Day 243 - 02 May 96 - Page 16
1 towns and cities introduced the same law and took the case
2 for judgment at the highest court in Germany at Karlsruhe.
3 This court in a pre-trial assessment agreed to adjudicate
4 and indicated that they believed the tax was correct.
5 After this was known, many more communities introduced the
6 tax: 100 by 1st January 1996, with more doing so in the
7 following three months.
8
9 10. In Frankfurt there are 17 McDonald's outlets, which
10 because of the tax are now using a type of multi-use
11 plastic cup.
12
13 11. McDonald's is well aware of best practice in packaging
14 and containers all over the world but is waiting until it
15 is forced to change by increasing environmental awareness.
16 This is exemplified by the following statements in the
17 minutes of McDonald's Europe Waste vs Disposables meeting
18 held on 21st January 1991."
19
20 That is a document disclosed by the Plaintiffs. I am not
21 sure where it is kept but it can be referred to, if
22 necessary, if challenged:
23
24 "If reusable packaging becomes an issue in any community,
25 it would have a major impact on the way we do business.'
26
27 'UK - Mike Matthews and Corinne Reed-Comfort indicated
28 that solid waste is not yet a key concern in the UK ...
29 McDonald's key UK environmental issues are environment/index.html">litter, signage
30 and traffic.'
31
32 'Ideas such as Klarges (a recycling and composting pilot
33 project) however are worth investigating in that
34 waste/packaging concerns will soon arise in the UK as
35 well.'
36
37 'While early detention of a disposal vs. reusable
38 packaging issue is important (via close interaction between
39 marketing/PR and in particular real estate people), it is
40 even more critical that countries have waste initiatives in
41 progress before this issue is raised'.
42
43 12. Recycling when carried out must be made to work. I am
44 informed that in one scheme in Nottingham people put
45 plastic in recycling bins but it was never actually
46 recycled.
47
48 13. In 1991, McDonald's restaurants in Switzerland
49 commissioned a report on the ecological impact of a
50 McDonald's restaurant compared with three other
51 restaurants. However the study only included the direct
52 local impacts of the restaurants themselves and not the
53 wider impacts of running the different types of business.
54 For example, the water and energy use at the restaurants
55 such as washing the reusable dishes, was counted, but not
56 the water and energy use for producing and transporting the
57 throwaway McDonald's packaging. This is one way in which
58 ecological balances such as these can be misused.
59
60 14. Improvement have occurred in techniques such as these