 Rydyn ni'n haf oes, a mi dd fel gwnaeth customers a chaf anghymru, a rwy'n cael ei ffordd fath o'r placol, a challwch a chael gyda ni i fynd i'r adres ar y telio. Rwy'n credu ofyctio'r rhai i gael. Rydyn ni'n cael eu hwn gyda i gael, ond rwy'n credu i'r ffordd i'u rhai, ac rydyn ni'n credu fodd rhai i'u hwn i roi'r yn cael ei ffordd i eistedd yn rhoi gyrdd y moffial, dwi'n gallu gwrth aimsol o wybod, dwi'n gallu'n gwneud i fy nghymru cof yr oedd Cymru, gallwch yn cael ei gwrth eu llai. O bobl gwybod i ei gwneud, dwi'n gallu tynnu, a dwi'n gallu chyflwch eu gwirio o'r rhywbeth rywfau, bydd hynny mewn ei gwybod i'r sylgr yn mwrd, ond roedd hynny i ni'n ddweud ar gyfer y mae'n gwneud. Felly, bydd y gallw'nlineg arall dilleg y maelig, ar wahithau, gallwch chi angen fod yn ei gwneud ddim yn dod i gael, mae'n gwneud yw ddwy'n chweiniol a'r hyn yn cael ei wneud i'i gael y cyfnodol yn ysgrifennu'n fawr, i gael ysgrifennu yn eich cyfnodol yna yn roi. Ond byddwn yn ddweud y sgwrdd yn ysgrifennu yn ysgrifennu, dwi'n gael'r pryd yn eich cyfnodol. Dwi'n ddweud ysgrifennu, fel dyna, mae'n gwneud i arddangos y cyfnodol, i ddim yn ysgrifennu ymlaen, a'i ddweud i ei wneud i gael ysgrifennu. Cyfei fyddai gwybod y maen nhw a nhw yn gwneud eich gydig arnau cwanaeth蹝an i'r asunau. Felly hynny'n gasgwch chi'n gweithio gael eu'r llai ddau, ychydig yn y gallu gwneud eich hangf iddyn nhw eich hwn yn yr ysgrifiann fyddion oedd chi'n gweithio eu ddau. Mae'r amser, nad ydych yn gweithio i gael ei gweithio ei ddau yn gweithio eu gwell oedd yn yr ysgrifiann iddyn nhw a'i gweithio i'r ddau. Swet y gallwn i amser, rydyn ni'n gobeithio'n gwel fel ydych chi, a'n swydd eich bod llwyfer iawn. Felly mae'r gaeloedd, rydyn ni'n gweld i chi. Ychwaneg a'r gweithio maeth gyda siariad gweithio, maeth y maeth cysylltu'r rain byddai'r panfyrdd i'r BBC. Felly ei dderbyn yn gorau yn ei cyfo, sydd eich gweithio, ddim yn gweld i'r cyfwbr. Ond, mae'r gweithio'n gyfrifio i'r bod cyfwyrdd i'r gweithio'r eich cyfu'r tan yr unhau. drwswyl sydd rhan o gwasanaeth y bach i'r hyn o'r sîm. Mae'n ffrannu'n meddwl gyda'y'n meddwl yma. Mae'n meddwl cymaint, eithaf bod chi'n meddwl am ffarae, rwy'n meddwl y gallai hynny efallai'r thymau. Mae'n meddwl cullaeth gan y mae'r ddweud mi a'r adegau, os gallwnys ar hynny oes yn ddweud. Efallai yma oes o'r ddweud mewn meddwl ar ddweud. Mae'n meddwl gofan ar gyfer drwswyl mewn meddwl gofyd a'r adeguaeth i'r maes. Roedd o'n cael eu pethau jubwyr yn ystod o'n cilio'r lleiwyr i'r wneud. A oeddwn i'r cilio'r cyffredigol yn cyfrifiadau'r unrhywbeth yn ystod o'r lleiwyr, yn ystod o'r llyfr, mae'n amlŷn iawn o'r wych yn ei wneud. Mae'n cael ei humun o'r bwysig o'r cyffredigol i'w cyffredigol, oherwydd o'r bwysig o'r llyfr yn ystod o'r cyffredigol, oherwydd o'n cyfrifio'r arddangos, grants that the there are there in the media. Certainly in the traditional media. So, Matt, as I said to you, as you know he is the environment correspondent you will be familiar with him. He covered Copenhagen, I know covered Paris. I remember his stories on the withdrawal, the US withdrawal from Paris. But he has been covering this story for many years and you couldn't ac yn rhoi iawn i'r eistedde y gwrsion yma ar y dyfu'rиче ac yn rhoi'r awg wrthod yma yma ar yr ddysgu adael'r Math. Felly y gallwch yn fawr, i weld i chi eisiau hwnnw i'r hirion, yw Matt Osnauchman yw Tipperary. Yr eich ei gadw am ambrangod a'i gwerthio arferfoedd o'r ysgolodau nifer, yw'r gradtwyr o'u cyfran o'r CC. ac mae'n cyfathio'r llunaf yw'r llunaf gyda'r MIT. Mae'n cyfathio'r llunafwynt, mae'n cyfathio. Mae'n cyfathio'r L.I.G.H.T. Felly, rydyn ni'n fawr, rydyn ni'n byw'n gweithio'r llunaf, ac mae'n ymgymellog ywch chi'n cyfathio'r llunaf peirio ar y teimlo i'r cyfathio'r llunaf cyffredinol i'r reisyn o'r uneddiad yng Nghymru yma yn Toronto, i'r 2018. Mae eich mwy ffordd o'r Gwylodraeth, but that would be to take up too much of the time that we want to give to him to address us. Matt Magrath. Thank you very much and you are a very very warm welcome here and thank you very much Alex for a very kind introduction. I hope this thing is on and I can be heard and I'm trying to make my remote control work here and doesn't seem to want to do that right now, so just bear with me one second and get my slides to work. That's your joke there, covering the climate. That's what I'm here to talk about, reporting on climate change, something I've been doing for quite a number of years. It's a tricky and difficult issue as I'm sure you're all aware. We are often in the limelight I suppose