The agreement signed at the Lima climate change conference was supposed to be a triumph of diplomacy, but the reality is exactly the opposite. Although the agreement means that there is now global unanimity on the need to take action to combat climate change, the text of the agreement falls on almost all indicators. The Lima conference also failed to resolve a number of difficult issues, including the issue of valuing climate finance. The 2009 Copenhagen Accord promised to allocate $100 billion a year to help developing countries cope with climate change. There is still no clue as to whether and how the world will get there. This is worrying, especially for the poorest countries. Third, Australia`s request for next year`s Paris Agreement, which is expected to contain binding emissions targets. Oddly enough, Australia reflects the European position in this situation, widely regarded as an ambitclaim. There is no realistic prospect of legally binding goals, since the U.S. Congress would not ratify such a treaty, and China will not do so without the United States. In any event, a legal obligation at the international level is not necessary to achieve national measures. Just two months ago, Prime Minister Tony Abbott said coal was “good for humanity” while refusing to contribute to the Green Climate Fund.

It was unclear whether Australia would commit to significantly reducing emissions beyond 2020. We come together in a broad community of defenders, practitioners, activists, scientists, lawyers, trial parties and others who work to promote tax justice through human rights and to achieve human rights through fair tax policies. Tax revenues are the most important, reliable and sustainable instrument for managing human rights in a sufficient, fair and responsible manner. The realization of all human rights is also at the heart of the government. It is by respecting, protecting and respecting civil, political, economic, social, cultural and environmental rights that the state deserves to impose its legitimacy. Taxation also plays a fundamental role in redistributing resources in order to prevent and eliminate inequalities between men and women, economic and otherwise, and to reduce the resulting inequalities in the perception of human rights. In addition, a fair tax system can strengthen the bonds of responsibility between the state and its people and encourage governments to do more to attack the rights and rights of those to whom they are responsible. Tax policy can also counter glaring market failures and protect global commons, including a healthy environment within global borders. Nevertheless, many countries are finding it difficult to raise sufficient tax revenues to adequately finance the implementation of human rights, all of which represent a certain financial cost. At the same time, inequitable tax systems at the national and global levels continue to fuel growing inequalities and inequalities in the exercise of human rights, shifting the burden of financing public services to society`s less talented enterprises, weakening the provision of existing services and concentrating wealth in the hands of the less privileged few.