Day 060 - 02 Dec 94 - Page 24


     
     1
     2                            (Short Adjournment)
     3
     4   MR. MORRIS:  Just a further question on that document.  You read
     5        it carefully overnight, did you?
     6        A.  Yes, I read it.
     7
     8   Q.   Would you now accept that is a broadly accurate picture of
     9        the development of concern over CFCs?
    10        A.  I honestly do not know if it is accurate.  Certainly
    11        some of the dates are familiar to me, not all of them are,
    12        but whether it is broadly accurate, I would not like to
    13        say.
    14
    15   Q.   I am not talking about the exact details for every point,
    16        but in terms of the development of concern, would that be a
    17        broadly accurate summary?
    18        A.  In terms of development of concern, yes.  I think one
    19        item is missing, however, and that was the UK decision in
    20        July 1987 to make a plan to phase out of CFCs in the UK.
    21        That was ahead of the Montreal Protocol in September 1987.
    22        The Montreal Protocol itself only gives a timetable to
    23        phase out CFCs.  We are ahead of that plan by a long way.
    24
    25   MR. RAMPTON:  My Lord, this is a document which has no date on
    26        it.  It appears to have emanated from what I might call the
    27        real authentic Greenpeace organisation, as far as the
    28        Defendants are concerned, in July of this year.  If it is
    29        to be asserted that there is an accurate account,
    30        chronological account, of what Mr. Morris calls "concerns
    31        about CFCs", then I would have thought it was necessary for
    32        the Defendants to call evidence to prove it to be so;
    33        otherwise the only admissible evidence we have in this
    34        court about the development of scientific and public
    35        concern is that given to your Lordship by Professor Duxbury
    36        in July.
    37
    38   MS. STEEL:   Can I just say, Mr. Rampton has just made reference
    39        to the real or authentic Greenpeace.  For the record,
    40        I would like to correct the picture.  I just want to say
    41        that London Greenpeace has actually existed in this country
    42        for longer than Greenpeace UK.
    43
    44   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Precisely what I was going to say.
    45
    46   MR. MORRIS:  That is recognised by Greenpeace UK.  The second
    47        point, I think, unfortunately for Mr. Rampton -----
    48
    49   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Do not argue the weight of things now.
    50 
    51   MR. MORRIS:  On this document ----- 
    52 
    53   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I will look at all the evidence in due course
    54        and see where it takes me.
    55
    56   MR. MORRIS:  I would argue that whereas the detail cannot be
    57        used as evidence, the broad picture of the development of
    58        the concern has been accepted by the witness, which is the
    59        most important thing.
    60

Prev Next Index