Day 292 - 01 Nov 96 - Page 11
1 conclusive, that similar propaganda for pilot schemes, and
2 similar non-recycling by the company from pilot schemes,
3 has happened in other countries as well. Anyway, the main
4 thing is that they have used their pilot schemes for
5 propaganda purposes and they have not made any attempt to
6 do customer recycling.
7
8 In fact, yes, Mr. Beavers recognised the benefits of
9 in-store customer recycling of their packaging and that the
10 working of it, quote, does not cause difficulty. That is
11 what he said, when he came back for his second stint. So
12 if a member of their US board of directors is prepared to
13 go on record on that, then we feel the company clearly
14 should be doing it if they claim to have any environmental
15 concern.
16
17 Mr. Langet said that less than 10 stores out of 10,000 in
18 the USA are now doing customer recycling. In fact, we also
19 heard, I think from Paul Preston when he came back, that
20 the Manchester scheme had been abandoned. And I will come
21 on to that. It seems that it was just getting to be on
22 stream for actually effective use when the earlier
23 witnesses were giving evidence. And just at that moment
24 the company decided to abolish it.
25
26 I mean, Edward Oakley -- I couldn't find the exact
27 document, but it is one of the McFact cards ----
28
29 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I am pretty sure I have them in a note
30 anyway. That is an important part of your case, is it not,
31 so far as the deception is concerned?
32
33 MR. MORRIS: Yes, yes. I mean, I am going to try and flag up
34 the deception part of it.
35
36 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Carry on now.
37
38 MR. MORRIS: Because there is a number of deceptions to look
39 out for. That is one of them. There is another deception
40 which is very important, which is the recycled paper which
41 in America they cannot called paper recycled unless it is
42 post consumer or contains substantial post consumer waste.
43
44 There is the deception on whenever they seem to, in a
45 country, prefer polystyrene packaging, then they always say
46 how paper packaging is more damaging to the environment.
47 But where they have got paper packaging, they usually put
48 out information saying that plastic packaging is more
49 damaging to the environment. So they always try to
50 convince the customers that they are doing the right thing,
51 but the net effect of it all is an admission that all types
52 of packaging are inevitably damaging to the environment,
53 that McDonald's has considered.
54
55 And if, as they say, although I do not think there is any
56 substantial evidence on this whatsoever, certainly not
57 reliable, that the use of knives, forks and spoons and
58 plates is damaging to the environment, so what, we are not
59 being sued by, you know, the population of the world for
60 criticising the damaging effects of knives, forks, spoons
