I welcome the Minister of State and his officials. Members will be aware that on 6 May 2009 Dáil Éireann ordered that a motion re the International Tropical Timber Agreement, ITTA, 2006 be referred to the committee for consideration and that the committee should report back to it not later than 26 May 2009. I call on the Minister of State to make his opening statement.
International Tropical Timber Agreement (ITTA) 2006: Motion.
I welcome the opportunity to discuss the motion to approve the International Tropical Timber Agreement (ITTA) 2006. While this is a trade agreement between producer and consumer countries of tropical timber products, its importance lies in its emphasis on project assistance for tropical timber producing countries and the promotion of sustainable forest management. The previous agreement, to which Ireland was a signatory, was negotiated in 1994 and entered into force on 1 January 1996. While it was due to expire on 31 December 2006, it remained in force until the entry into force of the ITTA 2006. This successor agreement to the ITTA 1994 was concluded at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development in January 2006.
The European Union and its member states are parties to the agreement on the basis of shared competence. A number of member states have already ratified the agreement but a significant number have yet to do so. The European Commission has asked member states to ratify the agreement as soon as possible.
The motion before the committee seeks Dáil approval for the terms of the ITTA 2006. The agreement includes its objectives and a detailed range of procedural rules governing the structure and organisation of the International Tropical Timber Organisation, ITTO, and its council. By decision of 3 March 2009 the Government authorised the Minister for Foreign Affairs, on behalf of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, to proceed with signing and ratifying the agreement subject to the approval of Dáil Éireann. This approval is required by Article 29.5.2o of the Constitution, which provides that, "The State shall not be bound by any international agreement involving a charge upon public funds unless the terms of the agreement shall have been approved by Dáil Éireann".
Under the 1994 ITTA, consumer members such as EU member states make annual compulsory financial contributions to the administrative budget of the ITTO based on the volume of tropical timber product imported. Ireland's annual contribution over the period of the agreement ranged between €30,000 and €40,000 per annum. Under the new ITTA 2006, the European Union will pay all member states' mandatory annual contributions to the ITTO. However, member states may make voluntary financial contributions to the ITTO to help fund specific planned actions. To allow for such voluntary contributions by Ireland, Dáil approval of the agreement is required in accordance with Article 29.5.2o of the Constitution.
The primary role of the ITTO is to: develop internationally agreed policy documents to promote sustainable forest management and forest conservation; and assist tropical member countries to adapt such policies to local circumstances and implement them in the field through projects. In addition, the ITTO collects, analyses and disseminates data on the production and trade of tropical timber and funds a range of projects and other action aimed at developing industries at community and industrial scales. ITTO members may submit project proposals to the council for review and financing in accordance with the ITTO project cycle. Examples include pilot and demonstration projects, human resource development projects and research and development projects. The organisation's action plan sets out the types of activities it should undertake in project and policy work. As indicated, projects are funded by voluntary contributions, mostly from consumer member countries. Since it became operational in 1987, the ITTO has funded more than 800 projects and activities valued at more than $300 million. The EU is among a group of major donors that includes the governments of Japan, Switzerland and the USA.
I have referred to sustainable forestry management, SFM, as being one of the key objectives of the agreement. While the term "sustainable forest management" requires little explanation, it would be useful to repeat the definition developed by the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, MCPFE. It defines sustainable forest management as:
... the stewardship and use of forests and forest lands in a way, and at a rate, that maintains their biodiversity, productivity, regeneration capacity, vitality and their potential to fulfill, now and in the future, relevant ecological, economic and social functions, at local, national, and global levels, and that does not cause damage to other ecosystems.
This is a good and concise description of what is meant by SFM. Its core objective is the attainment of balance – a balance between society's increasing demands for forest products and the other benefits that forests provide, and the preservation of forest health, diversity and scale. This balance is vital to both the survival of tropical forests and to the future prosperity of indigenous forest communities.
Ireland is pleased to renew its commitment to the objectives of the ITTO and looks forward to the positive results of its efforts in developing the markets for tropical timber products in a manner that is sustainable, not just from an economic perspective but more particularly in terms of the sustainability of tropical forests and the people who depend upon them.
I thank the Minister of State for his informative presentation. I support the ratification of the ITTA. Sustainable forest development is not just an issue as regards tropical timber, it is obviously an issue that relates to all forest management. Will the Minister of State confirm that we are not engaging in a mere rubber-stamping exercise? What is the level of compliance with the agreement? Have inspections taken place and have prosecutions been pursued? What level of inspection applies in this country with regard to the varieties of timber that are imported?