about how we report it and often seems to be as much of an issue as the actual issue itself. The glamorous life of BBC reporter is not something I'm very much familiar with, to be honest with you. I love my job, it's great. er gementbwyddoedd gan y cyfnodau am yr hyn? Yr hyn wedi ddechrau ei gysylltiad a dipynnal. Mae nhw'n meddwl'r hynny yw ar yw'r ysglywedd yr oedau. Mae'r amser ymlaen nhw, na fyddwn ddechrau fel ydw amser, Alex Cabstick, gallwn i'r cyfeirio. Ydw y gallwn wedi'u cyfrinddol gyda'i gymhwylo? Mae'r cyfrinddol â'r cyfrinddol i'r cyfrinddol. Mae'r cyfrinddol dros yw'r cyfrinddol. I work for radio TV online. I work for the website, I report on radio and I do TV as well. But obviously a major part of the way that these have changed in the last number of years is that we now produce what we call digital content phrase, gets stuck in my throat sometimes. And what that means is trying to reach newer, younger, different audiences with the range of knowledge that we have. And so the piece I'm going to show you is kind of falls into that category. It's a short piece we made in Katowice in Poland in December. And it's just kind of appealing to a younger audience. The style is slightly different. It's obviously subtitled. And it just gives you a sense of the kind of the way that things are changing right now. I'm very sorry for this. It's the parallels of technology. There's the widget. This giant tortoise organisation is very stormy. It's made up of 200 countries. And I can't go forward on any particular thing, unkind of change, unless every single one of those agree. And I imagine taking 200 of your friends out for dinner and you can only choose one menu item for everyone. That's a big challenge. It's also very divided in this particular organisation. You've got rich countries, poor countries, and the poor countries say, Well, you guys in the rich, you had oil and coal and gas for 200, 300 years. Now you want all of us to give it up just when we're trying to get our citizens out of poverty. That doesn't seem very fair. How do we really come from a fundamentalist understanding of the nature of climate change? It's not something that's happening in 2050 or 2075 or 2100. It's something that's happening right now. We're seeing impacts in wildfires and flooding in the sea level rise. And we're also seeing heat waves in Europe and other rich areas. And a scientist also said we have 12 years basically to really get the grip of this to cover our emissions of carbon. So can we speed up our response? Well, there's three key things that have to come together to ensure that happens through this UN process. One is about finance. Poor countries need more certainty and more money to help them cope with the impacts of climate change. The second thing is called transparency. Rich countries want everybody on the same page. They want everybody who seems to be doing something. They want to be able to check that everybody is doing what they say they're doing. The third element is what's called greater emissions. That means simply bigger, quicker, deeper carbon costs from the richer countries. If all those elements come together, and I think that this process really can speed up over the next couple of years, if this one fails to do that, I think all our futures will be badly affected. So that's the kind of thing we're kind of doing now. I know that's two minutes to explain the very complex UN process, what's going on in the background to it. And that piece worked really well. It was shared widely on social media. It also went on TV as well. So you can see we're kind of moving towards... I know it's a little bit of dead dancing sometimes. You've got these older geezers trying to do these kind of younger stuff. The way we are trying to see it is that a lot of us have that experience and knowledge going back a long time and we want to try and capture that in a way that appeals and can inform younger audiences. That's what we're trying to do really with that kind of thing. As Alex said, I've done a number of fellowships. I think working in this particular field, it's very complex. There's a lot of data, there's a lot of information. I've been looking up to go to MIT and I'm looking up to go to Stanford and York University and other places. The kind of thing that really helps you to stay informed is to go and speak to scientists in places where you're not reporting, where you can sit down and have a conversation with them and really try and get to grips with what they're saying. Sometimes you're doing all that kind