public Hearing - Cafe Nero

[SeanMacGabhann]

(first up I'm not up for closing Nero's down. It's there now so let's move on and focus on what's next)

Who is making it an environmental issue MP? There are stacks of differning reasons why one might discourage chains

you say that like they are morally equivalent in some way

you're an above intelligent bloke MP, you know that's not how it works at all. You know than landlords for example prefer branded clients because they can charge higher rates and the actively prevent indies. You are quite right to say that being and indie doesn't make you good but a healthy market for indies at least allows most of us to have a go if we want?

A decision in Seattle (or somewhere) that read SE22 on a spreadsheet as a good target will do ANYTHING to close down the competition - and the small guy just doesn't have the resource to fight it. Only local people can decide the winner in that competition

Again - I'm not going for a black and white on the chains v indie thing. I'm just countering some of the reasoning

[Keef]

I agree totally with MP (Except I'm anti hunting).

[Michael Palaeologus]

I agree with your second point Sean, but I dont see a problem with global business targeting a particular area, any more than a UK business doing that. Business is business, it is Darwinian to its core.

There have been some moral amiguity in the actions of Greenpeace at times, currently just why arent they cooperating with the other anti-whaling protestors who are chasing the japanese fleet?. I support many of the things that Greenpeace believe and do and champion their right to exist, but that support is not without reservation - ditto Starbucks. In that, they have equivalence.

I dont think that Morality is an issue here and I think that trying to identfy which organisation has the moral high ground is not possible, it depends on your definition of "moral".

Starbucks may flex their corporate muscle to gain competitative advantage but Greenpeace will also push the boundries to achieve their objectives.

The issue is how the observer views the objectives of the different organisations. Those who support either organisation will concider any questionable actions as "worth the cause", those who are against will view any questionable actions as evidence further demonstrating the fundamental duplicity of said organisation.

As you say Sean, there is no black and white here - but i think that my reasoning evidences the fundamental ambiguity and contradictions in the big vs small, global vs local argument; and I do think that these are often linked to the environmental cause.

[SeanMacGabhann]

And so my next question MP , is where were you when this argument was kicking off on another thread months ago! sheesh ;-)

I think we should resurrect that thread and carry the debate on there as this one is about a specific issue. But I do like the "it depends which organisation you support" line. It just reminded me of the Stewart Lee routine and the values held by the Carphone Warehouse >:D<

I'm still not sure why you brought Greenpeace, the environment and morality into any of this mind you...

EDIT - just resurrected one of the chain threads in the Lounge if you still fancy the debate

[Michael Palaeologus]

I picked on Greenpeace because they are one of the highest profile global organisations with green credentials and because of their size make a useful comparison with private sector global organisations.

I will have a shufty at the other thread :)

[lozzyloz]

Surely a chain has the potential to have much less impact on the environment than an equal number of independents?

Efficiencies in buying and distribution reduces the carbon footprint.

Sourcing ethical and fair trade ingredients supports good farming practice/independent producers.

A high public profile creates pressure to act greener.

Capital available to invest in technologies that reduce energy consumption and waste.

Whether they do or not is another question.

[Cassius]

I prefer to use an independent if possible and I like it because I know at the end of the day who will make a profit from my hard-earned cash, and I'd prefer if it was someone I have actually made contact with rather than some nameless shareholders elsewhere.

I like the fact that my organic fruit and veg come from near where I brought up and that you can visit it and look at next months meal in the ground, and that I know the local distributor personally, however if I didn't ALSO like the produce I wouldn't use them.

And I don't use Cafe Nero - because I think paying ?2.00 or whatever it costs there for a cup of coffee is daft when I can walk home and make one in my kitchen for a few pence.

[lozzyloz]

nameless shareholders elsewhere - these are quite often the ordinary man on the street either through individual holdings or via pension funds.

For ?2 you get to have an out of your kitchen experience! Would you not eat out for the same reason?

I don't have any grudge to bear against the chains. Some are better than others as with the independents. When I'm in ED I tend to patronise Jacks, Petite Chou and Panin D'Oro for an Espresso Dopio. When I'm out and about I try and find an interesting looking independent cafe. But to be honest they aren't always to hand and the Nero's, Costa's, Apostrophe's etc often are when the caffeine addiction kicks in.

[Cassius]

Actually I think the coffee in these places resembles bitter hot water more than a proper cup of coffee, and although I am happy to sit in a restaurant and eat the kind of food that I wouldn't make for myself, a ?2 cup of coffee in an indulgence too far. However I make my own sandwiches too, so I guess that I look after the pennies.........

