---

Rainforests and Logging

My Lords, the very name of Eden resounds with meaning. It combines solid political experience with the magic of the biblical garden and of the global environment, as we have heard. The noble Lord, whom I have known for many years since childhood, has considerable experience of south Asia and other parts of the world, and it is wholly appropriate that he should be introducing the urgent subject of the rainforest. The noble Lord has set out all the arguments admirably and has given us some astounding statistics. I thank him for giving me the opportunity to mention one aspect of illegal logging and timber production—the use of slave labour, in the Brazilian rain forest in this instance. All noble Lords will know that the Amazon region is under threat not only environmentally but from grave abuses of human rights by loggers and landowners. Fortunately, President Lula’s Government have recently taken giant steps towards the environmental lobby, but the region is so vast and uncontrollable and finance so limited—in part because of macroeconomic constraints and national debt—that every initiative seemed dwarfed by the overall task. The main concern of human rights agencies is the plight of illegal workers who are being forced or enticed into logging and ranching operations, becoming the slaves of the loggers and ranchers and the unwitting agents of the destruction of the rainforest. Many of the culprits are simply clearing land for agriculture, with an eye to the lucrative meat and soya exports, as well as timber exports. We know from many different sources—researchers, priests and NGO staff, some of whom take considerable risks to find out—that workers from the back streets of cities in Minas Gerais find themselves, through fraudulent offers of transport, food and high salaries, in the power of the gatos or middle men. They literally lose their identity. They are suddenly transported hundreds of miles and end up isolated in camps such as the charcoal batterias in the Mato Grosso. A friend of mine has described the conditions there, talking of the tree stumps and the wreckage of the forest, the red and eroded earth, the overpowering, choking smoke, and the workers moving like ghosts in and out of the smoke around the ovens, their lungs full of ash, heat and charcoal dust. Several writers have described the debt bondage into which contracted forest labourers easily fall, when they have borrowed money for food or essential needs against earnings that seem never to materialise. Frequently, aid workers who try to expose such conditions are shot or threatened with violence. Only last February, in a famous case, a 73 year-old American nun, Sister Dorothy Stang, was murdered in Para state, where she had campaigned for people’s rights and the protection of the Amazon forest for 30 years. Four rural community workers who had also stood up against illegal land-grabbing, ranching and logging were killed soon afterwards. The government sent troops in, but the murders were only symptomatic of an endemic land tenure system that favours the owners and their gunmen and can be altered only through legislation. In spite of that, the most recent policies of the government are held up as a model in Latin America. In March 2003, President Lula launched a national action plan for the eradication of slavery, which created new penalties for those using slave labour. It initiated legislation to expropriate land for the use of landowners, and it drew up a blacklist of 101 companies that have used slave labour and are now denied any state support. Meanwhile, the ILO has a range of projects that help to ensure compliance with ILO Convention No. 29 on forced labour. In December 2003, the Brazilian Congress approved amendments to the penal code widening the definition of slavery and increasing the sentences. In February 2004, further amendments were approved by the Chamber of Deputies, expropriating land belonging to slave owners. The amendments have been held up in the Senate, and there are fears that senior politicians wish to play down the problem of slavery. Meanwhile, a special mobile inspection group has been quite successful in releasing slave labourers. It freed about 5,000 in 2003 and 2,700 last year. Much of the credit for that is due to the CPT, the Pastoral Land Commission, which is highly respected and receives and acts on initial complaints from the public. The use of mobile courts has enabled the group to impose immediate fines, freeze bank accounts and ensure the co-operation of farm owners. However, the group’s work is limited by the lack of resources and the high level of impunity that continues to exist. That is what I wish to address. Sentencing and policing have been a problem. The minimum penalty is only two years in prison. In Brazil, short sentences under four years are often commuted into social service, such as making a donation to charity and even house arrest. The federal police are not always, as they should be, able to accompany the special group on raids, and prosecutors are themselves targeted and receive death threats. In January last year, three government officials and their driver were murdered while investigating farms in Minas Gerais for this purpose. For all their efforts, the Brazilian Government are already missing their own target of eliminating forced labour in the Amazon region and elsewhere by 2006. Anti-Slavery International, of which I am a council member, recently urged Brazil to give more support to its campaigners and prosecutors and to implement its plans for land reform and social programmes to prevent workers being trapped into slave labour. Will Her Majesty’s Government do what they can to back up the recommendations? We are, after all, a major trading partner of Brazil and one of the importers of Brazilian timber and farm products. Are the Government satisfied that there is proper certification of timber produced according to international labour regulations? One important effect of certification has been the formation of a national buyers’ group. The Forest Stewardship Council has also set new national standards and has encouraged civil society’s participation in forest policy development. I know that the Government support that. Civil society must include all those who are engaged in the industry, not just the local communities and indigenous groups. Will DfID, which has supported the Brazilian rainforest since 1993, give some priority not only to the local community but to the eradication of forced labour and the improvement of labour standards in the rainforest? Will the Foreign and Commonwealth Office raise this issue during its regular human rights dialogue with Brazil? Similarly, Defra could take it up during its dialogue on sustainable development. Perhaps the noble Baroness could kindly pass on these requests to her colleagues. I want to say a final word about national parks in Brazil and elsewhere. Some projects which come under the name of ““national parks”” are very far from the image of the national parks that we have in other countries, as they are in regions that are still prone to illegal loggers and ranchers and are unprotected from the local militia. Last February, the Brazilian Government announced the temporary prohibition of clear-cutting activities in an area of 8.2 million hectares—which, in terms of the figures given by the noble Lord, Lord Eden, obviously may save some areas of rainforest—and a national park spanning 3.7 million hectares in the state of Para. That is a welcome move, provided that the Government can also provide the proper protection. My conclusion is that rainforests are about people as well as forests and that Brazil, having made a promising start in 2003 and notable changes, is now, for many reasons, showing a worrying lack of commitment to ending illegal logging and forced labour. It will need much more encouragement and material support from the international community if it is to comply with UN conventions in the future.