Appendix
1.The Government welcomes the Second Report of the
Environmental Audit Committee and congratulates the Committee
for addressing the key issues pertinent to our commitment to tackling
illegal logging and improving the management of forests throughout
the world. The Government is grateful to the Committee for recognising
its international leadership on both the EU Forest Law Enforcement
Governance and Trade (FLEGT) process and timber procurement.
2. The Government is aware that it must not rest
on its laurels if momentum is to be maintained and is determined
to build on its achievements. The report makes a valuable contribution
to this work by further raising awareness of the importance of
the subject and recommending ways forward.
3. In focussing attention on sustainable timber the
Government recognises that timber and wood products have a generally
favourable environmental profile and is concerned that the special
care employed to ensure they are acquired in a responsible manner
should not put timber at a disadvantage in comparison with alternative
materials.
4. The Government's responses to the Committee's
conclusions and recommendations are set out below. The EAC's recommendations
are marked in bold; EAC paragraph numbers refer to the body of
the report rather than its conclusions and recommendations.
Recommendation 1. A significant part of the timber
trade involves a world market in what are effectively illegal
and stolen goods, worth up to $15 billion a year, for which the
EU (including the UK), the US and Japan are the main markets.
The impacts of this illegal trade on valuable ecosystems, the
world's poor, the economies of developing countries and climate
change mean there is a moral imperative to address this problem
in every way possible.
5. The Government agrees that action must be taken
to tackle illegal logging and its associated trade and that action
by the main timber consuming countries, including the EU, Japan
and the US is vital. To support this, the UK Government has taken
action to tackle its own consumption of timber that could be from
illegal sources through the UK Government's Timber Procurement
Policy and used its 2005 Presidencies of the G8 and EU to promote
action by other timber consuming countries.
Recommendation 2. For natural and ancient forests
to survive and function properly in providing livelihoods and
protecting the planet's climate and species, the final goal must
be not just a legal timber trade but also a sustainable timber
trade. In the long term, anything else would have to be regarded
as a failure.
6. The Government agrees with the Committee that
for natural and ancient forests to survive and function properly
the overall aim is sustainable forest management. Tackling illegality,
and improving forest governance is but one, yet essential step
towards that. The need to move towards sustainability is explicitly
recognised in the FLEGT Regulation.
Recommendation 3. Any measures put in place to
tackle illegal logging in the EU must be considered in the context
of China and India as alternative, and very hungry, markets where
there are few if any existing controls on the sources of timber
entering the country and very little prospect of this changing
for the better in the near future.
7. The Government is aware of the increasing demand
for imported natural resources, including timber from China and
India. Government has signed agreements for Sustainable Development
Dialogues with both these countries in November and October 2005
respectively. These will consider natural resource issues and
place issues of sustainability as a core principle in bilateral
relations and look to address issues of common concern.
8. The UK Government was particularly pleased that
the Eighth EU-China Summit, held in Beijing on the 5 September
2005 agreed that the EU and China would work together to tackle
the problem of illegal logging in the Asian region. Government
is now working with the European Commission and other Member States
to develop a plan for following this up with the Chinese Government.
9. The UK is also engaged with China through two
regional Forest Law Enforcement and Governance (FLEG) processes
- the East Asia Pacific FLEG and the Europe North Asia FLEG -
and is directly supporting joint research in analysing trends
in China's timber production and consumption. This research has
helped build confidence in co-operation and demonstrated to the
Chinese Government the likely impacts of uncontrolled timber imports
on neighbouring countries.
Recommendation 4. Illegal timber is currently
a fact of life within the UK timber trade. It is therefore virtually
impossible for even those companies that are attempting to eliminate
illegal timber from their chain of supply to guarantee that they
have done so.
10. The Government understands that illegal logging
is a problem for the UK timber trade and this is one of the reasons
that Government has worked within the EU over the last three years
to help introduce the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade
Action Plan.
