In his letter, Brian Sumner was correct in calling the government spokesperson’s words at Chatham House on banning illegal logging “hollow”. They were I think, rather silly. The government is taking what steps it can, but you just cannot, as suggested, visit the UK’s Proceeds of Crime Act on illegal loggers in some distant producing country. If there are timber ‘criminals’ it is vastly unlikely they are to be found among UK importers, merchants and timber agencies.
Overseas is where the problems lie, and we’re not talking of some little bush sawmill deep in the jungle. Dr Mike Packer alleges “well over half of commercial logging in the tropics is illegal”. I would think that statement hard to justify with any real proof. However, bear in mind that to process and ship large volumes of illegally sourced timber there must be lots of money changing hands and substantial facilities available to transport, process and ship. The difficulty in enforcement, is that when timber and products arrive at their destination port you cannot tell the legal from the illegal. It all looks the same because it has most likely been processed in the same mills. It would be a fair guess that perhaps every timber importer in Europe has at some time entirely unknowingly bought and sold some illegally sourced timber.
Unfortunately, the idea of trying to stop the entry of illegal timber is unworkable. Illegal sourcing can be curtailed only at the source. Subscribing to the various certification and chain of custody schemes is certainly a good start, but only as good as the enforcement by the authorities in the source countries.
The UK government ought to know this and possibly could offer to assist in this enforcement through project funding for independent monitoring agencies such as SGS or through the International Tropical Timber Organisation. Such interventions might not be altogether welcome, but are a more sensible offer than empty threats of prosecution.
Gordon Gresham
Market consultant
