New Delhi, March 20 (IANS) Shyam Saran, who was the prime minister’s special envoy on climate change, Saturday declined to speak on the controversial subject of his resignation, quipping that the “climate was just right” for him to leave.
Saran left office March 14, having announced his resignation last month allegedly over his differences with Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh on India’s climate change stand in Copenhagen, which he felt was “weak” and “didn’t get much action”.

“The climate was just right for me to leave,” he quipped in reply to a question as to why he demitted office, after speaking at the Asian Corporate Conference here organised by the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII).

Saran, a former foreign secretary, has repeatedly refused to entertain questions on whether there were other reasons for his decision to quit.

Saran and Ramesh are known to have differing recommendations for India’s negotiating stance at formal and informal negotiations at international forums. Saran opposed the decision to announce a reduction of 20-25 percent in carbon emissions intensity as per 2005 emission levels by 2020 before the Copenhagen Summit last December, government sources said.

He felt this was an ace that India should keep up its sleeve at the negotiating high table. But Ramesh reportedly worked out an agreement with the other BASIC countries (India, China, Brazil and South Africa) that they would make the announcement and use this to pressure the rich countries to make significant cuts, the sources said.

“Review and verification doesn’t add up to international compliance so it is a very weak regime which is being proposed to replace something that is multilateral, which has international obligations and compliance,” Saran stressed at the conference.

He added: “As far as the outcome (from Copenhagen) is concerned, it has been postponed. I hope that by the time we go to Mexico, we would have some agreement. But then there is also the Copenhagen accord which was negotiated amongst a group of heads of state as a political declaration. This has no legal basis.”