Recommendation 5. By allowing its members to use
the Code of Conduct in promotional material, without thorough
and transparent enforcement, the Timber Trade Federation is in
danger of misleading customers as to the legality and sustainability
of the industry it represents.
Recommendation 6. Whist the establishment of the
Responsible Purchasing Policy by TTF is encouraging; the low uptake
at its launch is definitely not. It also raises the question as
to why it was needed given that all its members are supposedly
already complying with the Code of Conduct and therefore sourcing
their timber and timber products from legal and well managed forests.
11. The Government considers it very important that
the timber trade is able to respond effectively to its demand
for legal and sustainable timber. The Government is pleased that
the Timber Trade Federation is encouraging its members to progressively
increase their capacity to meet Government requirements. The Government
hopes that the TTF's Responsible Purchasing Policy will become
binding on all its members so that both public and private consumers
can have full confidence in the provenance of timber and wood
products that TTF's members supply.
Recommendation 7. Progressive timber companies
struggle to ensure that they have legal supplies of timber. For
those UK companies that are less committed to ensure legality
and a reliable chain of custody, the only real drivers for improvement
will be the need to comply with legislation and a very real threat
of prosecution.
12. Under the FLEGT Action Plan, Chatham House has
undertaken a study of legislative options to tackle illegal timber
that enters the UK market. There may be some prospects for action
under existing legislation, such as the Proceeds of Crime Act
(2002) but, with both existing and potential new legislation,
continuity of evidence from the original illegal act in a producing
country to the UK market is recognised as a significant obstacle.
Further work to examine opportunities in this area is under way.
Recommendation 8. In our view, FSC is ideally
positioned to expand its role and work to raise awareness of sustainable
timber and related issues, if increased resources were made available
to it.
13. The Government recognises the valuable role played
by forest certification schemes, including that of FSC, in providing
tools to assess the quality of forest management and for customer
choice in purchasing timber products. As market mechanisms, these
schemes should be funded from the producer-customer supply chain
and Government's contribution to their operation is as a customer
via payment for certified products under its procurement policy.
Recommendation 9. The conclusion of most witnesses
was that, however desirable, it is unlikely that a multilateral
agreement will be reached within the short to medium term and
other measures are needed to reduce illegal logging and improve
sustainability. It is with regret that we agree, despite the fact
that we see a binding multilateral agreement as the most effective
way of improving the management of forests worldwide.
14. The Government agrees that a multilateral approach,
in the long-term, would be the best way to tackle illegal logging
and provide the most effective way of improving the management
of forests worldwide. However, as progress at the Sixth Session
of the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) - the international
body for forests - held from 13-24 February 2006 has shown, there
is currently no international consensus on the need for a legally
binding agreement for all types of forests. UNFF will next meet
in 2007 to conclude and adopt a non-legally binding instrument
and to adopt a multi-year programme of work. The mandate of the
UNFF has been renewed until 2015 when a review will see the full
range of options for the future considered, including a legally
binding instrument, strengthening the current arrangement, and
continuation of the current arrangement.
15. The Government hopes by working with producing
and other major consuming countries this consensus can be encouraged.
With the European Commission and other Member States, the UK is
seeking to do this through FLEGT Partnership Agreements, with
their innovative approach of balancing bilateral trade measures
and development assistance for improving forest governance. Government
will continue to work with other consuming countries to explore
similar arrangements.
Recommendation 10. We are very keen to hear from
the Government how the G8 agenda on timber is being taken forward,
together with any positive outcomes from the recent ENA FLEG meeting
held in November 2005.
16. At the UK hosted G8 Environment and Development
Ministerial held in Derbyshire on 17-18 March 2005, Ministers
committed themselves to requesting our experts to meet in 2006,
to review progress towards the commitments we have made, to share
lessons on actions to tackle illegal logging, and to make their
findings available. The outcome was endorsed by Heads of State
and Government at the Gleneagles Summit in July 2005.
