Memorandum from the International Fund
for Animal Welfare (IFAW)
SUMMARY
— IFAW welcomes this inquiry by
the sub-committee as we believe the FCO has a vital role to play
in environment, conservation and animal welfare issues at an international
level. Furthermore IFAW is in a good position to comment on the
role of the FCO as we have had the chance to work with the FCO
on a number of issues at international level in the past.
— IFAW strongly believes that
many of the most serious environment issues require international
co-operation and negotiation often through multilateral environmental
agreements. This is true of the two particular examples given
in our evidence: the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and
the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
— There are examples of successful
environmental diplomacy in the past, including the FCO's role
in helping achieve better protection from commercial trade for
basking sharks at the 2002 CITES meeting. It is questionable whether
the structure and capacity of the FCO today could play a similarly
successful role.
— The issue of whaling is an area
in desperate need of diplomatic support from the FCO. It is questionable
whether Defra receives the support it needs in this area to achieve
the Government's stated objective; to maintain the current global
moratorium on whaling and to stop all but indigenous subsistence
whaling.
— IFAW would like to see the sub-committee
recommend that the FCO review its structure and capacity to support
environmental international diplomacy, and the level of priority
these issues are given; and that high level diplomatic action
is needed ahead of this year's IWC meeting.
— Specifically regarding the work
of IFAW's scientific whale research vessel in foreign waters,
IFAW would like to place on record our gratitude to the FCO Maritime
team and embassy staff abroad, who have been exceptionally helpful
and instrumental in getting research permits for boat.
1. The International Fund for Animal Welfare
(IFAW) works to improve the welfare of wild and domestic animals
throughout the world by reducing commercial exploitation of animals,
protecting wildlife habitats, and assisting animals in distress.
We seek to motivate the public to prevent cruelty to animals and
to promote animal welfare and conservation policies that advance
the well-being of both animals and people.
2. As one of the largest international animal
welfare organisations in the world, IFAW has offices in 15 countries
and a staff of more than 200 experienced campaigners, legal and
political experts, and internationally acclaimed scientists.
3. IFAW welcomes this inquiry by the sub-committee
as we believe the FCO has a vital role to play in environment,
conservation and animal welfare issues at an international level.
Furthermore IFAW is in a good position to comment on the role
of the FCO as we have had the chance to work with the FCO on a
number of issues at international level in the past.
4. IFAW's comments below apply generally
to our experience of the work of the FCO. We do not feel able
to fully comment on all the 14 questions outlined in the inquiry
press notice, so our comments are simply given in the most coherent
way possible. Where points match specific questions these have
been highlighted to assist the sub-committee.
5. Two specific areas where IFAW's work
has brought us into contact with the FCO include the issue of
whaling and the International Whaling Commission (IWC); and the
protection of endangered species from wildlife trade through the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora
and Fauna (CITES).
6. IFAW strongly believes that many of the
most serious environment issues require international co-operation
and negotiation often through multilateral environmental agreements.
This is true of the two particular examples mentioned above; the
International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
7. Regarding international environmental
diplomacy [Question 2], one example of a successful role played
by the FCO in the past relates to the critical importance of the
FCO in securing protection from commercial trade of the basking
shark by having it listed on Appendix II of CITES (therefore regulating
trade and introducing protection measures for basking sharks).
It can take considerable effort to get species listed on CITES
Appendices, and the listing of the basking shark was achieved
through involvement of British embassies in a number of countries
and an FCO team who participated at the 2002 CITES meeting where
the decision was taken. At that time, there existed the Environment
Policy Department within the FCO, which had experts familiar with
the biological and conservation issues and who worked to provide
good technical detail to embassies and ensure that it was clear
that the issue was a key policy objective for the UK. Since then,
the role, structure, and size of what was the Environment Policy
Department has changed significantly. It is questionable whether
the FCO would have the capacity or expertise to play a similar
role today as was the case outlined in the example above.
