... A FORUM TO STIMULATE DEBATE ... ... JUST ADD A COMMENT AT ANY ENTRY BELOW... ... FOR THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF TOWN AND VALLEY ...

Saturday, 3 February 2018

Brexit: and lengthening food supply chains

Remember the horse-meat scandal - and how the whole food chain seemed out of control?
Futures Forum: Taking control of the food chain

The problem is that the UK relies on imports of food more than most countries:
Futures Forum: Brexit: and 'What will you eat when the food runs out?'

And what's worrying is that even the food suppliers don't know exactly where their products come from - and that this is going to get even more complicated once we exit the EU:



Revealed: how food makes its way to our plates from the four corners of the world


Friday February 2nd 2018






You’d be amazed how much travel goes into our meals.
Take the Big Mac, for example. The bun will have been baked in Manchester or Banbury, the sauce is from Lancashire and the beef patties are from Scunthorpe or Waterford in Ireland. Meanwhile, the cheese slice comes from Coleraine in Northern Ireland, the pickles are grown in Turkey, the onions in the United States and the lettuce in Spain.
In truth, the international journey taken by the ingredients of the British Big Mac is no greater than for any other burger or snack at a fast food joint. Its story is typical in a food distribution scheme that has become so globalised that the UK now imports ingredients from a staggering 168 countries around the world.

(A Big Mac: Cate Gillon/Getty Images)

Majority of UK food from abroad

In fact, the UK relies so heavily on imports that they account for just over half of all the food we eat – and about three-quarters in the case of fruit and veg. The ingredients in some heavily-processed ready made meals, it seems, make even longer journeys than they do over in the fast food industry.
During the horsemeat scandal food safety inspectors came across a pizza that single-handedly contained 35 ingredients which had come from 60 countries in five continents – demonstrating just how difficult it can be to trace the source of any fraud or contamination in the food processing chain.
Among the global whirlpool of ingredients making up the pizza, the cheese topping contained cheese produced in seven different countries, while the anchovies came from another seven countries – as massive processing plants mix together single ingredients from numerous suppliers in multiple countries and pass them to the next stage in the labyrinthine food manufacturing chain.

Retail food packaging must show the country of origin for beef, veal, lamb, mutton, pork, goat, poultry, fish, shellfish, honey, olive oil, wine, as well as fruit and vegetables that are grown outside the EU. Meanwhile, restaurants and cafes are not obliged to tell you where any of your food comes from.

Mysterious food chains

“Some international food chains are so complex that no-one knows what’s going on. Even the experts can only scratch the surface of where, for example, their meat comes from,” said City University professor of food policy Tim Lang. “And it’s not just the international food chain. Supply chains are like spaghetti inside countries as well,” he said.
A previous study of his showed that even British bread companies didn’t really know what was going on just a few steps earlier in the manufacturing process.

How things have changed

In the olden days things were so much simpler. Back then, we had much more straight forward meat-and-two-veg style diets and if we didn’t rear the chickens and grow the potatoes ourselves, they probably came from the farm round the corner.
Fast forward through decades of travel, immigration, supply chain globalisation, specialist diets, cooking programmes, the rise of multinational companies and trade liberalisation – and the demand for ingredients has mushroomed while the supply chain becomes increasingly spaghetti-like.
Technological innovations such as refrigerated planes and trucks, plastic packaging and faster ships have also played a role in spreading the supply chain – as of course, has our increasing appetite for tasty snacks and ready-made meals.
“People eat far less ‘whole food’ than we used to and far more food that has been processed and made more convenient,”
Tim Benton
“People eat far less ‘whole food’ than we used to and far more food that has been processed and made more convenient,” said Professor Tim Benton, of the University of Leeds.
Colin Khoury, a food expert at the University of Wageningen in the Netherlands, expects the internationalisation of the industry to continue – helped, in part, by a growing health consciousness in wealthier nations.
“The globalisation of diets trend is continuing strongly. Quinoa – from the Andean mountains – was essentially unheard of 15 years ago. Now it is grown in more than 100 countries and eaten in many more,” he said. “Chia seeds – from West Asia and Southern Europe – are one of the next big new crops likely to show up all over the world,” Dr Khoury added.