17. This and the other commitments made on illegal
logging are being taken forward. In December 2005, towards the
end of the UK's Presidency of the G8, the UK Government chaired
a planning meeting for this Forest Experts meeting with G8 counterparts.
At this meeting Russia (who hold the G8 Presidency in 2006) indicated
that they were intending to host the Planning Meeting. The UK
will continue to support Russia in the planning for this process.
Russia has yet to confirm the arrangements. Government will provide
information to the Committee about this process when it becomes
available.
18. The Government is also working to fulfil the
commitments it made at the G8 Environment and Development Ministerial.
Delivery on these to date has included ensuring that the FLEGT
Regulation and negotiating directives were adopted during the
UK's Presidency of the European Union, widening access to CPET
to the wider public sector and working to share knowledge on timber
procurement with the G8 and other countries. The Government is
also working towards agreeing actions with 25 major timber industry
representatives from across Europe and Africa to improve transparency,
production and the procurement of legal and sustainable timber.
A full review of progress towards these commitments will be made
for the Forests Experts meeting.
19. At the ENA FLEG Ministerial Conference, 21-25
November 2005, 43 countries from Europe and North Asia made commitments
to tackle illegal logging, associated trade and corruption. This
is significant internationally towards controlling illegal logging
as it engages China and Japan, both of which are heavily dependent
on Russian exports, to an extent that other regional policy processes
have not done. This also sends a clear message to tropical developing
countries that a temperate industrialised country has problems
too and is willing to acknowledge and tackle them.
Recommendation 11. Progress towards implementing
measures on illegal logging under the FLEGT Action Plan during
the last six months has been disappointingly slow. It would be
useful for us to receive a detailed report from DEFRA on what
progress has been made during the UK Presidency and what discussions
there have been with Austria to ensure that, whatever momentum
there is, is carried forward during the first six months of 2006,
when it takes over the EU Presidency.
20. In July 2005, the UK took over the six month
Presidency of the European Union, including the work in the Plan
of Action of Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade. Government
set itself four objectives for that period, to:
ensure adoption by the EU Council of Ministers
of the draft FLEGT Regulation;
reach Political Agreement on the draft negotiating
directives to allow the Commission and Member States to open negotiations
on Partnership Agreements;
make progress on developing these Partnership
Agreements; and
support the Commission in preparation of a
report on 'additional options', including a Stakeholder seminar
in Brussels.
21. The Government delivered the first three of these
objectives. The draft Regulation was adopted by Agriculture and
Fisheries Ministers on 21 December 2005 and unanimous political
agreement was achieved on the draft negotiating directives at
Agriculture and Fisheries Ministers on 24 October 2005.
22. Together with the Commission and other Member
States, progress was also made on preliminary discussions with
a number of potential partner countries during the second half
of 2005. The UK has taken a lead role in this regard with Ghana,
where discussions are now well advanced, and has provided practical
assistance to the Netherlands in holding similar discussions with
Malaysia. The UK has also, through our presence on the ground,
supported the European Commission in preliminary dialogue with
the Indonesian Government. Government has also hosted Cameroonian
Parliamentarians on visits to the UK.
23. The fourth objective was not achieved during
the UK's EU Presidency. The FLEGT Action Plan also commits the
European Commission to investigate 'other legislative options'
to tackle illegal logging at the national and EU level. This report
was due in Summer 2004 and, despite lobbying from the UK Government
(at Ministerial and official level), other Member States and stakeholders,
the European Commission failed to meet this deadline. In 2005,
however, the Government funded a study by Chatham House on other
options for the UK and also for Italy and Estonia.
24. The results of these studies, together with national
studies undertaken by the Netherlands and Spain, were presented
at a stakeholder meeting funded by the UK and chaired by the European
Commission and the Austrian Presidency in Brussels on 31 January
2006. Non-governmental organisations, research institutions, industry
and member state governments were represented and the range of
possible options discussed. The European Commission will now consider
all options and issues raised at the meeting and is expected to
deliver the delayed report by early summer 2006.
