Proposition 54K1260

Proposition de résolution visant à lutter contre le commerce illégal du bois.

General information ¶

Authors

Ecolo Muriel Gerkens
Groen Anne Dedry
LE Georges Dallemagne
PS | SP Daniel Senesael
Vooruit Maya Detiège

Submission date

July 13, 2015

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

wood industry resolution of parliament illicit trade

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR PVDA | PTB PP 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 ¶

Jan. 28, 2016 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief. I would like to thank all the colleagues who have worked constructively in the committee. The resolution was unanimously adopted. All amendments, after two, were unanimously approved. This resolution is therefore very broad and hopefully will be passed on in the plenary session.

It is now awaiting the report of the European Commission in February 2016, as also stated in request number 12 of the resolution. We can hope that we are evolving towards an extension of the directives that come out of the European Commission and that ensure that the resolution becomes real at the level of the directive.

We all know that forests are an enormous wealth. They play a major ecological, social and economic role. On an ecological level, forests house 80% of biodiversity, contribute to the water cycle, climate regulation, soil protection and carbon storage.

Forests are essential to curb and reduce global warming. They also contribute in a vital way to the development of local populations and ensure their food and energy needs are met. They meet some of their health needs. If forests are managed from a sustainable development perspective, they will play a significant economic role in developing countries.

Forests are a world heritage that we must protect, maintain and develop. Worldwide, forest management must be implemented in a manner that respects social and ecological equilibrium. Unfortunately, our forest heritage is under threat. Every year, 13 million hectares of forests are destroyed. The Amazon, Central Africa and the Malaysia-Indonesia area are ⁇ threatened by deforestation.

The causes of this deforestation are many. Illegal logging is one of them. In some countries, the trade in timber is carried out illegally and without respect for biodiversity, the environment or the local population. Illegal logging has severe social consequences and can lead to armed conflicts and physical violence between predators and locals. This illicit trade is also a vector of corruption and fuels organized crime, many of which are factors of destabilization in producing countries.

The illegal trade in timber is practiced in countries that are also trade partners of the European Union and Belgium. Belgium is the fourth largest importer of timber in the European Union and the second largest for timber from the Amazon. Globally, it is the largest importer of timber imported from Cameroon and the fifth for timber imported from Brazil.

The volume of timber landed in the port of Antwerp has increased sharply over the last few years. It grew from 182,000 tonnes in 2010 to 280,000 tonnes in 2014. My colleagues, we have a great responsibility. Belgium must organize itself in the best possible way to effectively control the origin of imported timber and, above all, its legality.

In 2003, the European Commission adopted a plan to combat illicit trade. Subsequently, two European regulations were adopted, in 2008 and 2013.

The European Regulation, which came into force on 3 March 2013, prohibits the placing on the market of timber or products derived from illegal harvest. The 2013 Regulation also stipulates that importing companies that sell timber on the European market must comply with the so-called “reasonable diligence” principle. This principle includes a set of measures and procedures aimed at minimising as much as possible the risk of placing on the internal market timber from illegal harvest.

Belgium has adopted the necessary measures for the full application of this Regulation in domestic law by the Act of 25 April 2014. The SPF Environment was therefore designated to carry out the control of imported timber, and sanctions are provided for those who do not comply with Belgian and European legislation. However, during the hearing in the Health Committee, we found that the SPF Environment did not have enough staff to control importing companies. Furthermore, during the hearings of June last year, it appeared that the means of control were lacking, but also that the will to fight more effectively against the illegal trade of timber was shared both by NGOs and professionals in the sector and the Minister of the Environment.

Following the hearings, the President of the Health Committee, our excellent colleague Muriel Gerkens, took the initiative to draft a resolution that I co-signed. The text calls on the government to mobilize more personnel to strengthen controls and concrete the possibilities of sanctions. This is indispensable, dear colleagues, if we want to comply with Belgian and European legislation. We also advocate for the use of independent observation and control bodies. On-the-spot checks in the exporting countries may be carried out through these independent bodies. This text therefore encourages the possibility of grouping by geographical basin of the exporting countries in the organization of controls. We request to strengthen the capacity for investigation and cooperation between the competent Belgian authority and the authorities of the producing country to verify the conformity of the certificates or other documents issued.

Finally, the text emphasizes the importance of traceability of the timber marketed and the information given to the consumer on the origin of the products.

In conclusion, I would like to congratulate the majority-opposition work that has been done in committee to reach a text that is acceptable for all. I hope that Minister Marghem will be able to use this resolution to obtain more resources during the next budget control in order to effectively combat illegal timber trade.

