Hello and welcome to outrage and optimism. I'm Tom Rific Carnac. I'm Christiana Figueres, trying to

continue the conversation when we were so rudely interrupted by the clock. I am Paul Dickinson.

Welcome to Part 2. Welcome to Part 2 of answering your questions about power and politics. Thanks for being here.

So, Christiana, at the end of last week, we asked a question about progressive politics,

which is a brilliant question from Daniel. He used the example of Venezuela, and we started to get

into a bit of a conversation about really how can you manage progressive politics in the era of

social media and short attention spans and to what

degree is populism necessary. But we didn't get into the connected questions. So the first one is

from Dietram, who says, while disappointing, the momentum at state, city and corporate level

in the US remains strong. The real question is whether international frameworks can adapt to engage these

subnational actors more effectively. Climate action has never been a purely federal story.

And actually, there was a connected question from Alexander who asked, how do you think leaders

outside government should respond when these global guardrails start to weaken.

So these questions are obviously about the fragility of multilateralism and where does agency

now sit. So we'd love to hear your answer to these, Christiana. Well, I very much enjoyed listening

to Mark Carney's answer because he gave an absolutely brilliant speech in Dallas that has elicited a lot of excitement.

It seems that every day we're reminded that we live in an era of great power rivalry.

That the rules-based order is fading.

That the strong can do what they can and the weak must suffer what they must.

Honestly, I think the speech really merits the full read or the full listening, because

it's absolutely brilliant.

Summarizing, though, I think Mark Carney in that speech does two things absolutely brilliant. Summarizing, though, I think Mark Carney in that speech does two things absolutely

...