Proposition 53K2247

Projet de loi portant assentiment à l'Accord international de 2006 sur les bois tropicaux, fait à Genève le 27 janvier 2006.

General information ¶

Submitted by

The Senate

Submission date

March 13, 2012

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

sustainable forest management sustainable development wood product international agreement tropical wood

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

July 5, 2012 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

by Mr. Georges Dallemagne, the rapporteur, refers to his written report.

This is the ratification of a treaty that dates back to 2006. It was important that we finally ratified it today. Its main objective is the expansion of the trade in tropical wood. It is a first and foremost commercial treaty that extends previous purely commercial treaties.

The text under review mitigates the commercial objective by considerations related to sustainable development and, in particular, sustainable management of tropical forests. The goals pursued are quite positive. I think in particular of strengthening the capacity of producing countries to ensure sustainable forest management, and the creation of a fund for the sustainable management of tropical forests, even though, to my knowledge, many resources have not yet been gathered to do so. Belgium has not yet made its contribution to this fund intended – I remind you – to contribute to the effective achievement of the objectives of sustainable management.

That said, we have concerns about the coherence between the beautiful words contained in this treaty and the situation in terms of ecosystems in the world’s major forests. I would like to resume here a publication of a FAO report from the end of 2011 which gives figures relating to the world’s forest resources between 2000 and 2010. On this occasion, FAO noted a certain stagnation in the deforestation rate over the last decade, with deforestation at a rate of thirteen million hectares per year, the equivalent of a football field every two seconds. This rate is identical to that shown in the last five-year report covering the period 2000-2005. According to the FAO, there is no reason to shout victory.

I also regret that this report does not distinguish between natural forests and replanted forests. It also does not say how much the destruction of natural forests is not compensated by planting trees. You will understand that a natural forest contains more biodiversity and stores much more CO2 than replanted forests. The millennial forests of the Amazon, the Congo basin or Indonesia make environmental, social and economic services infinitely more important than replanted forests. They have a significantly higher carbon storage capacity than plantations and concentrate more than half of the world’s terrestrial biodiversity. There is reason to worry about this non-compensation. Exploiting and then replanting is not the same as exploiting while ⁇ ining a base of forest biodiversity.

In addition, there is the problem of illegal timber harvesting and timber imports from illegal farms still very widely practiced. Illegally harvested forests cause a loss of income of $10 billion a year. For this reason, the European Commission has developed the FLEGT process, coordinated by the World Bank, to strengthen forest management governance. This is very positive. However, I am concerned not to see any mention of the relationship between this fairly interesting process launched by the European Union and the treaty that we are going to sign today.

This is the difference between the words of the treaties and the reality of the ground!

Finally, I would like to mention the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The Moratorium on Forestry was signed in 2002. It was confirmed by a presidential decree in 2005 but has never been properly applied. Today, Greenpeace denounces the granting of licenses for craft cutting. In fact, it is not about craftsmanship. These are not small base operators but, on the contrary, multinational companies with a base in Europe, even in Belgium sometimes.

Yes, of course, we are for this treaty but rather than words, let us act!

We demand that Belgium actively engage and ensure that these major international meetings lead to real changes on the ground.

Stop the destruction of biodiversity, the impoverishment of local communities, the false craft exploitation, the illegal export! Yes to prudent exploitation, local processing and valorisation of forest products, respect for indigenous communities and all other functions of the forest! We need to think about future generations.

In the meantime, Mr. Germany joined us for an intervention.

Thank you for giving me the word.

I would like to join those who would have said that this text is an advance.

That being said, as colleagues have probably recalled, despite international agreements – this agreement follows an agreement that already dates back twenty years ago –, deforestation in the world has continued on a very large scale and is now a major problem.

Unfortunately, despite the fact that they constitute an advance, the texts that are subject to our approval remain extremely blurred, especially on the question of traceability. This agreement takes as a central point of view the issue of timber trade, but not necessarily sufficiently the other aspects related to the preservation of tropical wood and rare essences.

We are therefore looking forward to other texts, including the FLEGT mechanism from January 2013, which will ⁇ still be insufficient since it is based on the principle of reasonable diligence, which means that it will be the companies themselves who will demonstrate that the wood they market is a forest wood where sustainable development is at stake.

In my opinion, beyond these new regulations, it is important to have a real traceability capability of tropical wood. It is important that we can in the future have a labelling system that allows us to know the gasoline, the geographical origin and whether this wood is harvested in a sustainable way.

These are things that we will probably have the opportunity to come back to. In any case, personally, I will take initiatives in this area because I find it primary to preserve the primary forests even better.