Different kinds of quinoa are displayed. (MARTIN BUREAU/AFP/Getty Images)

UK need is greater than most

Yet while food chain globalisation has affected most of the planet, the UK is particularly reliant on other countries. That’s because it is a small, densely populated country leaving relatively little room to produce the food we need. And so, despite a population of just 60 million, it’s the fourth biggest importer of vegetables in the world, buying in nearly as many as India – a country with more than 20 times the population of Britain.

Fast food nation

Another reason for our heavy reliance, it seems, is our junk food habit. Only this week, i revealed that the average British household consumes more ultra-processed foods than any other European nation – meals that are inherently international because they tend to involve multiple ingredients and numerous processing stages.
Moreover, Britain is likely to become even more dependent on food imports in the future – and from an even wider range of countries.
“With Brexit, food sourcing goes from far and wide to even farer and wider. So we might start getting oranges from Florida as opposed to Spain or Greece,” said Prof Lang. “This is the biggest restructuring of the food system for 50 years and it is terribly worrying,” he added. “The Europeanisation of the British food system began in 1967 and it’s now all going to change. We don’t know what form it will take – it may be food shortages, we just can’t tell,” he said.

Revealed: how food makes its way to our plates from the four corners of the world - The i newspaper online iNews
.
.
.

Friday, 2 February 2018

Plans for Port Royal: selling the Drill Hall, rather than producing a masterplan

The front page of the Herald seems to miss the point: yes, the District Council has seized on the Scoping Study's survey results that 110 people would like 'new food and drink outlets' at Port Royal:
Futures Forum: Plans for Port Royal: demand for cafes and restaurants come a poor third

But neither the District Council nor the consultants could be accused of showing any 'vision' for the Drill Hall - as the photo on the front page is in fact from the 'vision' of local architectural designer Alex Vick:
Futures Forum: Plans for Port Royal: 'Alternative ideas as to how the Port Royal area of Sidmouth could be redeveloped'




Sidmouth and Ottery breaking news and sport - Sidmouth Herald 

And so we are back to square one:
Futures Forum: Plans for Port Royal 2009: "We are desperate for someone to buy this site and to give us good money for it."

On the inside pages, the Herald looks at what the consultants actually proposed:




Revealed: Consultants’ conclusions on Port Royal | Latest Sidmouth and Ottery News - Sidmouth Herald

Two years ago, the whole process had been set in motion - and now the consultants' conclusions have been brushed aside:
Futures Forum: Plans for Port Royal: anticipating a Regeneration Board >>> ‘Scoping Report for the eastern end of Sidmouth’ to be presented to Cabinet >>> Wednesday 6th January
.
.
.

Universal Basic Income: 'The unexpected benefits of unconditional cash transfers'

The notion of the UBI has been around for some time now:
Futures Forum: The universal basic income
Futures Forum: The unconditional basic income

It has attracted huge amounts of debate:
Futures Forum: Universal Basic Income and Negative Income Tax versus 'funding for the more deserving poor'

The Guardian reports on an experiment one year on:
Money for nothing: is Finland's universal basic income trial too good to be true? | Inequality | The Guardian

And the Adam Smith Institute has just produced a paper:


BASIC INCOME AROUND THE WORLD: 
THE UNEXPECTED BENEFITS OF UNCONDITIONAL CASH TRANSFERS

Otto Lehto

January 19, 2018


  • Replacing existing welfare systems with a universal basic income has the potential to streamline bureaucracy, eliminate welfare traps, and reduce poverty. 
  • The idea is being trialled by governments across the world including Scotland, United States, Canada, and Finland. These studies contribute to a growing body of evidence on the effects of basic income on employment and poverty.
  • While recently advocated by Labour's John McDonnell, basic income has a rich intellectual heritage on the free market right. Nobel Prize winning economists such as Milton Friedman, F.A. Hayek and George Stigler have advocated replacing existing welfare systems with a negative income tax (a form of basic income).
  • Automation and globalisation will deliver massive benefits for ordinary people, but they also run the risk of creating short-term mass unemployment. Existing welfare systems are ill-suited to handle the transition and mass retraining programmes rarely deliver their promise.
  • There is strong evidence that unconditional cash transfers are incredibly successful at alleviating poverty in the developing world. With studies in Kenya, Namibia, India and Uganda supporting the view that simply giving cash is one of the most effective forms of development aid.

