[Certif-agrofuel] EU workshop sustainability criteria

[Nina Holland]

Hello,

Here you can find a report of this weeks high profile workshop on sustainability criteria organised by MEP Corbey. The speakers on GHG were good, the ones on biodiversity really bad.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/public/story_page/064-22625-064-03-10-911-20080229STO22603-2008-04-03-2008/default_en.htm

Below you find my own impression of that workshop.

Best, nina

==========================================

After yesterday's workshop organised by Corbey in the EP, I'm  
extremely concerned that we are loosing the social issues debate big  
time. It is NOT going one step in the right direction.

The workshop was much bigger than I thought, held in one of the  
plenary halls, and with many foreign missions attending such as  
Brazil, Colombia, Malaysia (a whole block) and Indonesia. Other MEPs  
were there: Claude Turmes, Caroline Lucas (who expressed doubts about  
effectiveness of criteria), Pilar Ayuso, Parish, Weisgerber, Blokland.

The expert panel on GHG emission wasn't that bad but biodiversity and  
social issues was dramatic. The guy from Proforest who spoke on social  
issues did mention a lot of issues as well as the indirect impacts  
socially, but basically concluded that criteria couldn't handle those,  
but did not put a conclusion to that reality. Social issues came at  
the very end.

Basically, this was what happened. A lot of NGOs were there, T&E,  
Birdlife, GP Oxfam, FoE, Misereor, etc. Only Ulrike made an  
intervention on social issues, talking about slavery, land conflicts,  
etc. referring to international conventions.
Then the spokesperson from the Brazilian mission took the word and  
called her arrogant and paternalistic 2 times, said how well the  
police was executing labour laws etc.
Then the Indonesian embassy spoke saying how the Indonesia biofuel  
plan (10% by 2010) will generate 3.5 millino jobs, that Indonesian  
NGO's play a part in this, and referring to the 700 conflicts  
(probably those mentioned in the FoE report on Indonesia) downplaying  
them.
Then the Malaysia government said how they positively contribute to  
the RSPO, and how the EU should NOT impose any extra social or  
environmental criteria than  those proposed by the EC. That 30% of  
palmoil from Malaysai is produced by smallholders and that they will  
be affected by these criteria. That they will send more written  
comments to Corbey, and how the criteria should not impact  
international trade.
Greg Archer from LowCVP advocated again the BSI, the RSPO, RTRS and  
urging the ad hoc working group (now called the Mertens group) to not  
'reinvent the wheel'.

After that, unfortunately, nobody present counterattacked on the  
social issues. It would have been so easy! Me neither but I have to  
say a large NGO speaking up at such point would have had a lot more  
impacts; but nevertheless I really regret not having tried to get to  
speak (maybe i feel i've been doing the same talk too many times).

Lucas and Turmes asked good questions, Weisgerber and Ayuso mainly  
protectionist for European farmers, Parish asking the panel if GMOs  
would not be a good solution.

*** Corbey's conclusions were dramatic. On social issues she echoed  
what the different embassies had said and concluded that there can  
also be positive social impacts and agrofuel production can contribute  
to 'good living'. That the GHG efficiency of agrofuel production is  
much better than in Europe.
That ILO criteria are important and should be applied to all products.  
That free and prior informed consent (mentioned by Ulrike and earlier  
proposed by Corbey herself) would only be relevant in certain cases  
and therefore not good as a general criterion. Most difficult is the  
rising food prices, that is a global issue. She asks for more written  
input, comments, soon.

Claude Turmes is very skeptical about the impact of agrofuels on  
rising food prices, says it's not based on facts. I'll try to write up  
some notes on the meeting Monday as well, later. Corbey is more  
convinced that agrofuels have or will have a big impact on food  
prices. By the time ULrike made her statements, Claude had left the  
workshop.

WTO compatibility was again and again mentioned, Greg Archer  
maintaining that no social criterion would be WTO compatible.

So all in all, I'm very skeptical about the motivation of both Corbey  
(and also doubt Turmes) to insist on a full set of social criteria. We  
urgently need to send Corbey, Turmes and the shadows, and the ad hoc  
working group or COREPER, and the ENVI and ITRE committees all the  
reports, declarations etc.

I'm intending to do with the 2 Brazilian reports (Agribusiness and  
biofuels; an explosive mixture and 'depolluting doubts') and try to  
get the 'Sugar Slaves' documentary copied.

I hope as many of you as possible can help and take on the sending of  
reports, or set up meetings with the most crucial people. Once we have  
found out who is on the ad hoc working group, we can to a certain  
extent approach them directly too.

This is a crucial time for all of us to act, pleas all consider what  
you can do!

NIna



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	FYI
Date: 	Thu, 06 Mar 2008 20:41:42 +0100
From: 	David LELOUP <david.leloup at imagine-magazine.com>
To: 	Nina Holland <nina at corporateeurope.org>




-- 


David LELOUP
Journaliste
Imagine demain le monde
209 rue Henri Maus
B-4000 Liège
Belgique

T +32 (0)4 232 17 75
M +32 (0)497 31 96 64
F +32 (0)4 225 94 27
E david.leloup at imagine-magazine.com
W www.imagine-magazine.com
B http://david-leloup.blogspot.com



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/certif-agrofuel/attachments/20080307/d6e04546/attachment.htm