I invite you to vote on this resolution.

Deforestation has an impact on the balance of the planet: loss of biodiversity, aggravation of natural disasters, reduction of water resources, impact on greenhouse gas emissions, and therefore on global warming. If we want to fulfill the ambitious agreement reached in Paris in the context of COP21, we must fight against deforestation and illegal trade in timber.

In 2010, Europe adopted a Regulation laying down obligations for operators who place timber and timber derivatives on the market. This Regulation, which came into force in 2013, should be continuously monitored in order to improve its effectiveness. In this spirit, if we subscribe to our colleague’s resolution proposal, while recalling the clear commitments of the Minister, we also want to ensure that the text remains reasonable, realistic and without excesses. That is why the majority wanted to make amendments to the resolution on four points that we consider essential.

The first is support for SMEs, which are at the forefront in this struggle. The principle of due diligence, which consists of a system of procedures that enterprises must apply to reduce the risk, constitutes a heavy administrative burden. The sector, quite constructively, indicated that it was willing to collaborate to ⁇ the goal, without however accepting to be penalized by procedures that would really benefit from being simplified. Small and medium-sized enterprises are required to control national, European, international regulations as well as those of importing countries.

The second point on control is the encouragement of further administrative cooperation at the national level, highlighting the main lesson of the hearings: the work between the protagonists works well and the exchange of information is effective, which enables the General Directorate to assume its responsibilities.

If these checks – many more than the original version of the text – have not yet given rise to sanctions, it is because the General Directorate of Environment believed that there was no infringement.

The Minister is determined to obtain a reinforcement of budgetary and human resources to strengthen controls. We will support them in these actions.

The third axis is the will to act at the European level. We want the Commission, as part of the revision of its Regulations, to support Belgium’s proposal for a simpler and faster procedure for granting authorisations to control organisations. Indeed, for more than three years, after the CTIB submitted a request for recognition, it has still not been ruled on its application, while the Centre could offer a system of reasoned due diligence to Belgian operators.

Finally, coordinated global action is needed in partnership with civil society, NGOs and third countries affected by deforestation. We shouldn’t be naive, some exporters are turning to Asia, which is less watchful to ship there illegal timber that will return processed to our continent without being subject to the control and traceability established by the timber regulation.

In a globalized world, concerted action is needed at the international level. For example, the current efforts to replant forests in Europe, developing countries and wood-exporting countries share the same will.

There is still a long way to go, but here as in many other fields, it is not by ideology but by the pragmatism of all goodwill that we will advance this noble cause that is the struggle against illegal timber.

It is the pragmatism of this proposal, as amended, that the MR group will firmly support.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to congratulate the main authors of this resolution, which I have gladly co-signed, because it constitutes a major concern of our generation, namely the disappearance of primary forests, of these large carbon wells, but above all of these large reservoirs of biodiversity. What is not done today cannot be done tomorrow.

The resolution welcomes the introduction of a new European regulation, but calls for additional means of control from the government. That is what matters! I call on the Minister to take this request of the authors of the resolution very seriously, to implement means of control. Today, these means are ridiculously insufficient. This is indeed a major issue.

We are still in the field of soft law, that is, reasoned diligence, reasonable diligence. There are certain constraints, but the rules are not entirely binding in terms of timber traceability. It will be important at some point to take the step, given the challenge that this constitutes.

I submitted an amendment. Thank you to those who have signed it. Unfortunately, the majority did not follow. It was an amendment that proposed that every wood marketed in Belgium be labelled in terms of its essence, its country of origin and whether or not it has been produced in a sustainable way. This is important for consumers. We all pay attention to what we consume, to what we buy. Where does this wood come from? Has it been produced under acceptable conditions? What essence is it? This information is lacking. I regret that this amendment has not been adopted.

Therefore, I will submit a bill in order to continue the discussion on this subject. Today, for a whole range of goods we buy, whether it is in the food field or other, mentions indicate the origin of the products. As for wood, given the challenge it constitutes, we could also do so without it being too compelling. I propose to continue this discussion on these elements at a subsequent meeting. I am pleased once again that we can adopt this resolution today.

Mr. Speaker, we will support this very exemplary proposal. Personally, I would have put more emphasis on the responsibility of multinationals for the plundering of forests, which would have been a slightly different way of expressing things.

