Danish Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and Minister for Climate and Energy Lykke Friis were asked to answer two questions regarding COP15 today:

1. Will the Prime Minister explain the Danish negotiating tactics and the outcome of the climate summit and explain what the Danish government intends to do after the disastrous outcome of this summit?

2. How does the climate minister consider the result of the climate summit, and what concrete steps does the government intend to take internationally, including in the EU and the UN to push for ambitious initiatives and agreements that will reduce the anthropogenic warming to 2 degrees?

Both questions – obviously – put forth by the opposition. A lengthy debate ensued. Below is a very brief selection of quotes and screenshots from the online transmission at ft.dk.

Half empty or half full?

Anne Grete Holmsgaard, Socialist People's Party

“The summit ended in what looked like a melt down.”

“The international public is also very aware of what we do. Citizens' eyes are actually still on Denmark, Denmark has a special responsibility.”

“What the United States promised was in fact, that it would reduce by 1.5 percent per year. When the EU talks about 20 percent reduction is equivalent to maximum - maximum - 1 percent reduction per year.”

Lars Løkke Rasmussen, Prime Minister / Liberal Party of Denmark

“[Copenhagen Accord] is the result which some in Parliament has chosen to honor with the grade 'disaster'. One is allowed to. I think it demonstrates a very limited understanding of the political forces that were at stake and in play in the international climate debate.”

Lykke Friis, Minister for Climate and Energy / Liberal Party of Denmark

“COP15 has long been called the most complicated and most crucial climate negotiation ever held, and historians are in full swing digging in the archives for possible parallels.”

“The government will work towards the industrialized countries delivering the promised start-up financing, so I will soon take contact with my Spanish colleague to get the EU to press for the donor countries meet and discuss this as soon as possible. And Denmark will indeed contribute our share in the form of 1.2 billion Dkr during the next 3 years.”

The ministers laughing.

Lars Christian Lilleholt, Liberal Party of Denmark

“It is handing out a blank cheque to promise 30 percent regardless of what others suggest. How much should this cost Danish families and Danish companies? How many jobs should we move to China and India?”

“I am convinced that when the history books are written, this climate summit will be referred to as the turning point for the climate debate around the world.”

“I am of the opinion that the EU provides the traction of the climate agenda of the world.”

Per Dalgaard, Danish People's Party

“We in the Danish People's Party would very much like to be completely independent of oil from the Middle East and also of Russian gas because those are regimes which sometimes turn off the tap.”

“We do not believe that CO₂ is the major villain in the observed climate change and that it is so important to be addressed. It is great if as a side effect we reduces CO₂ emmissions.”

“There was taken good care of all appointments, meetings, transportation by busses and subway, and not least plenty of coffee and water for the meetings. […] I also whish to express my delight that the police [all] around Copenhagen and the Bella Center did a great job. It was beautiful and dignified, especially in light of [the] youth organizations, autonomous groups and other wild elements doing everything they could to destroy the conference and thus Denmark's reputation in the world. These destructive forces are obviously totally indifferent to Denmark's reputation, if only they can get to burning off things, all is well for them.”

Per Clausen, Red-Green Alliance

“I think it was an unusually harsh and somewhat unfair criticism, Mr Per Dalgaard gave of the police, because he just claimed that the police performance corresponded to that of the prime minister.”

“The political approach, Denmark chose, which was carefully targeted to take care of USA and other rich countries' interests, got the idea to spread among both the large, slightly richer developing countries and the very poor developing countries that Denmark was in the process of implementing an agreement that would be so unjust that perhaps one would be better off not getting an agreement.”

“The EU left the impression of being unable to act, not in a position to have visions, and who are unable to lead.”

Per Ørum Jørgensen, Conservative People's Party

“China said no to everything. I think even if the EU had proposed 80 percent [reductions] it had not pressured China.”

Mette Gjerskov, Social Democrats

“We must get over the failure and we must continue our work. It was what I was hoping that we would today, but I hear a prime minister apparently still not out of his climate coma, and hear an environment minister who is inflating the sad [Copenhagen Accord].”

Margrethe Vestager, Danish Social Liberal Party

“[According to] the Danish government [it acted] perfectly, the Danish ministers were perfect, they did uniquely. It is not the impression you get when you read the foreign press. I can mention the BBC, 22 December, The Guardian, 16 December, Daily Telegraph, 17 December, the Financial Times, 20 December, Der Spiegel, 21 December, an EU minister, quoted in Danish papers, 19 December; Russian climate negotiators, Bild, 22 December, a British member of the IPCC, India's environment minister; German EU parliamentarians, the Swiss newspaper Tages Anzeiger. Do they fault just as much as the [Danish] opposition when they say that the Danish government could have done better?”

Ida Auken, Socialist People's Party

"Yvo de Boer [UN], at a press conference last week said, quote: 'The basis for continued negotiations is not the agreement from COP15 [Copenhagen Accord].' [...however] The Prime Minister said that the basis for future climate talks is the Copenhagen Accord. The two statements are just not possibly true at the same time."

"[According to the Danish government] the world [left COP15] thinking: Wow, the Danish Presidency was excellent."

Voted statement

Thursday the government statement (V37) was passed by 60 for, 47 against. The opposition statement vote was dropped. Thus the official parliament statement is:

Parliament finds that the Copenhagen Accord is a starting point for further global cooperation on climate change that should be used actively.

It is positive that the Copenhagen Accord contains a number of positive elements and assemble the world's biggest CO2 emitters, and the poorest and most vulnerable developing countries in a global framework for combating climate change.

Parliament therefore notes that Denmark in close cooperation with the UN will actively pursue its presidency role in that building on the Copenhagen agreement toward COP16.

Denmark will work with the incoming Mexican COP presidency and with other countries in efforts wherever possible to effectuate the Copenhagen Accord.

This applies not least the provisions on support for climate adaptation in the poorest and most vulnerable developing countries.

Denmark is also active for the EU to maintain the perspective of reducing by 30 percent compared to 1990, under the conditions laid down by the European Council.

The online transcript is still being written and the voting was postponed so stay tuned for a sequel or update! (Transcript of entire debate in Danish at ft.dk, vote in Thursday's transcript)