Day 292 - 01 Nov 96 - Page 46
1 actually been collected for recycling?
2
3 MR. MORRIS: It might have been the Nottingham thing, I do not
4 remember, but it can be checked.
5
6 Page 12, we started going into the details of the content
7 of the various.... Or do we? Hang on. It does there,
8 anyway. A third of all fry boxes. Now, fry boxes - I am
9 trying to understand my note - involve 60 percent -- sorry,
10 yes. I believe what that refers to - it can be checked -
11 is that a third of their fry boxes are recycled and fry
12 boxes are involved in 60 percent of their cardboard
13 packaging. So it is a third of 60 percent that is actually
14 recycled, or it was in that particular year. I have not
15 really put all the years down.
16
17 It cross-references to page 49, line 40, where he says,
18 yes, i.e., he agreed with something then. This is not the
19 best way to ----
20
21 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It does not matter. You are giving me the
22 references, which I can read again myself.
23
24 MR. MORRIS: Right.
25
26 MR. JUSTICE BELL: If I need to.
27
28 MR. MORRIS: Page 13, Persico does not supply Japan, Canada and
29 Australia. And this is where we were trying to work out
30 how much packaging is not supplied by Persico, which is
31 fairly substantial amounts. The deceptive point is - I
32 want to check it out - line 19, page 90, line 26, page 60.
33 Oh, yes, he says in his statement: The only packaging used
34 by McDonald's in which a blowing agent is used or required
35 is the foam packaging for our sandwiches and some breakfast
36 items and foam hot cups.
37
38 And the way he puts it, this is part of the whole deceptive
39 approach of McDonald's, the only packaging used by
40 McDonald's, you know, as if there is an enormous range
41 where it does not apply. And then we went through a very
42 substantial amount of packaging that that foam packaging
43 would apply to.
44
45 So it was just a point, it was not an enormous point there,
46 but McDonald's tend to underplay, at the minimum, what they
47 consider to be the damaging nature of their packaging or
48 even the content of their packaging.
49
50 Then it says here see -- no problem next to food. I found
51 that reference later on. He said there is no law, never
52 has been a law that he knew of. That was on day 62. The
53 last point on day 62 in these notes, 67, line 59, no law
54 versus recycled paper or polystyrene touching food except
55 in Scandinavia. This was another deceptive point from
56 McDonald's, which we have heard repeatedly, "Oh no, we
57 cannot use recycled materials next to food".
58
59 But not only has there not been any scrap of evidence to
60 prove that, but in fact their own expert witness, their own
