Didn’t it cause a row? I’m thinking of the Fairtrade issue especially when Tate and Lyle converted to Fairtrade earlier this year. The Adam Smith Institute went to town in its criticism of the whole concept, and I read several newspaper articles promoting the Institute’s views and heard such views on the radio. Sue Bentley, our diocese’s World Development Officer responded:
‘To some extent this strikes me as a negative reaction to Fairtrade’s continued success. The Fairtrade vision puts justice and sustainable development at the heart of trade structures and corrects market failures to make the trading system work for everyone, thereby actually enabling the free trade model to flourish.’
Both St Anne’s and St Christopher’s have certificates to say that we normally use Fairtrade products in our churches. Many of you will deliberately opt at times to buy Fairtrade items from the supermarkets, which are increasing the stocks of these things. I once shared a room at a conference with the Bishop of the Windward Islands where many bananas come from, and so have a personal interest now in ensuring that if possible I purchase their bananas. Interestingly, as well as our European links, our Diocese also has a formal link with the Windward Islands.
I will pick out a few issues which counter the Adam Smith Institute’s arguments, again from Sue Bentley’s formal response to them.
‘Fairtrade remains unique amongst other ethical brands in ensuring farmers a price for crops that covers the cost of sustainable production, gives a premium for investment in future improvements and support for small-farmer organisations. It is backed by Christian Aid, Tearfund, CAFOD, the World Development Movement and Oxfam.
‘Seven million farmers and their families benefit from Fairtrade at present…and there is no evidence to suggest that other producers are suffering because of it. Two billion people across the world still earn less than US$2 per day. There is no research to back the Institute’s claim that “it rewards inefficient farmers who produce poor quality goods”.’
It is accused of predominating in relatively developed countries like Mexico but not places like Ethiopia, but it is forgotten that the coffee-producing areas of Mexico are some of the poorest areas of Central America, and moreover Fairtrade works through partnerships with thousands of small coffee farmers of Ethiopia to improve their lives.
Anecdotal evidence contradicts the allegation that it does not aid economic development, for in fact producers are able to improve their lives with healthcare, education for their family and are able to diversify and improve their businesses. And the Institute was factually wrong when it says it only helps landowners, for it works with cooperatives and also sets conditions for workers on plantations. It is acknowledged it has not reached the very poorest, but that is an area to be developed.
It is said that most Fairtrade produce ends up in non Fairtrade goods. That is because of the workings of the free trade market which the Institute upholds.
Your jar of Nescafe may well contain coffee from Fairtrade cooperatives as well as other coffee. The more we buy Fairtrade only items, the less this will happen.
It is said that only 10% of the premium goes to the producer - this is factually untrue.
It is stated that coffee prices have been relatively stable over the last few years, but in fact that is not the case at all. Therefore the Fairtrade minimum price is the only way some farmers will be able to continue to produce their crop.
The Institute holds the view that free trade is the world’s most effective poverty reduction strategy. To say “fair trade is unfair, but free trade makes you rich” is simplistic. It might true in China and India, but many African countries will never be able to trade their way out of poverty.
There is more, but I will stop there. Fair trade, to me, seems to be the only way ahead for the consumer to show that ethical purchasing matters in today’s world, and I say this as a former employee of the Nestlé Co Ltd. You must make up your own mind, but these days you do have choice. You can choose to buy food and other items with little regard for the producers - and can ignore things such as some chocolate from the Ivory Coast is produced by trafficked children, or you can take a positive step and seek, where you can, to do your bit. Those who benefit from your action will never be able to thank you personally, but should we only do things that are principled and ethical because we will be thanked? I think not.
I would encourage you to opt to purchase Fairtrade goods whenever you can, to see it as part of loving your neighbour as yourself. As I frequently remind people on similar issues: if we were in the position that many are in this world, we would be very grateful for the positive support that people who we don’t know give. So now I am off to have a cup of tea, Fairtrade of course.