-appeal to minister
The Forest Products Association (FPA) yesterday charged that “illegal” action being pursued by the forestry commission against 10 major concessionaires will cause significant losses to the country and it appealed to the Minister of Agriculture to seek professional advice on the sector.
The FPA in a press statement yesterday said it is “increasingly concerned at the continuing unprofessional and erratic advice being given by the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) to the Minister of Agriculture and upon which he is acting, specifically with regard to the wrongful and illegal imposition of exceedingly punitive fines on forestry concession holders and the resultant closure of the operations of a number of TSA (Timber Sales Agreement) holders.”
The FPA also flayed the commission over what it said was its “maladministration, incompetence and improper application of the Forestry Act and TSA Regulation,” which the association said resulted in the illegal and improper demands for compensation by the GFC on a number of concession holders for alleged and unproved breaches of harvesting procedures, amounting so far to over $200 million. Barama Company Limited, Toolsie Persaud Limited and several others have been fined by the GFC for harvesting and other transgressions.
According to the FPA, on January 31 this year, following a meeting on January 8 with the Minister of Agriculture and the Chairman of the GFC, on the subject of Pre-harvest Inventories, the association wrote the Commissioner of Forests pointing out that the “GFC’s demand for complete, that is 100% pre-harvest timber inventories before approval of Annual Opera-tions Plans (AOP), is a major shift of policy.”
The FPA pointed out and documented the difficulty which the industry would face in adhering to this demand because of the dearth of specialist surveyor skills needed in the field of timber enumeration and the extensive time and cost which would be involved, the release stated. But there was no response to the FPA letter, the release added.
No response
Moreover, over a year ago on January 29, 2007, the industry sought clarification on the “guidelines” announced by the GFC in 2006 but there was no response from the commission.
However, the commission seemed content with “verbal pronouncements and warnings of punitive action,” the FPA said.
However, when challenged by the industry on the “practical implications of this approach by the GFC … the commission would not commit its position in writing.”
The FPA said further that progressive enumeration of inventories by batches of blocks over a period of 2 to 3 months, endorsed by the commission for harvesting by the submission of a “notice of intention” by the TSA holder with subsequent sporadic onsite inspection at the discretion of the GFC, has always been the accepted practice. It has never, therefore, been the practice for Annual Operation Plans (AOPs) to include prior submission of 100% inventories, the FPA declared.
In fact, the FPA argued, the likelihood of the GFC being able to conduct 100% inspection is extremely remote, adding that the GFC’s current rate of inspection is 2.5%.
The industry supports 100% timber enumeration to ensure sustainable harvesting practices which had been the past practice, the FPA noted. But the demand by the GFC for the industry to provide this data in advance at point of submission of the AOP has resulted in the stoppage of all timber harvesting for over 3 months.
Misleading
“It is most unfortunate, therefore, that the commission has misled the minister into publicly stating at a recent press conference that the demand for complete timber inventories prior to the commencement of harvesting is in breach of guidelines confirmed by the GFC in 2007,” the FPA asserted.
The association also maintained that the commission had in fact misled the minister into accepting that it had acted properly in demanding compensation for alleged breaches of procedures or in threatening concessionaires with closure if compensation was not paid.
The FPA noted that some TSA holders who were unwilling or unable to suffer the loss of business, markets, and retrenchment of workers and the financial consequences of extended closure, have agreed under duress to pay substantial amounts of compensation.
The FPA said it “is in receipt of correspondence from the GFC to concessionaires, which has illegally threatened the concessionaire with “immediate closure” should the concessionaire elect to challenge the alleged breach of harvesting procedures and not to pay compensation, but instead seek redress through the courts.”
The FPA expressed its deep concern, therefore, that the minister at his press conference on April 30 “endorsed the GFC’s attempt to deny the fundamental rights of TSA holders to protection under the law, by illegally withholding TSAs and closing down the operations of those concessionaires who have challenged the GFC’s demand for compensation in court.”
It is apparent to the FPA, the release stated, that “the GFC has either withheld or failed to inform the minister that in every case where concessionaires are accused of being in breach of the regulations for harvesting without prior submission of inventories, the GFC had in fact issued Timber Marketing Certificates, collected royalty, 2% export levy and authorised all the documentation, including Export Certification, for the shipment of the timber so harvested.”
The FPA pointed out further that in every case where the GFC had authorized the shipment of timber for export and collected royalties and export levy, the TSA holder had fully complied with the procedures for harvesting which were in place, sanctioned and administered at the time by the GFC.
The FPA declared that it was therefore “now wholly improper and absolutely illegal for the GFC to now demand compensation from concessionaires for the shipment of timber for which they have already paid royalties and other forestry dues.”
In addition, the FPA noted that in accordance with the Forestry Act, once a concessionaire has paid the prescribed royalties on harvested timber, “the timber becomes the property of the concessionaire and the removal and export of the timber has been, in effect, approved by the GFC.”
According to the FPA, it is satisfied that the GFC had also improperly advised the minister with regard to his powers under the Forestry Act, to authorize the Commissioner of Forests to accept any compensation payment from a concessionaire in the amounts which had been imposed.
Loss of US$10M per month
Meanwhile, the FPA contended that the “action now being taken by the GFC against some 10 major concessionaires in the industry, including the arbitrary and capricious closing down of a number of them, will cause the industry permanent loss of export clients and markets.”
This action, the FPA added, will also “result in the retrenchment of many hundreds of employees and it has already caused the loss of some US$10 million per month in revenue to the country.”
The minister, the FPA said, need only examine the performance of the industry at the conclusion of 2006 into 2007 when the industry earned in excess of US$60 million annually and was employing over 20,000 persons, exceeding even the contributions to the economy of the rice and fisheries sectors, and compare that with the coming months’ results of the industry’s production and earnings for 2008, to understand the degree of collapse which is taking place as a result of the GFC’s actions against the industry.
The GFC must be held accountable for the declining state of the industry, the FPA charged.
It also pointed out that “the industry has been for some considerable time now all but excluded from having an effective presence and voice in the governance of the commission, the board of which is now dominated by government functionaries and appointments.”
Public appeal
Meantime, the FPA said it is now left with little recourse but to publicly appeal to the Minister of Agriculture before it is too late to recover the enormous damage already being done, to seek the professional advice of international organizations such as the International Timber Trade Organization (ITTO), to conduct a full investigation into the operations and functions of the GFC and the accountability of the commission to the country for the professional administration and regulation of the forest industry.
In this regard, the FPA maintained that it is still committed to working in collaboration with the minister and the government.