Recommendation 12. Measures that properly address
circumvention and illegal imports from non-partner countries are
of crucial importance for Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPAs)
to be a success. It is an enormous lost opportunity that the licensing
scheme approved by the Council of Ministers does not satisfactorily
address either of these.
25. Government understands concerns about circumvention
of the FLEGT Licensing Scheme. This was a significant area of
debate during consideration of the draft FLEGT Regulation, both
at official and ministerial level. A bilateral agreement will
never be watertight since the EU cannot impose trade conditions
on partner countries' trade with third countries, allowing them
to import timber products from and export to third countries outside
the FLEGT licensing scheme. In developing the current Regulation,
the possibility of requiring all timber imports to the EU to have
a certificate of origin was considered. However, advice from customs
experts, including those from the UK HM Revenue and Customs and
the EU Customs Working Group clearly indicated that these proposals
would not work in practice as there would be no mechanism, or
legal basis, for tracing any product beyond its last country of
significant transformation. It also risked a challenge under the
WTO by introducing a requirement for third countries to show the
origin of their exports, without placing a similar requirement
on like products produced in the EU.
26. However, in negotiating and implementing partnership
agreements, the EU will seek to encourage partner countries to
adopt similar measures for all their exports, and ultimately for
products for domestic markets. The EU will make it a requirement
for Partner Countries to report on timber import levels and their
actions to tackle circumvention.
27. The UK Government is also working to raise awareness
of the issues of illegal logging with other major timber processing
countries that import raw materials from potential partner countries
before exporting manufactured wood products to the EU. These include
China and India (see paragraphs 7 to 9 for details), the G8 countries
(see paragraphs 17 to 19 for details) and through support of
the Forest Law Enforcement and Governance Regional Ministerial
Processes (see paragraph 20 for details).
Recommendation 13. If we are asking poorer producer
countries to spend what are often precious and limited resources
in improving their forestry management the onus must surely then
be on the EU and Member States to do the utmost in their power
to secure a stable market for the resulting certified timber.
This should include some form of commitment to purchase timber
from VPA signatory countries.
Recommendation 14. We urge the UK Government,
through its own channels and those of the EU, to assist Ghana
and other interested countries in every way—financial or
otherwise—to achieve their aim of putting the necessary
procedures in place to verify legal timber production and enter
into a VPA with the EU.
28. The Government recognises that partner countries
implementing the FLEGT licensing scheme and introducing the governance
reforms required will incur costs and that the EU should provide
development assistance where needed. Government has allocated
a total of £24 million for the period 2006-11 to continue
its work on tackling illegal logging. This will primarily be for
development of FLEGT partnership agreements in Africa and Asia.
Government expects other Member States that are active in providing
development assistance in the sector and the European Commission
to make similar contributions. Planning for the co-ordinated delivery
of this assistance is currently under way. In terms of purchasing
the timber from VPA signatory countries, a FLEGT license will
help provide the assurance needed for legality under the UK's
Government timber procurement policy, so will give access to central
Government markets.
Recommendation 15. We are disappointed at the
lack of will both within the UK Government and the EU to push
legislation on illegal timber forward as an integral part of putting
in place successful VPAs. Without legislation to underpin VPAs
they will undoubtedly fail—if they are taken up at all.
29. There is no lack of will on behalf of the Government.
Government does not agree that the Voluntary Partnership Agreements
will undoubtedly fail without additional legislation. The governance
and law enforcement reforms that are required will only come about
through actions by the exporting countries concerned. Legislation
by importing countries can reinforce these reforms, it cannot
substitute for them. The assistance that will be provided under
FLEGT Partnership Agreements will help exporting countries introduce
these reforms.