of stuff, you're travelling around the world and you're going to get carried away with yourself. As Alex also said, I'm from February. This is my father. He's a beef farmer down there. You can see his nice monkey trousers. He's the kind of guy who would bring me back down to Earth with a bang very quickly. He said, put on a few pounds there, I see. The camera never lies. That kind of thing. Whenever I need to feel, they get back to my roots. He's the man who would do it. Arden has also been, I think, a place where I've learned some key lessons in journalism. One of those I learned a good number of years ago involved Albert Reynolds, the great former Prime Minister and T-shirt of this country. I was sent here in the late 1990s to cover one of the general elections and Albert had been out of power for a couple of years. I went to interview him down in Longford. It took a radio car with me down from Belfast. I went to interview him live down there in Longford. I drove down to Longford, got stuck on the roads, running late, all that kind of stuff. Ran into the Longford Arms Hotel, there's Mr Reynolds here, Mr Reynolds here. Mr Reynolds put his hand off, come Mr Reynolds, come out, come out to the radio car. I got my satellite dish up calling London. Come on, come on, come on, pick it up, pick it up. I said I've got Albert Reynolds here to do the interview, the live interview on the one o'clock news. And then I had a little tap on my shoulder and says, I think you're looking for me brother. I was Jim Reynolds, Albert Reynolds's older brother who loved nothing more than actually making a fool of a young BBC reporter. He looks like he might, I don't have time to check, I'll just stick him on. That's the way mistakes are made. So that was a good listen I learned here. I'm very keen just to touch on the way that we do find reporting and how the history of this house come about. I found this piece in the New York Times from 1956, written by a man with a wonderful name of Walden Mark Heimfort. And it's a really excellent piece of science. He was born in 1877. He died about a month after this article was written in 1956. And it puts forward this idea, this mad theory that carbon dioxide could account for climactic change. He reports on this guy who said that basically to him the carbon dioxide theory stands up. Though it may take another century of observation and measurement of temperatures to confirm it. Very, very interesting that he would have this insight I guess back in 1956. And of course, what happens, nothing has resolved. Here in Ireland, Irish Times, 1986. Michael Viney's piece in the Irish Times. And I love his opening paragraph, which goes, predicts that the greenhouse effect caused by the bill of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will have pushed up mean global temperatures by one degree Celsius from 1850 to the year 2000 and that the earth can expect an additional warming a few degrees over the next century. I mean, you could write that today. It was prescient and brilliant. What I also like about this story is the headline, for A Little Ice Age. And Michael Viney's last sentence in this piece says, contacted biologist Dr Edward Fahey and he doesn't believe the greenhouse theory and we're heading for a little ice age. And so we get into this situation straight away from the earliest reporting of these stories where we get sub editors and editors conflicting with the body of the actual evidence. So the story isn't about heading for a little ice age, it's about the fact that the world is warming. And it kind of sets the scene for what's happened over the last 20 years or so or we have editors who are unsure about the science of the story wanting to be, to cover all bases by actually having climate and virus, climate skeptics, people with critical voices giving them equal weight with scientists who are saying there's an issue. And this is across all media. It's across, you know, the BBC has certainly seen that. Newspapers have seen it. It's been widespread in the world. And in the BBC there were a number of complaints at various times taken about the appearance of Nigel Lawson on radio programmes when he would appear with a scientist. And, you know, programme producers getting criticised for basically equating an economist essentially with a scientist. And, you know, that practice ultimately led to a couple of inquiries and internal inquiries in the BBC. And, you know, we moved on to a kind of a position now where we don't have to do that anymore. There's the climate sceptical