Read the full paper here.


Basic Income around the World: The Unexpected Benefits of Unconditional Cash Transfers — Adam Smith Institute
.
.
.

Thursday, 1 February 2018

Pressures to expand business parks in East Devon >>> Blackhill Quarry, Woodbury

Developers and landowners would like to expand their industrial estates:
Futures Forum: Pressures to expand business parks in East Devon >>> from Greendale and Hill Barton >>> to Woodbury

The former Blackhill Quarry at Woodbury is one such possibility:
Planning application for Blackhill Quarry site | Latest Exmouth News - Exmouth Journal
Business park expansion plans to create 50 new jobs - Devon Live

But the neighbouring communities are not happy, as reported by the East Devon Watch blog:


BLACKHILL QUARRY: WHO’S LISTENING TO THE COMMUNITY?

1 FEB 2018

At the time this article was prepared, more than 145 individuals and resident associations had lodged formal objections against Clinton Devon Estate’s (CDE) planning application 17/3022 to create new industrial units on the Blackhill Quarry site. The condition on granting the original quarry licence was that when extraction ceased, the site should be returned to its natural state.

This number of objections is rising hourly, in spite of a determined PR campaign by CDE in the Exmouth Journal and local Parish Magazines to spin a favourable case (It’s only a small bit of land… the site proposed is currently covered in concrete and any restoration to high quality habitat will be problematic…. mitigation proposals that might secure significantly more wildlife benefits for the surrounding heathland are being discussed. Etc.) The consultation period has been extended.

Owl recalls last May CDE launched an on line “tell us what you think” survey with the introduction:

“We look to listen carefully to our staff, customers and those in our community. How we engage with you and what you think about our approach to sustainability is important to us and we want to get it right. Your feedback to this survey will play an important part in helping us develop our future communications.”

The survey asked questions such as:

To what extent do you agree with the following?

1. Clinton Devon Estates puts responsible stewardship and sustainable development at the heart of everything they do?

2. Clinton Devon Estates understands and conserves the wildlife it manages. And

3. How credible do you think “We pledge to do today what is right for tomorrow” is as a statement from Clinton Devon Estates?

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/05/30/time-running-out-to-tell-clinton-devon-estates-what-you-think-about-them/

Anyone want to rethink their responses in light of the above?


Blackhill Quarry: Who’s listening to the Community? | East Devon Watch

The Straitgate Action Group also have something to say on the application:


Objections mount for CDE’s planning application for Blackhill Quarry



Aggregate Industries’ permission to process material at Blackhill Quarry on Woodbury Common came to an end in 2016, and the plant is now in the process of being taken down to be re-erected at Hillhead Quarry near Uffculme.

It was widely hoped that this area at Blackhill would be restored, but landowner Clinton Devon Estates made an outline planning application late last year for 35,000 sq ft of industrial units - referred to in the post Why does quarrying have such a bad name? Take a look at Blackhill

Objections to this application in the East Devon AONB are mounting up, and the issue has been covered in the local press:
DCC raised no objection to the proposal, but interestingly the Devon Stone Federation did:
This planning application has been drawn to my attention by the Minerals Officer of Devon County Council… Devon Stone Federation objects on the basis that the proposal would sterilise an important underlying mineral.
Sterilisation is a rather bizarre reason - given that the mineral operator is now moving away from the site and dismantling its plant, and given that modification orders to restrict further mineral extraction were served back in 1999 when the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths were designated nature conservation areas of European importance.

But hey, an objection is an objection and should be welcomed, particularly considering what had been intended for this area.