30. Notwithstanding this, Government is disappointed
at the time it has taken the European Commission to produce the
report on 'additional options' to tackle illegal logging that
go beyond the bilateral voluntary Partnership Agreements and FLEGT
Licensing Scheme. This report was due in Summer 2004 and, despite
lobbying from the UK Government (at Ministerial and official level),
other Member States and stakeholders, the European Commission
failed to meet this deadline. The European Commission has started
to make progress, with the stakeholder meeting held in Brussels
on 31 January 2006. The European Commission will now consider
all options and issues raised at the meeting and deliver the delayed
report by early summer 2006.
Recommendation 16. If the issue of illegal timber
is to be tackled there is no option but to legislate against it.
We agree with the Minister that, if there are difficulties with
WTO rules, alternatives to a direct ban on illegal timber imports
need to be examined. We support the German proposed legislation
and would very much hope to see this applied on an EU-wide basis
in the future.
Recommendation 17. As progress on any matter
on an EU-wide level is usually slower than would be ideal, options
for UK national legislation must also be taken forward as a matter
of urgency. The UK Government must pursue all options, including
the implementation of a Lacey-style Act within the UK making it
illegal to posses or market illegal timber products. Anything
less would demonstrate a lack of commitment by the Government.
Recommendation 18. We would hope to see legislation
in place in the UK within the next three to five years. With this
in mind DEFRA should commission Chatham House, which is already
doing excellent work in this area, to examine what kind of effective
legislation could be introduced within that timeframe.
31. The Government strongly supports the European
Commission's Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade Action
Plan, including looking into options for UK national legislation.
Government has been as proactive on this issue as possible whilst
understanding that until the European Commission's report is available
a full picture of the options is not possible. Government has
supported the European Commission's research work into additional
options, including financing Chatham House to prepare papers for
the stakeholder meeting held in Brussels on 31 January 2006 on
possible 'additional measures' and on existing legislation at
member state level which could be used to tackle illegal logging.
32. The practical implications of a direct ban on
illegal timber imports were discussed in depth at the stakeholder
meeting on 31 January 2006. Preliminary conclusions suggest that
requirements to make such a ban effective, such as the need for
non-partner country exporters to the EU to provide evidence of
legality, without similar measures being taken within the EU,
would risk a challenge under the World Trade Organisation. It
may also undermine incentives for countries to enter Partnership
Agreements.
33. It was agreed at the stakeholder meeting that
Chatham House would do some additional work, particularly on provision
of legal advice on the applicability of legislation similar to
the US Lacey Act to the EU or UK and the possibility of challenge
in the WTO. Following the Committee's suggestion, this work will
also include suggestions as to a possible timeframe for implementing
any legislation in the UK.
34. Chatham House has also undertaken an assessment
of the national legislation of relevance to excluding timber from
the UK. The assessment looked at criminal law, civil law, customs
misdeclaration and money laundering and concluded that action
could be taken against illegal timber produced overseas and imported
into the UK under this existing legislation but that problems
arise with practical implementation, in particular obtaining adequate
continuity of evidence from forest to UK market. Government will
provide the Committee with the final Chatham House study and the
European Commission's report on 'additional options' when they
are available. Government will consider all the options presented
in these reports and respond to them.
Recommendation 19. We very much welcome the changes
in Government policy on sustainable timber procurement that have
been put in place since our predecessor Committee's report in
July 2002. We also recognise the personal commitment of the Minister,
Elliot Morley MP, to the subject and we very much welcome his
determination to continue to tackle this very important issue.
35. The Government appreciates the Committee's recognition
of the advances made in implementing the Government's timber procurement
policy. The Government remains resolute in its determination to
encourage consumers at home and abroad to demand more legal and
sustainable timber. The Government believes that its procurement
policy is a key catalyst in achieving this change.