Beyond the wording, this text highlights the gaps in control. Only one part-time worker is in charge of controlling 280,000 tons of timber and this is unlikely to improve, given the government’s policy. On the one hand, this further reduces the staff of the SPF Finances. The role of the customs authorities is important in this regard. On the other hand, in its General Policy Statement, the government redefines the role of customs as a powerful economic and financial leverage to “improve the competitiveness of our companies, increase exports, allow our ports to continue to assert their logistical assets, etc.”

I fear that the effects of this very interesting proposal will be greatly diminished due to this policy and this governmental vision.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker.

We have identified a phenomenon, already denounced by many actors concerned with biodiversity and concerned with deforestation. They came to meet the various political groups to encourage them to act against this plague. The Public Health Committee and the Minister agreed to organize hearings including environmental defenders, actors from the economic world, representatives of the SPF Environment and customs. At the end of these hearings, a text was drafted and submitted.

I thought at that time that I was going to get the co-signature of the various groups. Fortunately, some have joined this resolution proposal. In this regard, I would like to thank Mr. Senesael, Mrs. Detiège – who is absent today – and Mr. of Dallemagne. Unfortunately, representatives of the majority groups did not co-sign it. I then wondered what was going to happen, while knowing that the minister and members of her cabinet, on the other hand, had expressed their interest in this text.

Then, our work continued in a very constructive way. The amendments submitted by the majority recognized our efforts and considered it appropriate to support them, while improving the original proposal. Thus, we were able to reach a common text. In this respect, I would like to thank all the members who participated in the work.

I would like to tell you that this resolution is serious. The preceding hearings and exchanges expressed a genuine global concern about deforestation. Colleagues have already recalled its climate and biodiversity impacts. In addition, the effects are also economic, both for local populations, who are victims of these practices, and for others. I think in particular of the wood sector, which suffers from unfair competition when wood is exploited illegally and imported by uncontrolled and uncontrolled chains.

It is a working tool both environmentally and economically. This resolution emphasizes the capacity of a State, also within the framework of European policies, to put in place the necessary tools to monitor compliance with the rules relating to this trade and to sanction in case of non-compliance with these measures.

This resolution is addressed to you, but also to the government. A half-time to organize the control and to be the reference authority with the European Union and with all these actors spread around the world for importing wood is not enough. It is not possible to ask for a half-time to fulfill the tasks expected by that reference authority.

You told us during the hearings, but also during budget discussions, that you want additional staff and that you have submitted this request to the government. In 2015, this request was not heard. I hope it will be in 2016. It would take eight additional people in the SPF Environment to ideally be able to devote two full hours to this work.

Could you tell us, Mr. Minister, if the situation has evolved with regard to this request? Has a first miracle been accomplished, have sufficient human and financial resources been granted to the administration responsible for this control?

Another important element of this resolution is the requirement for Belgian timber importers to exercise reasonable vigilance. This is a ⁇ complicated concept for them. A large company has the ability to send observers on the spot, to completely master all necessary administrative steps. It is easier for her. For a SME, it is more complicated to be able to observe what is happening in the world and in the countries where wood is imported.

The resolution therefore states that it is important to support the establishment and establishment of independent bodies capable of assisting Belgian importers in complying with these obligations of reasoned vigilance. These will allow criteria to be established and to obtain information from producing countries and information on the chain that has been followed.

I know that you intend, at the European level, to ask for relief, or at least for greater facilities, in order to create organizations that play this role of observers and helpers. This is one of the amendments introduced in the resolution and we obviously supported it. It is important that Belgian actors are assisted in fulfilling their obligations.

Another important element required adjustments in our discussions and in the drafting of the request addressed to the government. This is how we will consider the certification of the legality of timber mining by the authority of the importing country.

We know that in some countries corruption is present in the government in place. In some countries, ministers themselves are forest owners and farmers. It is therefore difficult to rely on their certification stamp to state that such exploitation is legal and that everything is done in compliance with the rules. These ministers themselves are economically interested and these countries experience governance difficulties.

To this end, it is important that Belgium complies with one of the clauses of the European Regulation. It says that, when a certificate of legality of timber exploitation in the country of origin is received, the official document given by the authority of the country is not a sufficient element. This element is necessary and required, but it must be accompanied by additional observations and information on how this exploitation took place.

International organizations spend the energy and the means to observe and photograph to have image evidence and concrete information about how things are going. This information must be integrated. Therefore, we can sometimes refuse wood that comes after the certificate of the government of the country of origin, but which does not meet the rules and criteria required by the European regulation.

