All the repeated global discussions on environmental concerns notwithstanding, the extent of damages meted out to the planet is not showing any let up. In this respect, some say these international exercises are of no significance anymore while others say the discussion element is very much needed. • Which view do you support and state why? The world over, parlays on green concerns have experienced greater frequency today than ever. But there is no visible decline in the cases of damages done to the Planet. This fact does not, in any way, undermine the need for more frequent discussions. The initial thing with which I am going to endorse the idea is that periodic discussions may leave great room for the world to take stock of what has happened to the Planet so far. For example, when the pro-planet parties from around the world meet at a place, they can air their concerns and evaluate the present scene and find out who does what for the Planet, both good and bad. The second point is that there is great scope for creating green consciousness among people across the spectrum. For instance, the Climate Summit in Bali, Indonesia, a few years back had invited huge media attention and the whole population got informed of the fact that green concerns are real and on their face. It is not a simple fiat by any means. Besides these, there is yet another argument to advocate the need for international climate discussions. These venues may become instrumental to making member nations go responsible for all the activities they have done, are doing and are going to do in the days to. When the frequency increases, the leaders will think twice before they embark on any anti-planet development exercise. The conclusion is that further discussions on environmental concerns will have greater relevance in the days to come than what they have today. Obviously, the “no significance” element sounds premature to me. 270 words