voice. We don't have to represent the climate sceptical voice with every piece we do about climate change. It's been widespread as well in the world. And it's become to the situation now where the BBC is moving on to do even more and using across the BBC's biggest asset, David Attenborough, to do a programme about climate change which is going to be on in the next couple of months. He's going to present this landmark climate change and it's going to be called Climate Change The Facts. And it's not about, oh, is climate change real or anything. It'll be about what scientists say is happening and what can be done about it. So these to me represent kind of big changes in the way that the world and the BBC has moved on in particular. And I think, you know, it's interesting to see that thing with David Attenborough happening at a time when the world has changed so much. And in 2018 we may look back at it and say, this was the time that everything really changed when it comes to climate change and the environment. We have record temperatures in Ireland and the UK and scientists looked at those in attribution studies and said actually, you know, these temperatures we had last year, they were made much more likely by the fact that there's warming in the world. We also had this remarkable Greta Thunberg from Sweden and the outpouring of young people everywhere, cutting through the crap if you like and just going straight, what are you guys doing to our planet? And this movement spreads so quickly and is gaining such traction in so many parts of the world. And as well as that last year we also had the report that woke up the world which was the report from the IPCC Global Warming 1.5 degrees which was released in Korea last October. We were very uncertain about this report before it came out because we had to commit people to go there and report on it and it cost money and all that sort of thing. Was it going to have the impact? Was this the one that we should be jumping up and down about? And we came to the view that it was. And we got very lucky in a sense because there was a kind of a weekend window of no news in the world from Donald Trump wasn't tweeting and there was nothing happening with Brexit. And this story kind of grew and stuck and stayed current for 24 hours. And I wrote a story on it. And this story was read by 4 million people. It was shared on social media 775,000 times. That's one of the most shared stories we've had in the last two or three years. And the interesting thing from our perspective was the amount of time people were spending on reading this story. They were not just casually quickly flicking out it. They were going through it. They were looking at it. They were reading it. They were coming back to it. And so we could see from that kind of thing that it came as a surprise to us that there was such an appetite for this type of material. So what I'm saying is that in the way that we've covered the story now climate change is emerging. It's coming top-of-the-news agenda pretty much all the time now. And the question of these planetary issues is coming up as well. You'll have all seen the reports from Mozambique last week about Cyclone Idai. I just want to play a little bit of video. Faril Keen, obviously, is our Africa editor. He went out there and he was covering out. But we got into the climate question very, very quickly. And you can just have a little bit of an idea about how we covered and how we're getting to that question. You know? He didn't want to do that. Sorry about that. I'll have to go back and see if that works now. Good evening. It's feared hundreds of thousands of people are homeless after what's thought to be one of the worst natural disasters to hit Africa. Cyclone Idai struck the coast of East Africa four days ago swamping Mozambique's Zimbabwe and Malawi. The United Nations says that the world has yet to realise the full scale of the massive disaster. The storm made landfall on the coast of Mozambique bringing 100 mile per hour winds and floodwaters that were swept inland. No one knows how many people may have died. The Red Cross says urgent aid is needed. In a moment, Shingai and Yoko reports from Zimbabwe. But first, our Africa editor, Faril Keen, is in the port city of Barra in Mozambique, which has been flattened. Whatever once lay here has been overwhelmed. Now the flooded land is an expanse of questions. What has become of those who lived here? Only a silence below. And very occasional moments of reprieve. These survivors landing at Barra airport rescue some high ground near their submerged village. Driving into the city we saw how nature's full, awesome force had ripped through homes and lives. 