Recommendation 20. It seems incredible to us that
the complete lack of reliable data, clearly identified as a fundamental
hurdle to improving sustainable timber procurement at least four
years ago, and recognised as such by the Government, has yet to
be properly addressed.
36. The Government is aware of the importance of
being able to measure progress towards its policy goals. Reliable
data on timber purchases is clearly necessary to produce an accurate
performance indicator that is based on quantitative measures.
However, the cost of collecting data has to be weighed against
the value of the information provided. Timber and wood products
feature in many thousands of Government contracts awarded each
year by many hundreds of procurement units within Government departments,
Executive Agencies and Non-Departmental Public Bodies. Wood is
often a small element of the goods and services purchased. The
details on value, volume and provenance can be buried deep within
the management information available to suppliers and buyers.
For some departments the cost of obtaining this information would
be significant, particularly if it involved investing in changes
to the established data capture system. The Government wanted
to keep the reporting requirements relatively straightforward
so that the burden on departments was manageable and not cost
prohibitive; to do otherwise risked a system that was unworkable
in practice.
Recommendation 21. The Government needs to set
out a clear strategy to address this lack of data for all procurement,
ideally within SDiG. In the meantime Central Point of Expertise
on Timber (CPET) should lead the way by focusing on timber procurement
and we would like to see set out in detail how this will be done.
37. The current SDiG Report allows departments to
report their spend on certified and non certified timber products.
This was seen as the most practical way of securing meaningful
responses from departments without them having to incur disproportionate
costs to do so. The Government recognises that the information
currently available from the SDiG Reports provides an indication
rather than an accurate measure of performance. The Government
has embarked on a project to examine in more detail the data captured
and reported by some central departments. The outcome from this
research will be used to consider whether it would be feasible
and cost effective to improve on the present reporting arrangements.
The Central Point of Expertise is involved in this process and
publishes information on its activities on its web site: www.profrest.net/cpet
Furthermore, the Government-appointed Sustainable Procurement
Task Force may address the issue of data collection and reporting
in its report which is due to be made in 2006. The Government
would wish to consider the Task Force's findings before introducing
any significant change to the current process.
Recommendation 22. Many environmental groups and
members of the timber industry, such as Timbmet, argue that a
forest cannot be said to be sustainably managed if it does not
protect the rights, health and livelihoods of people who live
in or adjacent to forests and are dependent on them. We would
agree.
38. The Government agrees that the ideal sustainable
development solution for commercial forest management would be
to avoid any adverse impacts on the people that rely on the forest
for their physical and spiritual well being.
Recommendation 23. We therefore question whether
it is possible for the Government to state that it has a sustainable
timber policy—legal, yes—if the social implications
of how and where it purchases timber are not a consideration.
As it stands sustainable timber procurement is a misnomer.
39. It is the Government's contention that social
well-being is being protected to a certain extent as a result
of its timber procurement policy and that as a consequence it
is valid to describe timber and wood as a sustainable material
in its contracts. Ownership and use rights to forest lands are
legal issues and in the context of procurement are covered by
a contractor's obligation to supply products that derive from
legally felled timber. The Government has also made clear its
belief that local communities should be part of the forest management
standard setting process and not be marginalized when decisions
are made. This principle is enshrined in the Government's published
criteria for credible assurance in support of suppliers' claims
to meet Government contract requirements. Government is keeping
abreast of possible developments to further enshrine social considerations
Recommendation 24. We urge the Government to seek
clarification regarding the basis of the Danish approach and the
EU position on the inclusion of social considerations in procurement
contract. Furthermore, given that the decision not to include
social considerations for once appears to be unrelated to restrictions
under any WTO agreement, the Government must work hard within
the EU to change policy and remove these restrictions, should
it become clear that they are real rather than apparent.
40. The Government has begun the process of seeking
clarification on the Danish approach to social issues in procurement
and will consider the Dutch approach too. Defra and OGC continue
to work together to determine whether there is scope to include,
within Government procurement, social criteria related to forest
management. This must be considered within the framework of the
recently amended EU Procurement Directives and the Government's
procurement policy based on value for money for the taxpayer,
which requires the criteria to be related to the subject of the
contract.