The Minister of State referred to the EU's involvement. However, it is alleged — this is not disputed — that a significant level of illegal logging of timber is taking place, particularly in new accession states such as Romania, Bulgaria and Slovakia. It is one thing to discuss tropical timber management but who are we to lecture others if the EU does not have its own house in order?
Sustainable forest management is linked to the debate on climate change. Forests, whether tropical or otherwise, are important carbon sinks and illegal logging does not help in this regard.
What level of inspection takes place in this country? What is the level of compliance? Have any prosecutions been pursued? Is it possible to prosecute people in our domestic courts in respect of breaches or does this matter come within the EU's jurisdiction?
I also support the ratification of the agreement. An extremely interesting presentation was made to the Joint Committee on the Environment, Heritage and Local Government last week in respect of the recycling of timber. Does Ireland have a policy with regard to the importation of timber? Do we seek to identify where timber imports originate? In the context of climate change, do we know where every piece of timber imported into this country originates? Is such timber imported directly or does it come via another source? Does the Government have a policy with regard to how domestic timber is recycled? People tend to throw timber into skips and landfill sites. We should put in place a policy with regard to the recycling of such timber. This might prove to be of assistance in the context of the overall position.
I have no problem with our being a signatory. However, like Deputy Creed, I wonder whether this is just a paper exercise. Will there be a tangible follow up on the agreement? As I pointed out during the earlier discussion we had on fisheries protection, we are too good at enforcing EU legislation in this country. Will meaningful checks be carried out on where the timber is coming from and the labour policies in the countries of origin and so on? While I do not advocate police states, I would like the other signatories to carry out their responsibilities.
Deputy Creed raised an important issue. He was correct to draw attention to the EU's record as opposed to the record of the tropical countries. The agreement is designed to ensure timber imported into the EU meets the required standards. In other words, the supply chain for timber should meet the criteria set out by the organisation. That is generally achieved by a paper trail and traceability of some kind. I am not aware of the level of inspections carried out in third countries. My understanding in regard to EU member states and the new accession states is that each country is obliged to have its own authority to deal with these matters.
In Ireland, the national parks and wildlife service of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has responsibility to ensure we honour our obligations under the legislation. I am not sure what are the bodies in Bulgaria or Romania, for example, what powers they have or how much they do in this regard. We can follow this up because Deputies are correct that the agreement will become a paper exercise if it is not universally observed and enforced. We can ensure this is fed into the system through our involvement at international level.
Deputy Creed is also correct about the climate change debate and the importance of forestry in that regard. Ireland enjoys a number of advantages because, despite the fact that a lower percentage of the country is planted with trees compared with other EU member states, the bulk of them have been planted since 1992 and that gives us an advantage under the Kyoto Protocol.
Deputy O'Sullivan raised the policy of importing timbers. Quality checks are carried out for various diseases that could be transported via timber, which is an enormous difficulty. This does not always concern timber imported for commercial purposes. The risk arises much more frequently in pallets or other materials enclosing goods that have nothing to do with the timber sector. We try to be as diligent as possible. Some of our European colleagues have run into significant difficulties with imported diseases affecting their own plantations and forestry crops and we try to be as efficient as possible in ensuring inspections are carried out and timber coming into the country is examined for quality and so on.
The Deputy's point regarding the recycling of waste timber is positive. I have visited a number of plants in the processing sector in Ireland. It is extraordinary that every scrap of timber that comes through the gate is used, not necessarily in the plant concerned because that depends on the products made there. However, leftover timber is transported to another plant to be processed further. It is an extraordinarily effective industry in terms of its use of the resource from logging to processing and I am impressed by this.
Deputy McGrath raised a related issue, which is outside the remit of the Department, but it concerns the labour policies that apply to logging in tropical countries and elsewhere. I do not have information on that but I will check this and revert to the committee.
Is there a record of prosecutions under the agreement?
Whether timber is imported as a raw material or used in packaging and so on, none of the diseases that has struck neighbouring countries has affected us.
Has anyone been prosecuted? Are we squeaky clean?
Prosecutions would not arise unless somebody was found guilty. The onus on the State is to ensure, in so far as possible, imports meet the standard. Since we have not failed, we have succeeded.
What diseases have affected our neighbouring country?
They are in the nematode area and are widespread in the forestry sector. There may be others but Ireland has a system in place, which is difficult to get past.