Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Consultation not a worry, says Jairam Ramesh

"Negotiations are a continuous process. The Cabinet's mandate is based on certain assessment . As it changes, we have to nuance our position . I

would describe 'consultation and analysis' as nuancing," Mr Ramesh said.

The Copenhagen Accord says there can be "international consultations and analysis" of the national communications submitted by countries. Prior to the Copenhagen conference, it may be recalled that Mr Ramesh had informed Parliament that the national communication detailing India's domestic unsupported action would be "for information only" .

Till Copenhagen, India had steadfastly maintained that only those efforts to deal with climate change that are supported by international finance and technology would be open for international monitor-ing , review and verification. On domestic unsupported efforts, the position has been that there would be no international MRV, only domestic monitoring and verification that would be done by Parliament. This position was reworked to include detailed national communication once in two years to the UNFCCC giving information on all steps, including unsupported efforts, taken to deal with climate change.

Suggesting that safeguards to this concession had been built into the accord, the minister referred to the "national sover-eignty corollary" . The four BASIC countries had arrived at the formulation that said "international consultations and analysis will clearly define guidelines that will respect national sovereignty" . These guidelines would be decided by all 194 countries under the UNFCCC. "This formu-lation was accepted by the US," Mr Ramesh said, adding that such a formula-tion is something the US is not really comfortable with.

The minister claimed that India need not fear "consultation" , as it is not a new word in international diplomacy. Mr Ramesh drew parallels with Article 4 of the Inter-national Monetary Fund, under which the IMF and government hold annual consul-tations , and those held under the WTO. "No sovereignty has been eroded," Mr Ramesh said. Unlike with nuclear plants, the information on emissions is in the public domain.

On the issue of peaking, Mr Ramesh said India has categorically said it would not accept a peaking year. The Copenhagen Accord doesn't state a peaking year, though it does mention the concept of peaking. According to the minister, keep-ing a peaking year out of the accord was "a major accomplishment" for India. Mr Ramesh said the accord mentions a longer time-frame for developing countries, this was said in the context of the fact that "the first and overriding priority would be given to poverty eradication and livelihood security" .

The minister went on to say this wasn't new language and that it was there in the L'Aquila declaration . "this is a language repeated from the L'Aquila declaration... the concept of peaking, when the Prime Minister made his commitment two years ago. India's per capita emission will never exceed the per capita emission of the developed world. We are implicitly accepting peaking. What we are saying is we will peak once you peak. We are not giving a specific year for peaking. What we are saying is if you reach at a certain level of average per capita emission, we will en-sure that we will never exceed that per capita emission. That is an implicit peaking . What we have not done in this document is to mention a specific year for peaking" .

The other contentious issue before Parliament related to the Kyoto Protocol. The government insisted that the Copenhagen Accord did not herald the demise of the Kyoto Protocol. "It accepts that the negotiations on the Kyoto Protocol will continue in 2010." However, Mr Ramesh was forced to concede that an "alternative alignment" had been provided in the accord . He accepted that there were "attempts to thwart the Kyoto Protocol".
News From: http://www.Time2timeNews.com

No comments:

 
eXTReMe Tracker