From our position depends, whether we can save the forest industry of Ukraine-deputy Chairman of the State committee Vladimir Bondar

Deputy head of state agency of forest Resources of Ukraine Volodymyr Bondar gave an interview to Lutsk television channel, where he responded to the sharp questions of journalists. In particular, he told about the reasons for the presidential veto on the moratorium on export of raw wood, a scandalous investigation of the British organization on illegal export of forests, problems of the forestry industry.

The President vetoed the moratorium on the export of raw materials. What is his motivation?

President and administration of the President explained their actions clearly and specifically. As I realised from the publication, the President advocates for strengthening the fight against smuggling, including the forest, but the law was made between the first and second reading various corrections that violate the international obligations of Ukraine. And from the president's point of view, this thing needs to be corrected. From myself, I can add that we have worked very long on this law together with the developers. And our arguments were the following. Firstly, the raw material is not recycled in Ukraine. Today it is not processed in Ukraine, it will not be recycled and tomorrow. and therefore it is necessary to understand the time frames that should be given to our businesses in order to resolve the issue of this raw material. Otherwise it will just be piled up in warehouses and at some time the enterprise forestry stop working.

The second question, which passed now in the law. This is a matter of not only its own firewood, but also derivative products. We are talking about chips, we're talking about piclets, we're talking about firewood chopped, it's processing products, including firewood chopped, because they pass through the appropriate droplets, this is the equipment road-crossing, which was brought to Ukraine. And if you take the Transcarpathian region in particular, it is as if I understand more than 500 people are engaged in production and export of this product. These meter firewood could not be classified as a business forest. So I think these things need to correct in the law, fix and make them out of the prohibition of export. Because in this case it will hurt the Ukrainian economy.

How do you evaluate the investigation of the English organization on uncontrolled forest exports to Europe?

In order to make a systematic accusation, or an analysis of a phenomenon, it is necessary to have for that reason. We have found out the information published by this Organization on the basis of which documents it issued this research and analyzed the implications. The organization is located in the UK, registered in 2015 year and consists of one person. One person is the director. This director is not a specialist, has no forestry education in the field. These facts say that this research can be taken into account only partially. If we take further vision and destiny of this Organization, we have faced with the following facts. This director of the organization or its representatives were not announced to be contacted by our public organizations, public activists, who gave them their data. Who are these activists, what data they have provided, we are not known, but to say that it is official data on the felling, we cannot export today. They were not used by state official data. Everything is built on assumptions, on the guessed, on the statements of non-official persons who have no evidence to give. To build a serious policy, or attitude to the State on such facts and arguments, I think wrong. Moreover, the Ukrainian public activists, who say that the data they have taken, they are distorted, they are not true, they are rigged.

If so many scandals regarding this organization, so many inaccuracies, so many problems, it seems to me that this situation was someone inspired and someone directly profitable. It is not surprising that it has caused such a reaction from the part, including government structures. It seems to me that the prime minister of Ukraine has not been correctly informed on this side. But the reaction is, and I hope that our forestry can prove their innocence. As far as I know, all forestry enterprises worked absolutely in the legal plane, and if the export was exported, it was according to all laws of Ukraine.

Who is advantageous to this campaign to discredit the industry?

This is not only a discredit of the forest industry, but also the state of Ukraine. Why? We speak not only about the lumber in the round form. If you read the article carefully, then there was written about lumber of unknown origin. In other words, the context of the article is that in Ukraine there are solid illegal chopping, and thus the forest is prepared according to standards that do not meet the requirements of European structures. and therefore, to produce something is wrong in accordance with the European rules and regulations. That is all the forest industry of Ukraine, I once again want to emphasize, not only and not so much the round wood, but also production of the round wood, starting with the production of lumber, and finishing with finished products, it is necessary to prohibit the implementation of the European Market. That is, the Ukrainian forest will choose from the European market. This is a very problematic position and it would have caused much damage to Ukraine. Such giants as "Ikea" announced the entrance to the Ukrainian market. We all know that this company does not work for contraband and illegal circuits. And they decided to enter exactly at this time, studying the Ukrainian market, and they were studied very long, as opposed to public experts, they did it sufficiently systematic and professional. And when they would start entering the Ukrainian market, they would have been comforted. This would be a serious redistribution of the market within Ukraine. This is not particularly like the competitors in our direction. Undoubtedly this factor, like other factors, were based on the writing of this material, I am convinced of it.

That is, in discredit industry there are certain stakeholders?

