Politics, according to Sir Humphrey in Yes, Minister, is the art of being seen to do something by the people who want you to do it, while doing nothing to offend the people who don’t.
This approach seems to be being adopted by the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) in its latest pronouncements on the Central Point of Expertise on Timber (CPET).
CPET is an independent body charged by Defra with assessing the five main timber and forestry certification schemes present in the UK market. Its judgement will then be used as guidance by government procurement officers, and will no doubt influence private sector buyers too, in their timber and wood product purchasing.
Earlier this year, CPET gave the Canadian Standards Authority (CSA) and Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) schemes its ultimate approval as proof that the timber they certify is “sustainable” and “legal”. The Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification, Sustainable Forestry Initiative and Malaysian Timber Certification Council schemes achieved only proof of legality status. This means that the advice to procurement officers will be to buy products certified under these schemes only where FSC or CSA alternatives are not available.
At the same time, the SFI, PEFC and MTCC initiatives were given the opportunity to amend their rules and resubmit them to the CPET to achieve “proof of sustainability” status. It now seems, reading between government press release lines, that the SFI and PEFC have made the grade, with the MTCC still working on it. However, Defra has delayed making any announcement because environmentalist groups, some of which approve only of the FSC scheme, have jumped in to demand clarification on how CPET reached its decision.
It must be tempting for politicians to stick with Sir Humphreyesque fence-sitting, but CPET’s credibility depends on its judgement being made public. The environmentalists should have no more influence in this area than the timber industry.
