Chamber update 6 Nov 2008
The last meetings in the 3 chambers took place during Wednesday afternoon.
A number of motions were withdrawn and others were modified, as the chambers worked towards the deadline for submitting motions at 6 pm. All chambers were committed to find compromise solutions for their top priority motions so that they can be passed during the working sessions on Thursday and Friday.
Smallholder certification
A number of motions were still circulating related to certification of small holdings and low intensity managed forest. The motions concern smaller adjustments of the current rules and do not seem controversial. For example, it is proposed to exclude protected areas from the calculation of operation size eligible for certification according to the rules for small and low intensity managed forest (SLIMF) regardless of their size, and to exempt small holdings from the requirement to translate the public summary report.
Controlled Wood still under debate
In spite of general support for the intention to improve implementation of the existing controlled wood system as well as exploring alternative options, the two motions related to CW were the most heavily discussed motions of the day. Even the environmental chamber seemed to internally disagree on details of the CW related motions. Apparently some members of the environmental chamber are challenging the motions as being too strict, even though they have already been generally accepted by economic chamber.
Performance of Certification bodies
A new amended motion was presented on Wednesday, with the same intent as the former motions but containing more specific details: The performance of certification bodies shall be evaluated based on the number of CARs issued by ASI, and poorly performing CBs shall be audited more frequently. ASI shall develop performance criteria, evaluate CBs based on these and publish the results on its homepage. Furthermore, ASI shall increase the number of unannounced audits.
Should FSC promote products from communities?
This was one of Wednesday’s hot topics in the corridors. Some Social Chamber member were convinced that a market exists for Community Forest Products, and that FSC should develop as system for labelling such products, however this approach was not unanimously accepted in the chamber.