Let's list the factors that preceded this article. For the first time the forest industry is completely deprived of funding. That was never. For three consecutive years the forest industry is not funded. This means that the eastern and southern businesses are forced to suspend actually their existence, because, they can not pay wages, it is not a resource area, they can not plant a new forest, they can not react to challenges such as fires… The resource enterprises also sit down, because on their shoulders the enterprises of the South and east are taken. The industry cannot implement new technologies, the industry cannot respond adequately to the challenges.

The decision to transfer to the concession of forests is further accepted. The majority of the heads of regional and District administrations, deputies of local councils and the industry just came out, and said it would not allow to make privatization. It was not just someone's decision, it was a strategic government solution that is now suspended.

What are the facts for today that prove such things? There are no facts for today. This is the first time that accused of not specific businesses, not individual exporters, but a whole industry.

As for criminal cases, no one has argued that the forest industry has no problems, they are uniquely, but they do not characterize the industry in general. There are separate cases that continue in court, the litigation procedure continues, such a thing is in every industry. I do not understand what is the information load on society? They say that the situation is disastrous, the forests are being cut, they say, the business forest will not be exported, well, the business forest is not imported.

The fact is that we have only two facts. The fact of closure in Ukraine on one classification code and the fact of customs clearance of another code, but it is necessary to consider that we have no unified norms between our legislation and legislation of the European Union.

Europe has 4 classes of quality wood. And we have 3. And under Class "D" does not always fall business wood in our understanding. I can say for sure that nobody of the business forest, systematically I mean, under the Code of appropriate classification is not exported, it is nonsense. In such large volumes it is impossible. It is not a needle to take out at one point. If there is a match with the classification codes, then this issue can be solved, but it is not a business forest, not a plywood raw materials, not high-quality varieties. This is recognized by the low-quality grade, which is not processed in Ukraine. Therefore, they are suited to us under the classification of firewood fuel. This is the definition of the Soviet gost, which we live to today, unfortunately, but this is true. If it is determined by this gost, please tell me whether the firewood is fuel in Ukraine, which go on the chip on the domestic production is normal, and the same wood fuel, which go to the production of chips for export (in that it comes here currency, while The enterprise is officially exported), it causes doubt and such reaction that the forest is exported to export. The forest industry enterprises systematically business forest has not been brought out and exported, even economic conditions do not. Our enterprises have exported the raw material, which is suitable for classification of wood raw materials, and which in Ukraine is not processed, processing as such in Ukraine does not exist. Therefore, it was exported to export, was received by the currency, which went to the development of these enterprises. And it is normal in every country if it does not violate the legislation. As far as I know, this legislation does not violate.

There was such information that 90% of exporters of fuel firewood are state forestry enterprises…

I'm hard to say how many people will import raw materials. Our enterprises did it, but did it according to the current legislation, and problems in this I do not see. Even exporting this raw material, the Code of Customs Classification installs only the customs, no other. The law is written as well. That clarification or explanation of other parties, except customs, is purely a recommendation character.

Code installation is the prerogative of Ukraine's customs authorities. If you export – it is a question to the customs, why they have produced most of the product under this code. But I want to say that such a system, obviously, was not, which would have connected the customs with forestry. It was the process of the permitted state of exports.

What would you say to the simple lissikam, heads of forestry, who are intimidated by this information campaign?

The forest industry is a systemic and serious attack. and checks in the forest industry did not cease. We are constantly checking. All documents are transparent, the chopping is held in accordance with the legislation and clear rules, which are formed in the state, the export takes place according to the clear rules and laws that are available in Ukraine. If there is a need to check the enterprise, so, there is such a need, the industry will react to it quietly.

I want to give Posol and turn to all the Litsivnikov. Today, only from our position depends whether we can preserve the forest industry of Ukraine or it will be destroyed.

And only when the industry is moistened and only when it has clearly formed its position and made a single front, this offensive has succeeded to repel. This is not the first offensive on the forest industry. It happens in stages. Because quite large finances are involved in the way to get out of the privatization of forests, or to come out of concession, and then using not very high culture of some Ukrainians, to destroy the industry. Most countries refused concessions. Only in Russia and Canada – huge countries with huge forest arrays – there is a concession. In other states, it has proven itself quite negatively.

Interestingly, there, where this English organization that conducted a so-called inquiry, there is necessarily a question of concession. They are a forerunner or an accompanying factor in order not to give the forest industry a place, and then the political elite decides on the privatization of forests. I believe that this decision will be the most detrimental to the Ukrainian forest. We cannot go to this decision, because in Ukrainian conditions this will only lead to the fact that the forest industry is to cease to exist.

By materials of the State agency of forest Resources of Ukraine