Day 293 - 04 Nov 96 - Page 39


     
     1        interest; not strictly, but a similar way of approaching
     2        it.
     3
     4        Secondly, he was clear about it when he was supporting what
     5        I was saying, and then when he was not supporting what
     6        I was saying, he was not saying, "No, it would only be 30
     7        times as great an area or 50"; he just said, "No, it would
     8        not be as much as that."
     9
    10        So, I think, in terms of weighing those two bits of
    11        evidence, the one in our favour -- which, to me, is just
    12        purely logical thing, as well, anyway -- is the greater
    13        weight.  I will just see if I have anything else to say.
    14        (Pause)
    15
    16   MS. STEEL:   I have not got a lot I wanted to say.  Just on the
    17        subject of figures, I have not really looked at these
    18        figures since we were questioning the packaging witnesses;
    19        but just that you might remember about when Mr. Kouchoucos
    20        was giving evidence about McDonald's CFC usage compared to,
    21        I think it was world production -- it might have been USA
    22        production -- and that they left out -- I don't know
    23        whether he worked out the figures himself, but somebody at
    24        McDonald's had worked out all these figures about how they
    25        compared to world usage, and it turned out that they had
    26        left all their HCFC usage out of the figures; so that they
    27        were, effectively, minimising their involvement.  I just
    28        think that, as a general position on figures coming from
    29        McDonald's, the figures that they give are usually the
    30        minimum, and that, you know, that should be the starting
    31        point; that is the minimum figures and then, you know, you
    32        have to add on all the bits that have been left off for one
    33        reason or another, or just, you know, left out of the
    34        equation.  But I have not looked up that, so -----
    35
    36   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  No.  I bear your point in mind.  There were
    37        no Gee Whizz figures on this aspect, were there?
    38
    39   MS. STEEL:   No.  There is something in one of their -- no.
    40        There was something in one of their documents, that thing
    41        about how if McDonald's lined up all the hamburgers sold
    42        since 1955, they would certainly -----
    43
    44   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   Yes, I have those things.  You say they
    45        ought not to be Gee Whizz figures, but "Oh Dear" figures.
    46
    47   MS. STEEL:   Yes.
    48
    49   MR JUSTICE BELL:  There are not any with regard to packaging,
    50        let alone forest, are there? 
    51 
    52   MS. STEEL:   No.  But, I mean, if you take this figure of, if 
    53        McDonald's lined up at the hamburgers sold since 1955, they
    54        would reach to the moon and back five times, you have to
    55        assume that packaging would go there as well, because it is
    56        even bigger than the hamburger.  The hamburger gets eaten,
    57        whereas the packaging just stays forever -- or certainly in
    58        the case of the hamburger wrappers in this country, which
    59        are Polystyrene.
    60

Prev Next Index