I was working New York.

I've been there, refused my family.

And then I got the call from this woman called Christiana Figueres on She said, Look, I've got this thing I've got to do I've got to bring the whole world to common agreement on climate change.

Are you interested in being involved?

So we had 195 countries that had to come with ambitious agreements right to Paris Onda.

We knew that there were a significant number that we're not really getting on board with what they had to dio.

So my role was to find ways to persuade them when diplomatic approaches were unsuccessful.

So I built a network off hundreds or thousands off cos people, religious leaders, business leaders, investors and others on we would utilize this network to help the diplomatic process be more effective on encourage national leaders that this was the moment for leadership.

I couldn't tell anyone I was doing this, so I would sit in the negotiation hall on one of the country's would say something that would put a spanner in the works.

The negotiation.

I would get a nod from Christiano and I'd put my system in tow work, and I'd call somebody who would call someone else who would call the minister.

And then we'd watch the position of that country change in real time and no one knew.

Now you've given away the secret of how to work behind the scenes.

What else can we learn from in terms of preparing the ground for what frankly is going to be, I think unequally difficult cop, especially when we've got apparently leaders of the free world actively starting Thio.

They argue against it, right?

So Paris Hadel, the country's sitting around together.

Everyone had to agree, and then it was gaveled Through is a decision.

There are small things that need to be agreed in Glasgow, but the main thing that needs to happen is each country actually needs to improve their nationally determined plans on, then come to Glasgow with those plans.

So the way the Paris agreement was structured Waas that there was a long term goal to get to net zero by the middle of the century on the country's would come every five years with plans of increasing ambition to get us onto that trajectory, and that's the mechanism, right?

That's the international mechanism.

That was the breakthrough.

That was the Paris agreement.

So this is the first test as to whether that's gonna happen now, one of the reasons why it's more difficult because we have a much more difficult political landscape since then, right?

You know, the idea that countries can come together and do big things together is less trendy than it.

Waas in 2015, the UK government has a massive diplomatic job on.

They could learn a lot from what the French is in.

2015, right?

This is a whole of government, everyone outreach, all ministers, all embassies.

The other thing, I would say, is given the reality of the geopolitics in the national governments, it's really important to focus on everyone else in society.

So it's really important that part of car is businesses, cities, investors, regions toe open the doors of that process to ensure we can go a Sfar as we can.

And the reason why that second bit is so important is because the logic that is at the basis of the Paris Agreement defies, um, the attitude that we had before off you go first and then maybe I will follow, which is exactly what we had before on the Paris agreement.

Really turns that completely on its head because the Paris agreement is not.

It is not a top down in position off what needs to happen in each country, but rather it's very much of a bottom up invitation for every country toe.

Identify what path, what social, political, economic path that country wants to follow in its own view.

Andan his own vision for the future and then to register that under the Paris agreement on.

Ultimately, if we remember the spirit of the Paris Agreement, that should not matter because it's not about who is doing what and let me see, but rather what do I want on?

Most countries have understood that.

Yes, of course, this is about a global need, but more immediately it is about self interest.

It is about cities that are more livable.

It's about public health and is much better, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

The list is long acting on climate change and reducing the intensity of carbon in the economy is not acting against our interest.

If it were, we would not be able to do it.

It is actually an accelerant of our interest on DSO in as much as we can get.

And I think that is where the work of the British government needs to be from here until then, to remind everyone that we are not looking over each other's shoulders.

We're not looking at this as a burden.

Yes, of course, it is a shared responsibility, but beyond that it is an opportunity that most countries should not miss on.

We are just about to flow over the guardrails of what is manageable in society, in the economy and in fact, in our physical infrastructure.

Now, the amazing thing is that before 2020 the technologies that air the solution, for example renewables and all of the other technologies, we really didn't have them at competitive prices.

We had invested in those technologies, but they were not yet successfully ingrained in the system.

Today they are.

Secondly, we did not have the capital accumulation that we have had since 2000 and eight.

We have a capital accumulation in the markets that can really be shifted quite quickly if we decide to do so on.

Thirdly, we were only experimenting with the policies.

So today, for the first time in human history, we have the technologies, the finance and the policy that if we aligned them all together, we can get to 50% emissions by 2030 before 2020.

We could not have done it, but after 2030 is going to be too late.

Our Children conduce nothing about that.

It is about these 10 years.

It is thes 10 years in which we are actually determine the future of humanity and of the planet.

So no pressure, just let's get it done.