90% of this city has suffered destruction. And you see it in the roads and in faces. Some food aid is now being distributed. But the relief effort is still nowhere near what's needed. Everything the storm could destroy, it did. And there is an ominous sense that the tragedy we have seen so far foreshadows much worse to come. Faril Keen, BBC News and Barra. Mae Sansa Oedys Davieshwyr yn join me now such terrible destruction over such large parts of Africa. Is climate change to blame? It's impossible to answer that directly tonight, but I know that scientists have started working on that and will give us an answer in the next few weeks, I think. But there are two ways in which climate change may have made the disaster worse. One is that we're seeing the level of the sea rise bit by bit, year by year, as the ocean's born, and as the ice sheets start to melt. And that means that when you get the big waves of a storm surge, they're better able to reach further inland and cause more destruction. And at the same time, as you're getting global warming, warmer air can hold more moisture, which means that when you get rainstorms, the rain falls much more intensely. We've seen that in Mozambique in this disaster, adding to the flooding in a very vulnerable country. The thing about this is that when we've done reports of that disaster before, there's normally maybe three or four days go by before we ask the question of whether it's time to change to blame here. And here we are, we're asking that question very early on. And this is a very difficult, this little cyclone. It isn't like a simple linear relationship in terms of what's going on here. The science behind it is actually very complicated. So I think it's interesting that we're seeing this kind of change happening in the way that we're broadcasting news right now and going to these stories very quickly. So I just want to touch on some of the things that are coming up that I think are kind of important in the next while and I think will be on top of our agenda going forward and how they will feed into what we're doing. And I think a number of them are kind of obvious. So the conference of the parties, this climate, big climate conference happens every year. That's where the Paris Agreement is signed in Paris. We just had one in the whole of the last year of the catavita. These things are really becoming kind of a focal point forward, a discussion about climate around the world. More and more scientists are going to the Cops to present evidence there, reports are being released there. The number of young people that were at the Cops last year was just incredible. I've been to most of them over the last ten years. This was incredible. It's coming to this really big forum for discussion of all sorts. And it will be interesting next year because in 2019 we're seeing the Cops in Chile, but next year in 2020 the UK is very keen to host it. Italy wants to host it as well. We're going to be in one of those countries and it'll be a big moment in time as to whether countries will take on greater commitments and will put their hands up and say we will do more and how much more they will do. And it'll be a time of kind of reckoning in some respects and we'll have clearer science about where we're up to and how much more time we've got. So I think the rise in the Cops will certainly be something that's going to happen. Also the IPCC, we had the IPCC come out last year with the 1.5 report. This year there are two reports coming out. One on the impact of climate change on food production and one on the impact on the oceans. And these are both going to be pretty significant reports as well and I think they'll keep that agenda up there very, very high. And the IPCC in 2021 is going to produce its next assessment report, which is its overall assessment of the climate following on from 2007, 2013, 2021. And that will be a key moment. They'll have better models. They'll be able to give greater levels of certainty and I think that will be a very, very big moment as well. Also this year we're seeing the intergovernmental panel on biodiversity and environmental services. They're producing a big report on nature basically. What's the state of nature? Where are we up to? It's their first big report since 2005 on this. I think this would be very, very important in understanding not just about climate change but how we're impacting