Agenda item

Petition - "Fairtrade Bromsgrove"

Minutes:

The Board received a public petition entitled “Fairtrade Bromsgrove”, submitted by Mr. Art Lavelle. The petition contained approximately 150 signatures. The petition read as follows:

“This petition asks for support for the Fairtrade Bromsgrove Steering Group. In signing this you will be-

Encouraging Bromsgrove District Council to pass a resolution in favour of gaining Fairtrade status
Considering seriously purchasing Fairtrade products where they are available in Bromsgrove outlets”.

The Chairman summarised the role of the Board in receiving petitions and outlined the process to be followed in consideration of petitions. He explained that the Board considered topics concerning the Council and the District and received evidence from various perspectives.

The Chairman explained that the Board was constitutionally independent from the Cabinet and where appropriate could make recommendations to the Cabinet. He said that the Board would interview key witnesses from different perspectives in respect of the petitions by asking them a series of questions. The Board would then consider if it wished to make any recommendations and if so what these would be.

The Chairman invited the Lead Petitioner, Mr. Art Lavelle to present his petition, allowing up to 5 minutes. Mr. Lavelle explained that the Fairtrade Foundation supported farmers and workers in developing countries to guarantee a minimum income and basic health, educational and community amenities regardless of prevailing market conditions. He said that between 4-20% of the cost of fair trade products went towards community projects, with spending priorities usually decided on a collective democratic basis.

Mr. Lavelle stated that the Fairtrade Foundation encouraged towns to achieve fair trade status and there were 454 towns in the UK with Fairtrade status at that time. He said that there were 5 conditions to achieve Fairtrade status and that one of them was for the Council to support the idea with a resolution.

Mr Lavelle explained that Fairtrade was not a contradiction to free trade and that the Government supported both free trade and Fairtrade. He said that the national Conservative Party also supported Fairtrade. He said that there are 2 billion people world wide that live below the poverty level of $2 a day and that Fairtrade intended to help alleviate this problem.

Mr. Lavelle indicated that they had contacted local organisations such as churches and the Oxfam shop and started a petition to canvas support and outlined the key reasons why the Council should support the campaign.

it was a community project where anyone in the community, child or adult, could join in.
it was something that the Council could do to show community leadership and engender civic pride.
the cost to the council would be limited as the main costs would be in time commitment and promotion rather than direct financial commitment.
it would encourage trade in Bromsgrove, as it persuades people to think more about where their food and produce comes from it encourages them to think more about local products produced in their local area as well.

The Chairman thanked Mr. Lavelle for his petition and invited Members of the Board to put questions to him on the petition.

He was asked about the progress towards Fairtrade status at Redditch and responded that they did not yet have Fairtrade status.

Members asked what other qualifications were required, apart from a resolution of Council, to achieve Fairtrade status. Mr. Lavelle advised that there were 5 conditions, including a resolution of Council. There was also the condition that Fairtrade products be available locally, including high street outlets and Council provision at public meetings. Bromsgrove would need at least 18 outlets to sell at least 2 Fairtrade products and he referred to a number of high street products that were already Fairtrade. Mr. Lavelle expressed the view that schools should be involved and other local organisations. He also indicated that a steering group needed to be established with Council representation and that an initial steering group had already been set up.

A Member of the Board commented that Fairtrade products were already available through many outlets and that people were free to support Fairtrade through consumer choice and that it was not necessary for the Council to give direct support. The concern was expressed that if the Fairtrade brands attained too much support from government and become too big this may upset the balance. It was suggested that consumer choice offered a balance which allows consumer choice to support Fairtrade if they so wished.

The Chairman invited the Assistant Chief Executive to present the officer report. The Assistant Chief Executive said that operationally there would be some minor costs to the Council in terms of staff time but that it would not be a problem to roll out. He said that the issue of whether to support Fairtrade was more of an ideological debate and pointed out that the Adam Smith Institute argued against Fairtrade.

Members asked about the time and resource implications of supporting Fairtrade, especially in terms of officer time to support the steering group. It was pointed out that the Council had made recent decisions not to support bodies because of the resource implications and that committing resources to this may be inconsistent with that.

Mr. Lavelle was asked about the policing of Fairtrade agreements in order that the rules were upheld and there was no corruption. He responded that Fairtrade did regulate producers but that he was not aware of how this was done. The Assistant Chief Executive commented that the big companies involved with Fairtrade such as Cadburys made it more likely that it would be properly regulated, but that more details on this were required.

Concern was expressed by a Member of the Board at the potential resource implications to the Council Overview and Scrutiny Boards of undertaking a Task Group to investigate the issue further, as there were other agreed priorities. Concern was also expressed at the narrow scope of Fairtrade in just supporting Fairtrade organisations. The Assistant Chief Executive clarified that the report stated that there would be no financial implications to the petition but that the costs of supporting Fairtrade had not yet been costed. Members of the Board expressed the view that more information was required on the potential costs and resource implications to the Council of supporting Fairtrade before a decision could be made. It was agreed that the issue should be referred back to the Cabinet along with a full costing of the resource implications of supporting and attaining Fairtrade status.

RESOLVED that the Cabinet receive a report from the Assistant Chief Executive on the full cost implications of supporting Fairtrade status for Bromsgrove.

Supporting documents: