The government U-turn on whether armed forces personnel can flog stories about their experiences in action to the press was so abrupt, it probably gave ministers whiplash. By comparison, introducing a new policy on wood procurement in March in its Sustainable Procurement Action Plan must have seemed a low risk manoeuvre. But sections of the timber trade feel the change of direction could prove a pain in the neck.
Initially, the government proposition looks simple; that from April 2009 it will only buy timber that’s “independently verified legal and sustainable”, or sourced from countries which are “licensed partners” in the Forest Law Governance and Trade initiative for improving forest management.
Some timber companies welcome the move. They believe the industry needs a chivvy up on environmental certification.
Others see problems. Until now, they say, government procurement policy has been to prefer certified sustainable timber, but to accept material that’s only backed by proof of legality. The hope is that this would provide leverage to encourage suppliers to work their way up to “sustainability”. There are a number of supply projects under way around the world aimed at getting “legal” timber status, partly driven by the prospect of securing sales in the UK. Some may go for certified “sustainability” by 2009. Others, it is feared, will see that as unrealistic and turn to markets which aren’t so demanding on these issues.
There’s a view that the new policy also casts doubt on the work of the government-appointed Central Point of Expertise on Timber (CPET) to create a list of acceptable ‘category B’ proof of legality and sustainability, other than independent certification.
No-one argues that the government shouldn’t procure environmentally-sound timber. But some feel that setting unrealistic deadlines could undermine work already done with suppliers to improve environmental performance. Wider consultation is also urged. One source alleged that the new policy wasn’t even discussed with CPET.