the planet generally in terms of species. And I think also we're facing into very, very tough decisions for governments everywhere. Particularly governments like Ireland and the UK as well. We've had the easy bits. We've seen the easy stuff on climate change. Now we're into the hard bits, which are transportation and agriculture. They're the really difficult bits and there's no easy solutions to those. So governments have a lot of thinking to do about where they go with this. I do feel that kind of multiple factors are coming together. We're seeing this kind of rise of student aggression, student anger. I love the sign here, keep the earth clean. It's not yourness. No broadcaster ever wants to mention never to be mentioned again. But we're seeing what's happened with plastics. Look how the world has changed in terms of how we conceive of and treat plastics in five years or so. Even in the last two years we've gone from a world where we know plastics is an issue where somebody's doing something about it. Becoming right there in our faces is a real, real issue. We're seeing something similar happening now with clothing questions of fast fashion. Where are we going to with that? There's a whole range of them. Food production. You know, not just whether we should make subsidising farmers to grow to make more milk or milk powder or whatever it is, whether or not we should be using palm oil and the products that are making population growth and migration. All these questions are coming up in the extraction industries. There's almost like a rising sense that can we continue to extract more materials from the world to do something with it and should that now be much higher up the agenda. This question is equity and fairness. I think that some respects have become intermingled together. I think it is something that we're seeing basically some politicians are recognising this as an opportunity and they're both the left and the right, I think. So in the United States you've got Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. I mean, it's bizarre to think that just a year ago she was working in a restaurant as a bartender. Now she's interrogating politicians in Congress and putting them under amazing pressure and getting, I mean, she's very impressive as a politician in that respect. But the policy she's advocating, the Green New Deal, if anybody in the United States had said a couple of years ago, I've got a plan I want the United States to decarbonise in 10 years. They didn't kind of laugh out of the room. Now you've got almost all the Democratic potential contenders for president in 2020 saying we want to back the Green New Deal or we want to take major elements of that. There's a major shift in mindset going on there. The other politician for whom there's a big significant, I don't know if he's still the Secretary of State for an environment that might have changed in the last number of while, Michael Gove, who's been very energetic in that role and has recognised for the Conservative party going forward past Brexit, that having some sort of green agenda is a real way of tapping into those middle class voters that they want. So he's recognised, Alexander Craton-Cortez is also, some people are recognising it as that. So I feel personally that to me the big dominant new story of the future is this question of our planet, the future of our one and only planet is the new story that we all I feel is really emerging as our major new story. And I think it's important in that and I'm going to leave you with kind of a final thought on why journalism is important in that because it's not just saying oh gosh it's all terrible and it's really bad and we're all going to die and all the rest. It is about finding solutions, but it's also about telling some truths that are not necessarily that palatable. One of the examples I like to use I can get it to work is George W. Bush and his role in the Paris Climate Agreement. And it's hard to maybe reconcile that with the way things have gone, but you know, the way that the Paris Agreement works, the key element of it, the bottom-up as opposed to top-down approach was pioneered by Bush and his guys back in 2007. Now they didn't necessarily want to make this happen but that idea came from them because it did. That's my plug for journalism that actually has a role to play in telling some important truths. So as I said, I'm very grateful to have had the opportunity to speak to you guys. I'm happy to take questions. I'll do my best to answer them. Thank you very much indeed.