The media always knows there’s something going on when they start getting calls from the British consulate. The best voicemail ever left has been diligently saved and makes the rounds on slow days when we’re looking for a good laugh. A clipped British voice says, “Please call me immediately. I can tell you nothing.”

Through experience, the more they can’t tell you, the bigger the personage, so it was a pleasant surprise when shortly thereafter last week’s round of phone calls, Tony Blair jetted into San Francisco and then made his way down the California coast. He wound up with a real splash, signing a UK-California global warming pact with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger – the first-ever agreement between a single American state and the entire nation of Britain.

No doubt Mississippi is right now picking out its own nation-state with which to align – and boy, I’d love to see their short list.

All kidding aside, when you line up California with the UK, it’s quite a sight. Britain is number four on the list of world economies, and Blair himself may well have noticed that California – taken separately – is ranked fifth. Comparing landmass, population, agriculture, manufacturing and the rest, by any measure not overtly political, they operate in comparable spheres. Then there is their cultural influence to consider. What British history, finance and colonization do not touch on a worldwide basis, Hollywood and its music industry do.

After I read the headlines, it was time to look more closely at the pact itself. After all, it could just be boilerplate, akin to “We sure don’t like global warming” or a toothless set-up for political gain, but a single glance reveals that cynics must look elsewhere.

Even before this, California had committed to reducing carbon emissions to 1990 levels, far ahead of federal requirements and in step with the most stringent in the US. With this pact, it goes even further, creating real economic value for companies that perform far below emission standards, supporting mutual scientific and economic research, and developing greener technology.

These points are all aimed at action, and both Britain and California have the players and the resources to make it happen.

Still, it’s a bit disconcerting seeing photographs of Schwarzenegger and Blair, forehead to forehead, smiling like two smitten teenagers. And there’s that nagging business about the Constitution forbidding states from entering into agreements with foreign countries without the consent of Congress.

Finally, we can’t ignore the potential for striking political gold. The Republican “Governator” is coming up for re-election in a state which strongly feels that a better environment is one of its highest priorities, while the Bush Administration has chosen to eschew the Kyoto Treaty. No doubt Tony Blair has his own political agenda, as well.

Regardless, the pact encourages several key elements that must occur if we are to see change: scientific research, improved technology, the siren song of economic rewards, and explicit transparency in measuring and reporting the emissions themselves.

In the end, does it matter what political hay gets made? I think not.

In the end what matters is that we somehow recover from our earlier naiveté, from the idea that we can build and use technology – like automobiles or coal-burning power plants – and not pay the price. In the end what matters is that we figure out how to leave a zero footprint upon the Earth, a planet which will change with or without us. And while global warming to some degree is a natural cycle of planet Earth, we humans – and our technologies – will no longer be fueling it.

I'm Moira Gunn. This is Five Minutes.