Much of the debate that surrounded the final declaration, we understand—and some of the members around this table were present, and though I wasn't personally present, my leader was there—was about whether or not the declaration should reflect a consensus among Kyoto signatories that we would strive to achieve a 25% to 40% decrease in absolute terms from 1990. Ultimately, I understand, the minister did cave in to pressure—as we've heard from other delegations—and agreed to the declaration.
I'm just going to put this question to you straight up. Have either of you been able to reconcile the notion that the minister has said internationally that we're going to reduce our absolute greenhouse gas emissions by 25% to 40% from 1990 levels—per the document he signed on to and approved in Bali—with a domestic plan that no single third-party observer believes can achieve even a 20% cut by 2020 by using intensity targets and 2006 as the baseline year?
As two experts who have been around this climate change process for a long time, can you help us to understand this? Were you able to reconcile the government's domestic plan and its ultimate agreement with the final declaration that came out in Bali?