The plan agreed with DCC states that for the processing area, Area 12:
It is anticipated that an alternative use for Area 12 will be sought by the landowner, perhaps a recreational or leisure use which will benefit from the existing hardstanding, office building and workshop to alleviate pressure on the SSSI. It is acknowledged that a planning permission for an alternative use will need to be sought from the Local Planning Authority. Should planning permission not be forthcoming then the office building and workshop will be demolished and removed from site. In addition, the existing hardstanding would be dug up and recycled for potential use on estate roads. The area will then be restored in line with the site restoration principals as agreed by the Quarry Restoration Group at the time. 

Only a select few - landowners, mineral companies, county councils or the like - would have imagined that plans for "a recreational or leisure use… to alleviate pressure on the SSSI" could mean an industrial estate. Objections to planning application 17/3022/MOUT can still be made here.



Straitgate Action Group: Objections mount for CDE’s planning application for Blackhill Quarry
.
.
.

Protest rally in Exeter over hospital closures across Devon > Saturday 3rd February

This coming Saturday will see demonstrations across the UK to protest about the state of health care - including in Exeter:





Exeter demonstration for the NHS - 3 FEB 2018

With a piece from County Cllr Claire Wright - also member of the council's health committee:

Protect the NHS rally - this Saturday 3 February, 11am, Bedford Square, Exeter

Posted: 31 Jan 2018 

I will be speaking at a protect the NHS rally, this Saturday (3 February)! It takes place at 11am in Bedford Square, Exeter City Centre. If you are worried (and you should be) about the NHS and how it is struggling, not just this winter, but now all year round, please come and join the throng at Bedford Square this Saturday. Hope to see you there! 

Protect the NHS rally - this Saturday 3 February, 11am, Bedford Square, Exeter - Claire Wright

As covered by the Express & Echo:

NHS protest rally to be held in Exeter City Centre

Organisers say everyone concerned about their health service across Devon is welcome


Tina Crowson Senior Reporter - 23 JAN 2018


The Totnes protest march (Image: Andy Styles)

Hundreds are expected to join a protest rally in Exeter city centre over hospital closures across the county.

The Save Our Hospitals Campaign is holding a meeting in the city on Saturday February 3 which is open to anyone who has concerns about the reorganisation taking place across Devon where four hospitals have already closed while beds have been closed at several more.

Spokesman for the group Mike Dallimore from Brixham where the minor injuries unit has been closed, cited the closure of hospitals at Dartmouth, Bovey Tracey and Ashburton and beds at Paignton Hospital.

He said the group feared Devon would ultimately be left with only two hospitals in Plymouth and Exeter.

It comes as Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson was understood to be pushing for an extra £100m a week for th NHS in England after Brexit.

The group organised a protest march in Totnes last month which hit the headlines when a mock coffin was left outside the office of Totnes MP Sarah Wollaston covered in posters saying ‘cuts cost lives’ with the figure 120,000 ‘ unnecessary’ deaths.

The protest will start at Bedford Square in Exeter at 11am, said Mr Dallimore.


NHS protest rally to be held in Exeter City Centre - Devon Live

The SOHS campaign is very active in Devon:
Save Our Hospital Services Devon public group | Facebook
SOHS North Devon Save Our Hospital Services

With postings here:
Futures Forum: Care Closer to Home: It's Not Working > new video from Save Our Hospital Services Devon
Futures Forum: 'Care Closer to Home' >>> survey from Save Our Hospital Services >>> Is caring for patients in their own homes working?

Here's the national campaign:
Emergency Demo by HCT/PA - Gower St, Central London-Demo
.
.
.

"Plastic's bad reputation is not always borne out by the facts. Just because a brown cardboard box looks greener than plastic, that doesn't mean it is."

This is a piece of heresy from seven years ago - and the Guardian's: 
 Green living blog


Which is the bigger eco-villain: plastic or paper?

