| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
10.19 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. James Clappison): It is important that timber extraction should be carried out lawfully, with conservation safeguards and full regard to the interests of the people living in the forest. Before I come to the Government's policies on that, I shall deal briefly with the remarks made by the hon. Member for Sunderland, North (Mr. Etherington) about the agreements entered into by the National Hardwood Association.
To supplement Brazilian Government controls over timber extraction and export, the NHA signed an agreement with the exporters' association of the region from which most of the UK's imports of Brazilian mahogany originate. Checks and documentation aim to provide NHA members with assurances that the timber that they buy has been logged in accordance with Brazilian laws. The NHA has a formal procedure to deal with complaints about alleged illegal activities. I understand that it is examining several such allegations. In addition, I understand that an NHA delegation is in Brazil for talks with its Government and exporters about the mahogany trade. It is visiting logging areas and will report on its findings.
The UK timber trade is right to take allegations of illegal activity seriously, but the primary responsibility for enforcing Brazilian national legislation must lie with the Brazilian Government. Unilateral action by the United Kingdom outside the framework of international agreements would be damaging to the co-operation on which those agreements depend and to the advancement of global measures to promote environmental action.
There is already an agreed framework for regulating international trade in wild plants and animals: CITES, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, which has been ratified by more than 130 countries, including the United Kingdom and Brazil. Under CITES, commercial trade in more than 800 species is banned and a further 25,000 commercially traded species are subject to checks and licensing procedures. As the hon. Gentleman said, application of the controls requires the consent of two thirds of the CITES parties.
At the last conference in 1994, a proposal to regulate, but not ban, trade in Brazilian mahogany was defeated. The United Kingdom supported the proposal on the basis of the scientific evidence but the conference took a different view. There was extensive discussion and various options were examined by a working group that met over two days. Finally, the conference decided that CITES should not intervene in the mahogany trade.
It would be wrong to accept only those conference decisions that we fully support and ignore the rest. Stricter import measures by EU member states normally apply only to species that a CITES conference has already agreed to add to the convention. That is not so in this case. International agreements will not work without the support of the countries that sign up to them. A European Community ban on imports of Brazilian mahogany after a conference decision to reject less severe measures would dangerously strain a convention that recognises that major decisions should reflect the will of the parties. That would be a setback for conservation, not an advance.
As far as possible, we must work within CITES. The last conference endorsed a United Kingdom initiative to establish a international working group to examine CITES-related timber issues. The group made good progress at its last meeting in London at the end of last year and will meet again in September before reporting to the next CITES conference 11 months from now. That conference may also have before it fresh proposals to add Brazilian mahogany to CITES. If so, we will decide our position after reviewing the evidence, including any factors that may have changed. In the meantime, a more limited CITES monitoring scheme for Brazilian mahogany came into effect November last year. We hope that that will yield useful additional data in due course.
More direct Government involvement with forest management in Brazil is being pursued following the signing of a memorandum of understanding on environmental co-operation with the Brazilian Government. Under this accord, the Overseas Development Administration has funded £19 million-worth of projects, mainly on forestry. The aim is to promote sustainable forest management and strengthen environmental institutions.
We also aim to advance wider international discussion on improving forest management. At the earth summit in Rio in 1992, the United Kingdom played a leading role in ensuring the agreement of a statement of principles on the sustainable management of the world's forests. That was the first international consensus on the need to conserve the world's forests.
European countries followed up Rio with a commitment to the Helsinki guidelines for sustainable forest management. Thirty eight European countries are now committed to implementation of those guidelines. In 1994, we published "Sustainable Forestry: The UK Programme", which details United Kingdom action to
pursue sustainable forest management at home, and promote the conservation and sustainable development of all the world's forests.
The United Kingdom has also played a major role in establishing the United Nations intergovernmental panel on forests, which will report to the Commission on Sustainable Development in 1997 with specific proposals to follow up the principles agreed at Rio. We hope that the panel will produce agreement on criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management on the basis of national plans, and devise a mechanism for periodic international review of the forestry sector.
Improving the management of the world's forests requires international co-operation rather than confrontation. Of course we must do our best to ensure that the timber that we import, from whichever country, has been harvested legally. I believe that the United Kingdom timber trade is acting responsibly through its discussions with the Brazilian authorities, through the formal agreement it has signed with exporting companies, and by its willingness to investigate complaints about alleged wrongdoings.
One has to ask whether driving exports of mahogany away from the United Kingdom to other places where importers might take their responsibilities less seriously would best serve the interests of conservation. I doubt that it would, and I do not favour a unilateral ban on imports of Brazilian mahogany into the United Kingdom or the European Community as a whole.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow):
I had the good fortune to go to Altamira on the Xingu river in 1989, where the Kayapo put forward a number of proposals for the safeguarding of their forest. I listened carefully to what the Minister said and I should like to put three points to him.
First, what recommendations made at the intergovernmental conference are being pursued for 1997?
Secondly, on the issue of the Kayapo, which my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland, North (Mr. Etherington) raised, it has been reported in the press that Pai-Kan and others have brought various complaints about the infringement of their lands to the notice of the Brazilian Government. Has that been discussed with the Brazilian Government? I took Pai-Kan to see Mr. Speaker Weatherill on a previous occasion. He was my guest in the House, as he had been Ghillean Prance's guest at Kew.
The third point is about long-term financial help to the Brazilian Government. Many Brazilians argue that, if the Amazonian rain forest is really the lung of the world, the world has certain responsibilities in helping us keep it. I wonder whether the Minister, in the short time that he has, will comment on what I hope were those constructive points.
Mr. Clappison:
I will deal with the three points in the order in which the hon. Gentleman raised them. On the point about our international commitments and the report back to the relevant international conventions, I think that I made it clear that we are approaching this by upholding the principle of sustainable management of forests and encouraging each country to draw up national plans for sustainable management. As I am sure the hon. Gentleman, with his interest in the subject, well knows, we played a leading part in the Rio convention and in the important commitments that were made on forestry there.
The hon. Gentleman's second point about the gentleman and the specific area related to detailed matters, which I shall look into in the light of his comments.
The hon. Gentleman's third point was interesting. As I said in my speech, the Overseas Development Administration has entered into a memorandum of
understanding with the Brazilian Government for £19 million worth of sustainable projects in Brazil. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will agree that that is a fairly substantial amount to commit to an important project.
Question put and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at twenty-nine minutes past Ten o'clock.
| Index | Home Page |