[SeanMacGabhann]

Loz

You talk plenty sense and I'm not disagreeing with you but your line

tells it's own story doesn't it? Where I work at the moment (Fleet St and/or Canon St) had tons of indie coffee shops, aways packed - this was what - about 5-6 years ago. All gone, all starbies et al so it's no wonder you can't find them easily

They didn't go out of business because of product or service or lack of customers

Oh look I know I'm banging on about it but the sheer voracity and power of these places scares the shite out of me

[lozzyloz]

Very true Sean but these guys tend get in because the landlords want them there and the original independent either wanted to cash in their pension or just couldn't operate on a viable margin. I'd prefer to support an independent where possible if it is run by somebody who cares about their product, service, cost etc but even these guys can be guilty of providing crap. I remember going to a newly opened cafe on Grays Inn Rd last year. The staff were disinterested, the Lemon Drizzle Cake was stale and when I complained they insisted it was freshly made that day. Customer is always right in my view (and in my practice). The coffee was good however, but I thought that if they carried on like that I couldn't see them succeeding. Guess what, less than a year later they've closed and chances are a multiple will snatch the opportunity.

[Michael Palaeologus]

Which of you has a pension? You are shareholders in the global blue chips, unless you have invested in a pension that explicitly exludes such investment.

[SeanMacGabhann]

I know - it's a beautiful system isn't it Mike? Let's hope the whole thing doesn't dera..ooops

[Keef]

Sean why does it scare you, why do you even give a shit? I just don't get it.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Oof - so many ways Keef, and being at work I haven't got time to write the essay I'd want to

Because over the years we are seeing the power of so much, concentrate in the hands of so few.

Even in my lifetime I remember when most of the food and drink I consumed was directly traceable to somewhere or someone I knew. be it the lamb, fish or milk. And alreadythen food companies were consolidating

Now, just a simple burger, for example, which should be a slice of beef, minced is usually an amalgam of dozens of different cattle, from different countries and if any infections happen the whole food chain is compromised.

Not only that but the immigrant workers often used in the slaughter houses are exploited, the livestock treated badly, the farmers barely given subsistence, the person selling me the burger is on minimum wage - but because the food company at the top of the chain dictates all facets of the process, they clean up financially - that's not right. And the power has been wrested away from ordinary people who might want to compete

That's just one example - it doesn't apply to meat. It applies across the whole food chain (if I'm talking about bar/restaurant chains)

And as soon as someone tries to expose it we get a lot of the media (often owned by the same companies ) shouting them down

We're not in some Orwellian nightmare yet - but we're on the right road

[Keef]

Yeah yeah, but why do you care?

[lozzyloz]

That's all a bit doom and gloom Sean! There is some light ahead surely? Companies like Innocent, Fairtrade, Rough Trade Records, Co-Op etc, increased recycling, increased energy efficiency, increased awareness of the food we eat and so on. I would've thought this suggests a slightly brighter future if more people get on board.

[Administrator]

Lounged

The inquiry is at 10am on Tuesday 29 January 2008 at Avonmouth House, 6 Avonmouth Street, SE1. For further information contact the council's planning department on 020 7525 5000.

[Brendan]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We're not in some Orwellian nightmare yet

Yes we are.

[Brendan]

There. Did you see what big brother just did to us man?

Lounged indeed.

Or is that "corrected"

[SeanMacGabhann]

ozzyloz - yeah it is a bit doom and gloom and I don't always feel things are quite that bad. You can see the seeds of things happening, challenging the status quo but after the last couple of weeks of HFW-bashing, and a couple of people saying it's a "holier than thou" position to take, it gets to me sometimes

Keef - why do I care? Why wouldn't anybody? If you think about the reality of what's happening in some of the intensive vegetable and livestock farms we aren't that far removed from slavery. do many people suppot the emancipation of slaves in the 19th century or did we have people saying "why do you keep banging on about those slaves and children up chimneys? what do you care?"

Not - I quickly hasten to add - that I'm saying that's how you feel ! But I don't understand the "why do you care" question

[Nero]

Talking of Orwellian, I posted a comment after Sean and lozzyloz, and it's not there. Hmmm. Nero

[Administrator]

Nero Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Talking of Orwellian, I posted a comment after

> Sean and lozzyloz, and it's not there. Hmmm. Nero

You may have posted it whilst the thread was being Lounged, which can take up to 20 seconds. Apologies.

[macroban]

Some missing,

[Keef]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But I don't understand the "why do you care" question

It was a joke that obviously wasn't funny.