of Peoples, three other important circles have been meeting in the run-up to COP31. One is the Circle of Ministers of Finance. By the way, next November Brazil assumes the presidency of the COP and, as you are very well aware, this presidency runs throughout 2026, so the Circle of Ministers of Finance will continue meeting and continue looking at different ideas and suggestions. Let me mention very briefly the Circle of Former COP Presidencies. Since Paris, this involves to this day of course Alok Sharma, the COP26 President, and Laurent Fabius, the Paris President. A very interesting, innovative initiative that was conceived by Minister Marina Silva was a global ethical stocktake. Interestingly, the first meeting took place here in London during the London Climate Action Week. The co-convenor at the time was Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland, whom you all know well. Marina Silva conceived this as a conversation involving civil society, scientists, artists and representatives of minorities. I was present at the first meeting here and I thought it was extremely inspiring. It is an initiative that aims at conveying to the broader public, and to those who are uninitiated in some of this very specialised terminology that climate negotiators use, the cost of inaction and the importance of this agenda for our everyday lives and for sustainability in general. Meetings have taken place in Addis Ababa in Africa, in Bogotá in the Americas, in Australia in Oceania, and in New Delhi. Some of the topics that were raised here in London, which I think are of extreme importance to all of us, were, for example, the role of disinformation in fuelling climate denial or scepticism and the importance of looking at this very seriously so that we can counteract. In fact, Brazil has appointed a special envoy on adequate information and on combating disinformation. Q15            John Whitby: Thank you; that is very good to hear. What impact are cuts to overseas development funding from developed countries, including the UK, having on the presidency’s preparations in the run-up to COP30? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: What contribution the UK—

Are the cuts that have been made to overseas contributions by developed countries impacting on COP30? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: I would single out the UK as a—let me choose my words carefully here—very responsible participant in this conversation and these efforts, given its early and ambitious NDC dissemination. You may not have been attentive to what the UN Secretary-General said at Baku, at COP29, but he identified Brazil and the UK as key participants and leaders. Many of the compromises that were possible in Baku, although not at the level of ambition we would have hoped, were the outcome of very close co-ordination between personalities such as Mr Miliband, Marina Silva, Ana Toni and so on. Here we are building a very solid partnership that can be of inspiration, but also practical relevance, to the future of international co-operation to combat climate change. There are other countries that I would describe as disappointing. First of all, withdrawing from Paris is something that we would have hoped did not happen. We will have to see how to continue to co-operate under those conditions. Other developed countries are also looking at ways of contributing. In Brazil, we try to take the most positive, constructive outlook and try to dilute, and to the extent possible, prevent this north-south polarisation from paralysing our efforts. Q16            John Whitby: Finally, how might the International Court of Justice’s opinion on the obligations of states in respect of climate change influence countries’ approach to dialogue on finance in COP30? His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: I think it is a very significant development. I am personally a very strong supporter of the International Court of Justice on this and other cases, as well as the International Criminal Court. This is not a minor development. I think it has historic significance. The fact that it was brought to the ICJ by a small island—a developing nation threatened with extinction if ocean levels continue to rise—is something that will be inscribed into the annals of the history of our efforts in this regard. My expectation is that, yes, it will have an impact. We have yet to evaluate exactly the extent.

Excellency, thank you so much for that excellent set-up for this important meeting today. It was very important for us to hear the Brazilian presidency’s plans and to hear about the tremendous progress you have made, the work you have done with the United Kingdom Government and also the challenges that face us ahead of Belém. I thank you very much indeed on behalf of the Committee for coming to join us. We will bring this first panel to a close. His Excellency Antonio de Aguiar Patriota: Thank you so much. I hope we can welcome you in Belém soon.

I will insist upon it. And indeed this session, to a close.