Day 002 - 29 Jun 94 - Page 33

     
     1        recycling in the 1980's which is the material time, the
              late 80s, they have admitted, I think -- I cannot remember
     2        their document reference number -- that only 7 per cent of
              their paper was recycled, that is, in the States, or was
     3        made from recycled paper.  There is a possible ambiguity
              as to whether it was 100 per cent paper recycled or
     4        whether it was 72 per cent recycled paper.
 
     5        In fact, the maximum was 7 per cent.  That was for the
              States where they are under considerable pressure.
     6        Obviously, if McDonald's want to say that is a lie, then
              they would have to show their figures worldwide for 1989
     7        on the recycled contents of their paper.
 
     8        "The truth is it takes 800 square miles of forest just to
              keep them supplied with paper for one year".  We will be
     9        calling a witness on the effect that plantation on
              plantation -- sorry, let me get my thoughts right on this
    10        -- first of all, this applies to general wood supply.  It
              does not apply to rainforests.  It would be ludicrous to
         interpret that sentence as being that all their paper
              packaging comes from rainforests.  This, clearly, applies
    12        to the general origin of their paper.  That really is the
              link to the following sentence which is:  "Tons of this
    13        end up littering the cities of 'developed countries'."
 
    14        We will be calling a witness on their packaging in general
              from the States, Mr. Brian Lipsitt, and we will be calling
    15        someone, a resident of London, who has been involved with
              a Residents' Association that have made complaints over a
    16        number of years regarding environment/index.html">litter emanating from their
              restaurants.  We will be calling an expert on the damage
    17        that using plantation forests causes to the ecology.
 
    18        McDonald's case is that their impact now, because they
              have not released any details about what they were doing
    19        in the 80s, is that they prefer generally, and in this
              country they are claiming they only use sustainable
    20        forests.  I cannot remember all the details, but it
              includes Scandanavia and Czechoslovakia.  They are calling
         someone from the British Timber Trade Federation,
              Mr. Mallinson.  But we will counter his evidence to show
    22        that, in fact, these forests are not sustainable.  They
              are economically sustainable in that they continually get
    23        replaced, but they are not ecologically sustainable in
              that they are damaging to the environment, these
    24        plantation forests.  They are really just factory forests
              for organisations like McDonald's turning our planet into
    25        one giant factory.
  
    26        So, the next point is the Colonial Invasion section.  The 
              first sentence talks about McDonald's responsibility for 
    27        and other corporations -- I want to stress this point
              about other corporations is that it is an important point
    28        of law, I believe, that it is not an attack on McDonald's
              in isolation, or a criticism of McDonald's in isolation.
    29        It is a point we are making about an industry or a system
              of corporations and their collective responsibility,
    30        I mean, for the effects of that kind of system which they
              promote and maintain.