Plastic is held up as a symbol of the environmental damage of disposable culture. But does it deserve its bad reputation?
Albatross chick in Midway toll posioned by plastic
Disturbing pictures of dead seabirds with lighters, bottle caps and plastic bags in their guts are among the images that have contributed to plastic's bad reputation. But research by Oregan State University published this week suggests that the size of the "great garbage patch", an accumulation of plastic debris that floats in the Pacific, has been "grossly exaggerated". Rather than being twice the size of Texas, as is commonly reported, studies suggest the "cohesive" patch is less than 1% of the size of Texas.
Clearly, plastic does pose a threat to wildlife. But has its status as an environmental villain been exaggerated? Many of the world's most potent environmental threats are invisible, but plastic loiters in trees and riversas a reminder of the consequences of our consumption. However, in some cases, plastic is environmentally the better option.
For example Riverford Organics, one of the largest vegetable box schemes in the UK, discovered that swapping short-lived cardboard boxes for more durable plastic ones could reduce the company's carbon footprint from packaging by 70%. There was one problem. "Our customers hate plastic with a vengence," the company's website says. Even though paper and cardboard are responsible for 85% of the carbon footprint from packaging, virtually all complaints are about the plastic punnets and bags, which are responsible for only 8% of the footprint.
Guy Watson, the founder of Riverford, was prepared to make the investment in plastic boxes, but decided to test the water with a customer survey last summer. Around third of respondents were "pretty vehemently opposed" to the change and as a result, the company bottled out, concerned that plastic boxes would put off new and existing customers who think plastic is environmentally unfriendly and ugly. "You have to be quite courageous to fly in the face of people's intuitive judgement," he says, "and some might say commercially foolhardy."
Watson is unwilling to take that risk at the moment, but says he'd "be surprised if we don't have plastic boxes within five or 10 years". Meanwhile, the company is investigating the possibility of using bamboo.
Other retailers have had more success in switching to plastic. Marks & Spencer now uses the material for its 25cl wine bottles and will trial plastic for full-sized bottles this spring. The supermarket introduced the new bottles because less energy is required to manufacture them than a glass bottle, and the lightweight bottles reduce the distribution carbon footprint. There were no reported complaints, with customers apparently enjoying the lighter weight.
So is the future plastic fantastic? Julie Hill, author of the forthcoming book The Secret Life of Stuff, says that plastic has environmental potential because it is very durable, adaptable, flexible and light. Plastic's durability, for instance, means it can have a lower impact (if re-used, as Riverford had planned) than materials such as cardboard, despite the fact that plastic has two to three times more embodied carbon than paper and card.
Unfortunately, Hill says, plastic's potential is often unfulfilled: plastic products are frequently used only briefly and thrown away. According to the government's Waste and Resources Action Programme, 85% of local authorities in England collect plastic bottles, and only 26% collect other rigid mixed plastics. If plastic is allowed to escape into the environment it is a hazard as it mostly doesn't biodegrade.
Ultimately, it all depends on how a material, whether plastic or paper, is used – and what happens at the end of its life. Plastic pollution such as the "great garbage patch" of the Pacific may capture our imaginations, but plastic's bad reputation is not always borne out by the facts. Just because a brown cardboard box looks greener than plastic, that doesn't mean it is.

Which is the bigger eco-villain: plastic or paper? | Sylvia Rowley | Environment | The Guardian

Riverford has its green webpages:
Packaging - Riverford

Riverford has worked with the University of Exeter:
Sustainability - Sustainability - University of Exeter

And here is Guy Watson, founder of Riverford, writing in the Telegraph a couple of years ago:

A few years ago we worked with Exeter University to measure the carbon footprint of our veg box business as a whole. Many of the results were counterintuitive - for example, plastic packaging commonly has a lower carbon footprint than paper, and degradable plastics are normally bad for the environment as, less surprisingly, are many biofuels.
We created a website to share our conclusions and have used the information to guide some of our decision-making; partly for ethical reasons and partly because I expect, at some point in my life, that the price of depleting fossil fuels will eventually force business to restructure and change to survive. I would rather be ahead of the game. One day I hope to have the courage and cash to challenge our customers' understandably intuitive loathing of plastic and move to a deposit-carrying plastic box, because the carbon footprint of the cardboard veg box that we currently use (even though it is made from 98 per cent recycled materials, and is reused up to ten times and then recycled) is still almost as large as the trucks that move them around the country.
Guy Watson: why UK-grown fruit and veg isn't always best - Telegraph
.
.
.