Day 292 - 01 Nov 96 - Page 52


     
     1
     2        Page 19:  no recycled content, office stationery, before
     3        1990.
     4
     5        Page 20:  agrees McDonald's was using recycled paper
     6        content for PR purposes.  What that means is that he said,
     7        actually, that they had not announced -- we said they were
     8        using that for propaganda purposes, and he said they never
     9        announced it.  We put to him a document where, in fact, it
    10        says, you know, how their office paper was made out of
    11        recycled paper.
    12
    13        Page 21:  two and four hole trays not used in Europe, and
    14        paper bags had little recycled content in Europe.
    15
    16        So, the overall picture that was developing after all this
    17        cross-examination, once we actually went back to the
    18        relevant time in this case, which was 1990 or before, and
    19        once we got beyond concentrating on the items that
    20        McDonald's were flagging up as being important ones, it
    21        turns out that very little was recycled of any kind in
    22        Europe or anywhere else, as far as any of the evidence is
    23        concerned, you know, at the relevant time or before.
    24
    25        Page 25 to 26:  CFCs in Turkey.  There was an idea from
    26        Mr. Oakley that they had to use CFC blowing agents in
    27        Turkey or HCFCs -- I can't remember which it was now --
    28        because somehow the supplier did not have the capability of
    29        producing or economic considerations because of import
    30        duties, but they had not stopped, as we put to him -- wait
    31        a minute.  I don't know if it was there or another time.
    32        But the point was that they were exporting other items to
    33        Turkey at the same time, and they were moving packaging all
    34        over the place.  They were supplying, I think, Eastern
    35        Europe with their packaging from other countries.  So,
    36        really, when he said economic considerations, that is
    37        really what it came down to, that they were prepared to use
    38        damaging packaging materials if it was economically
    39        beneficial.
    40
    41        Then on page 29, there is the vast empty gravel pits which
    42        are unfortunately being filled up with McDonald's packaging
    43        and other people's packaging waste.
    44
    45        Page 32, he recognised that environment/index.html">litter is a danger.  There was
    46        a lot of -- he recognised that.  It was not just a question
    47        of unsightliness; it had other damaging implications.
    48
    49        On page 33, he said that how they used the packaging for
    50        promoting the brand image.  Then he said that all packaging
    51        ends up as environment/index.html">litter or in landfill.
    52
    53        Then he said, on page 34, that Oakbrook was responsible for
    54        all the packaging in Europe, which, again, he should know
    55        -- and, presumably, I think McDonald's probably accept
    56        now, like they accept the point about being responsible for
    57        what happens in the supply chain; I should think they now
    58        must accept responsibility for the relevance of what
    59        McDonald's anywhere in the world does, as far as this case
    60        is concerned.  It is the McDonald's system that is at issue

Prev Next Index