Recommendation 25. CPET should make clear to PEFC
that it would be desirable for it clearly and simply to set out
the minimum standards it expects all its national members to conform
to if it wants continued approval of its scheme.
41. The Government has, through CPET, examined the
PEFC International Council scheme requirements and is satisfied
that those requirements, if complied with by PEFC national bodies,
are adequate to assure Government buyers that certified products
are from legal and sustainable sources. The Government is also
satisfied that those requirements are sufficiently clearly stated
for the reader to understand them. However, at the time of writing
its response the Government was not sure to what extent the PEFC
system ensured that those requirements were fully adopted by all
its national bodies. In particular, the Government was concerned
to establish whether the changes made by the PEFC Council in respect
of stakeholders' participation in the standard setting and certification
audit processes were being adopted by national bodies. CPET,
on behalf of the Government, was in the process of checking a
sample of PEFC national bodies to establish the position. Until
the issue is resolved to the Government's satisfaction the Government
regards the PEFC scheme as on probation in respect of assuring
sustainable timber sources.
Recommendation 26. It is important that whatever
form Category B proof takes, CPET establishes a clear and comprehensive
method of assessment that really delivers legality and sustainability
and leaves no room for confusion amongst suppliers or procurers
regarding what is required. It is also vital that CPET offers
practical support to procurement officers in making judgements
as to whether or not proof provided is acceptable.
42. The Government, through CPET, has drafted a methodology
for assessing Category B evidence. At the time of making this
response the draft was the subject of a public consultation exercise.
The Government appreciates that assessments of Category B evidence
must be as robust as assessments of Category A evidence and that
buyers would benefit from guidance and advice from CPET when judging
the credibility of suppliers' claims for legal and sustainable
sources of timber.
Recommendation 27. We welcome the Minister's assertion
that he is keen to extend the standards set for Central Government
to other public bodies, and that he is taking action to do this.
We would be very interested in hearing what precise form this
action is taking.
43 The Committee is aware of the Government's past
efforts to persuade the local authorities in England to adopt
responsible timber procurement policies. The Government will
work with the CPET Reference Board members to devise a new promotion
strategy aimed at stimulating interest through peer pressure.
If we can identify the procurement activities where local authorities
have the most impact on the market for timber products and advertise
the achievements of some local authorities that have successfully
purchased legal and sustainable timber then we may be able to
encourage others to follow suit. The facility to seek free advice
from CPET will also be promoted and we will seek to enlist the
help of the regional centres of excellence wherever appropriate.
Recommendation 28. Every effort is necessary to
ensure a harmonized timber procurement policy across Europe. We
welcome DEFRA's efforts to engage with other EU members on the
issue of Government procurement and look forward to hearing how
it intends to take this agenda forward with its European partners.
We would however caution against implementing any common European
standard that resulted in a reduction of the standards already
put in place by the UK Government.
44. The Government agrees that a Europe wide timber
procurement policy would be ideal and will strive to make this
happen. The first step will be to identify the commonalities and
differences between those member states that have developed policies
or are close to doing so. An exploratory meeting between the UK,
Denmark and the Netherlands took place on 09 March to begin this
process. The Government accepts that standards must be robust
to be credible and will bear that in mind when discussing the
issues.
Recommendation 29. CPET offers by far the most
advanced form of sustainable procurement advice within Government.
As such a pioneer we are hoping to see it have significant impact.
We also expect it to be used as a tool by DEFRA, OGC and all those
involved in procurement, with the hope that what is learnt through
improving the Government's procurement process for timber can
be applied across all other areas.