Finally, one last element. As has been said, there are in some parts of the world sometimes larger facilities for circulating wood and its derivatives. It is known that products pass through Asia before reaching us and that therefore they are not identified as non-compliant with the rules. For this purpose, there is a demand from certain countries, and in particular from certain Asian countries, to be able, in the conventions they are going to negotiate or that they are currently negotiating country by country with the European Commission, to agree and prove to the European Commission that they respect the rules of operation so that trade can be made with them. There is a demand for being able to work by group of geographically close countries in such a way as to mutualize control efforts, improvement tools and governance. I think it is important that Belgium can defend this mode of cooperation within the European Union.

One last word, ⁇ beyond the resolution. I truly thank my colleagues and the Cabinet of the Minister once again for the cooperative work that has been done around this text. I know, Mrs. Minister, that you are trying to bring together the different actors of the wood to work collectively. Here in Belgium, this concerns companies, the port of Antwerp through which 400,000 tons of wood transit annually, under the control of a half-time – I add a layer of it so that your colleagues are well aware of the need to strengthen this service –, NGOs, importers, people who work in wood, customs and political actors. I know that you would like to reach a charter. I don’t know if you still have that idea in your mind.

I would just like to draw your attention to the need to properly preserve the role of each in collective work. I find it important, and it is a good idea, to bring together all these actors in order to identify difficulties, to enforce the regulation, to organize controls, to sanction if necessary, to create instances and to help identify criteria, to comply with rules. But I think it is not possible to ask all these actors to regulate the enforcement of the law themselves.

The law and compliance with the regulation must be enforced and applied now because this regulation came into force in 2013. The provisions do not need to be adjusted. Non-governmental organizations have to play a critical and challenging role. It can also play a constructive role with the different actors. Economic actors must also be able to play their role and express the difficulties they face. As for politics, it really must continue to assume its responsibilities of monitoring compliance with rules and sanctions.

I insist on the necessity that the tool you want to build collectively respects this well and does not result in spreading responsibilities amongst each other. In any case, the role of the public authority you represent and that the SPF Environment represents should not be diminished.

Thank you to everyone for supporting this work. I truly think that it is in everyone’s interest, both in Belgium and in the producing countries, that this resolution be followed.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, it is clear from the interventions that illegal timber trade is a topic that concerns everyone, that is, the whole world. Everyone can be an actor. From the producer to the customer, through the distributor, everyone must be responsible for his actions. It is obvious that I am the reasoning that consists in saying that genders should not be mixed. In fact, you should not use volunteer work because you do not have the possibility as a public authority to organize yourself properly to carry out control, certification and all operations related to regulation. At the same time, if there is, volunteer work has a value.

This is why I organized a round table last September, which brings together companies, associations and authorities. And I would like this round table to be able to establish a charter according to which everyone is responsible for their own scope of action and which would provide for a cooperation agreement that allows information to circulate and be processed properly in order to improve efficiency on the ground.

The concept of due diligence obliges timber importers to ensure that the timber they buy has not been cut under conditions that harm the planet: protected timber, overcutting, traffic. They are the ones who carry out the controls. Furthermore, no inspection – it shows that everyone has their role and that the roles should not be mixed – initiated at the request of Greenpeace has given no result leading to a sanction. On the basis of these elements, it can be inferred that the exchange of information has not resulted in sanctions and that, in doing so, the importers concerned are vigilant. Everyone is responsible for their actions. And there are people who are responsible and who act correctly.

In addition, import inspection is a guarantee of level playing field for all those who apply this principle at the foot of the letter. You always see what is wrong. But let me remind you that a lot of things are going well and that a majority of people work properly with the concern of respecting the rules and preserving the planet.

I continue to ask for eight equivalent full-time inspectors. I also insisted with my fellow Finance on the need to have more inspectors. I will submit this request at the next budget control.

He heard my request. He wasn’t the only one I asked the question.

And as you know, I had the opportunity at this round table in September 2015 to see that everyone is willing to move forward. This resolution also shows that at the political level, all parties have been able to contribute, in a beautiful example of parliamentary democracy, Mrs Gerkens, you are right – it is quite rare to emphasize it – to advance a dossier and work in the same direction so that the dossier progresses concretely, even if the dialogue is not easy. Furthermore, in this round table, the dialogue was not easy since for now, non-governmental associations do not want to sign this charter, estimating that there will be a mix of genders, to which they do not want to associate. On the contrary, we want to reserve their specific place in this process. I congratulate myself and thank all the members of the committee who today vote together on a resolution to fight against illegal timber trafficking even better on the ground. I thank you for your attention.