8. IFAW campaigns against commercial whaling
and so-called "scientific" whaling by the nations of
Japan, Norway and Iceland. IFAW welcomes the strong anti-whaling
stance of successive UK governments, which has been demonstrated
by consistent Ministerial representation at the International
Whaling Commission (IWC), the international body which exists
to regulate whaling and to protect whales from over-exploitation
and other threats.
9. However, regarding whaling, the only
country that maintains a diplomatic engagement in the issue year-round
is Japan. Over the past 20 years, this high-level diplomatic
action by the Government of Japan has led to a steady recruitment
of nations to the IWC (mostly poor, developing nations from West
Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific Islands, none with any history
of commercial whaling) who vote alongside Japan in its bid to
overturn the current moratorium on commercial whaling. This resulted
in the pro-whaling nations achieving a simple majority at the
IWC for the first time in decades at last year's meeting in St
Kitts and Nevis.
10. The Government's stated policy is to
maintain the moratorium on whaling and for all forms of whaling
to be stopped, except subsistence whaling by indigenous peoples.
The UK has also done a lot to strengthen the role of the IWC in
protecting whales and other cetaceans. However, in the face of
consistent high level diplomatic efforts by Japan, the Government's
objective requires the help of the FCO if it is to be successful.
11. For the FCO to become active again on
the issue of whaling expertise is required within FCO and it needs
to be clear that stopping commercial and scientific whaling is
indeed a priority policy objective for the UK. Increased involvement
of FCO, especially through embassies in countries supportive of
pro-whaling but not actually whaling nations, would help promote
Government objectives at IWC and ensure that negotiations lead
to more effective global protection for whales and their environment.
[Q.2]
12. With respect to both CITES and the IWC,
Defra is rightly the lead department on these issues but it is
questionable whether Defra receives the level of diplomatic support
required in these areas to achieve the outcomes it is looking
for (especially regarding the IWC).
13. Furthermore, IFAW questions whether
the structure of the FCO is adequate to respond to the needs of
international environmental diplomacy. Clearly, it is imperative
that the FCO is able to support the work of Government as a whole
as it pursue international agreement on environmental issues.
Climate change is a prime example of where such international
environmental diplomacy is required but other international areas
and conventions as mentioned in this submission are also worthy
of consideration in the way the FCO works.
14. IFAW suggests that the sub-committee
recommends that the FCO review its structure and capacity to support
environmental international diplomacy, and the level of priority
these issues are given. [Q.8 and Q.3] Specifically with regard
to the IWC, IFAW would like to see the sub-committee recommend
that the FCO undertake high-level diplomatic action, involving
all pro-whaling nations not just Japan, Norway and Iceland, ahead
of this year's IWC in May to prevent further increases in whaling,
and to combat Japan's efforts to overturn the moratorium and undermine
the conservation mandate of the IWC.
15. IFAW also feels it appropriate to mention
that we operate a 72ft sailing research vessel (RV Song of
the Whale), registered in London, which is mainly engaged
in using benign techniques to study whales, as part of IFAW's
global campaign to protect marine mammals and their habitats.
Since its launch in 2004, Song of the Whale has travelled
over 30,000 miles, and the team has conducted projects in North
Africa, the Mediterranean, North America, the Caribbean and Iceland.
The Song of the Whale team has recently returned from Iceland,
a country which resumed scientific whaling in 2003 and commercial
whaling in 2006. The IFAW team was carrying out research on rare
blue whales using non-invasive research methods. In the face of
the continuing expansion of so called "scientific" whaling
by Japan and Iceland, the work of IFAW is vitally important in
demonstrating and promoting the fact that we do not need to kill
whales to study them.
16. We would like to record our gratitude
for the assistance and support of the FCO's Maritime Team in London
and the FCO staff in various countries in obtaining research permits
for the vessel. We feel that the FCO has been instrumental in
obtaining these permits, sometimes in difficult countries, and
providing excellent support for the boat through its embassies.
17. Thank you for the opportunity to respond
to this inquiry. As stated in the covering letter IFAW would welcome
the opportunity to give oral evidence to the sub-committee. If
you require any further information, please contact:
January 2007
| 
