Although WWF and FSC continue to insist on good-faith collaboration, they have again launched a seemingly coordinated, public attack on Resolute without warning or consultation. That’s not collaborative, it’s not in good faith, and it’s at odds with the tenor and spirit of our productive, face-to-face meetings with WWF in the recent past. Resolute is one of many companies with legitimate and serious concerns over FSC processes, and yet the attacks—led by non-collaborative groups like Greenpeace, but sadly abetted by others—have focused almost exclusively on Resolute. Worse yet, the attacks rely on poor assumptions, flawed information, and skewed perspectives and motives. Here’s how.
In their various communications, both FSC and WWF have alluded to “the spirit of collaboration” in the public dialogue. We would like to take WWF up on that and present them with this set of questions that are raised by their press release. The public deserves candid answers from all stakeholders, which includes WWF.
— Resolute has partnered with WWF for years and routinely made senior executives available for discussion and cooperation. Why were we informed of the timing and content of your public statement only the night before it was released?
— Did WWF collaborate in any way with Greenpeace or any other NGO on this press release and, if so, when did that occur and what was the substance of those discussions?
— WWF’s release implies that Resolute is somehow undermining FSC’s purpose and reputation, yet there are no specifics to support that allegation. How do you justify that disparaging assertion, especially in light of FSC’s explicit assurance to us that raising concerns about FSC policy is “perfectly legitimate?” Can WWF point to any statement or position by Resolute that is not in good faith?
— Is WWF truly contending that Resolute or any other FSC member has no right to contest certification policy or decision-making?
— Other companies considering a partnership with WWF would be right to wonder whether, after we met or exceeded a number of goals set by WWF, they too might find themselves publicly disparaged as we have just been. What does WWF say to companies concerned that WWF’s empirical benchmarks can be eclipsed by arbitrary, subjective, and unspecified accusations?
We invite WWF’s response to these questions, and we will post those details in this space.
3 Comments. Leave new
[…] raised by some Canadian timber companies (in particular, Resolute Forest Products) and involving major international ENGOs, a Quebec government minister, and the president of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). We are […]
[…] December 16, 2015: Three weeks after Resolute explained its concerns in detail, FSC sent a letter to Resolute announcing its intention to launch a mediation process. The letter, sent after the end of the business day, was followed up the next morning with a press release. Greenpeace and WWF both promptly issued press releases urging Resolute to engage in the mediation process. (Resolute responded to WWF’s press release in this blog post.) […]
This fool has catered to a rogue president. Instead of getting him impeached he catered to him. Now he is denying the majority of republicans the support of the canadate they choose. Another establishment bought and paid for politician. Kick his ass out with no benefits.