EU forest proposals not strong enough, say environment groups

Environmental groups have reacted angrily to European commission proposals for the protection of the world’s forests.

Green groups say that the initiatives are unlikely to have any significant impact when it comes to stopping the problem of mass deforestation and the illegal timber trade.

Iola Leal of the Forests and the European Union Resource Network (FERN), said that the European commission’s proposals “don’t go far enough” to address issues such as the import of illegal forest products.

“The proposals are definitely not strong enough, there is nothing that would allow us to halt illegal [forest] imports,” she said.

“The biggest issue is ensuring the recognition of international commitment in law. If we had a strong recognition of illegalities it would allow us to bring to our courts those companies that are in breach of international law. The current proposals don’t include this at all,” she added.

Leal said that as the commission’s proposals do not make it a criminal offence to import illegal timber products, they are of no benefit when it comes to trying to stop companies trading in products that come from illegal logging.

“Once [companies] import here and we can prove that the products are illegal, there is no way to of ensuring that we can stop the market. This is something that we would like the parliament and the council to change,” she said.

She added that she would also like to see guidelines for certain measures that companies should adopt to make sure that their chain of custom does not include illegal products.

Furthermore, Leal said that a legal framework to regulate the trade in forest products would also benefit indigenous populations that are currently adversely affected by companies involved in the timber trade.

However, she added that the commission was right to delay the inclusion of forests in the EU’s emissions trading scheme (ETS).

Last week, parliament’s environment committee voted for an amendment to the original commission proposal, which would mean that forestry would be included in the ETS, a move which Leal said would hinder forest protection projects.

“We strongly advocate for the non-inclusion of forestry in the ETS…[carbon] markets will not address the problems of governance. This is one of the major problems in tropical countries, the illegal exploitation of forests.”

• Previous article
• Next article