45. The business-led Sustainable Procurement Task
Force was established in May 2005 to produce a National Action
Plan by Spring 2006. ?The Action Plan will enable the UK government
to bring about a step-change in public procurement such that,
by 2009, it can meet the goal for the UK to be recognised as amongst
the leaders in sustainable procurement across the EU. It will
set out how to ensure that public procurement fully contributes
to sustainable development in the UK, reflecting the principles
set out in the sustainable development strategy and the existing
EU, domestic and legal framework governing public procurement.
It will build on the work of the Market Transformation Programme
(and others) to identify in which sectors public procurement leverage
can be applied for maximum environmental and social benefit. We
await the outcomes of its work to see whether the Government's
procurement process for timber can be applied across all other
areas.
Recommendation 30. We encourage CPET to examine
ways in which departments and procurers can be encouraged to purchase
timber and timber products from producers working to achieve sustainability,
over those simply achieving legality, when sustainable products
aren't available. This should include the introduction of a third
category of timber, above legality and below sustainability, of
'progressing towards sustainability' to be included in guidance
as soon as possible.
46. The Government agrees that a requirement for
progressing towards sustainable timber would be a valuable addition
to the model contract specification guidance. Key to introducing
such a variant specification option is defining the requirement
in a way that can be universally applied and that can be objectively
measured and assured without depending on any one scheme or organisation
to do so. The Government considers that conditions are not yet
suitable for specifying an intermediate requirement for sustainable
timber but will keep the matter under review.
Recommendation 31. It is also vital for DEFRA
to set a clear timetable for implementing a requirement for all
departments and other government bodies, local and national, to
purchase only sustainable timber. In our view five years would
be a realistic deadline. This would give clear signals to the
market that legality is not enough and an incentive to work towards
increasing sustainable timber production.
47. The Government hopes that its policy and other
consumers' policies will lead eventually to a flourishing market
in legal and sustainable timber that will be able to satisfy demand
in the vast majority of cases. It remains to be seen how long
it will take to reach that position. The Government remains mindful
of the barriers to achieving widespread sustainable forestry faced
by many poor producing countries and the need to remain engaged
with those countries if they are to be discouraged from selling
their timber to less scrupulous consumers or convert their forest
to other more profitable uses. Nevertheless, the Government agrees
that it is important for the conservation of forests to move rapidly
to a position where purchasing legal and sustainable timber is
the normal expectation and will continue to work to that end.
The Government's current target is part of its delivery plan
in response to the World Summit on Sustainable Development and
is: by 2006, 50% of expenditure on timber by Central Government
Departments in England, will be on products which can be independently
verified as being from sustainable and legal sources.
Recommendation 32. Whatever criticism there may
be from ourselves and others with regard to the detail, it is
undoubtedly true that CPET's work has the potential, as has already
proved to be the case, to have significant impact on timber procurement
and timber production worldwide. We look forward to seeing greater
positive impacts worldwide as CPET's role expands and develops
in the future.
48. The Government shares the Committee's aspiration
for the outcomes of CPET's work and will continue to support CPET
for as long as necessary.
Recommendation 33. In many of the areas covered
by this report the UK Government has proved to be an international
leader: government procurement, assessment of certification schemes,
negotiation of VPAs. Now its EU presidency is over it must not
become complacent and must continue in this role. It must lead
by example. It must push for EU wide legislation. If this fails
it must implement national legislation. It must also, very importantly,
ensure that companies based in the UK are not allowed to carry
out or finance destructive activities in other parts of the world
that would not be allowed in this country. Timber and sustainability
is an area in which we will watch to monitor progress, and which
we may wish to return to in the future.
49. The Government thanks the Committee for drawing
attention to the importance of legal and sustainable forestry
and the opportunities that exist to achieve positive outcomes
in a number of key areas. The Government is proud of its achievements
to date but is aware that there is still much work to be done.
The Government will continue to treat this matter as a high priority
and will use its influence at home and abroad to encourage other
players to do likewise.
March 2006
| 
