I used to be quite a fan of yours. Your practical, down-to-earth approach to food has been a beacon to many. Your books and your name are a huge success (deservedly).

However, I cannot support your latest outburst (assuming you have been correctly reported):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=514633&in_page_id=1770

We cannot exploit animals, for personal gratification. This has nothing to do with feeding the poor or pensioners. Please don't go for the sympathy vote. Some of the healthiest and happiest people on the planet are vegetarian, for goodness sake!

If you were after the limelight, you've succeeded.

If you were after the support of logical folk, you've blown it.

Chickens cannot continue to be kept in awful factory-farming conditions and never should have been. It is a stain on society. I hope your apron is stain-proof.

Organic food is only more expensive because it doesn't reap the subsidies that other food enjoys. The real price of much of our 'chemical food' is hidden in water-purifying costs, for starters. These are passed on to the consumer in another guise than food price.

In the chef wars, you've just scored 'nul point'!

[Why not take a look at www.alternativevet.org , while you're here?]

References:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/02/16/easuper116.xml

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7247384.stm

Report entitled: Green, Healthy and Fair

Professor Tim Lang, Commissioner at the SDC, said:

"Government cannot resolve the problems of obesity, waste or climate change alone. Given the enormous influence wielded by supermarkets, working with them effectively is essential.

"There are many areas where the government and retailers are already working together, but government needs to be more ambitious. With public scrutiny of retailers' behaviour increasing, many supermarkets are keen to work with government to develop a green, healthy and fair food system.

"In fact, our research with supermarkets has shown that in areas such as climate change or recycling policy, they are often frustrated by the lack of clarity or long-term strategy on which they can plan for the future."

Ah those lovely supermarkets! Poor misunderstood chaps that they are.

Why is it that government has to do the work? Why cannot morals, ethics, common sense, public conscience and other such standards guide the behaviour of the commercial giants? Why cannot families take some responsibility?

Dream on!

Role Players:

Sustainable Development Commission (SDC): www.sd-commission.org.uk

British Retail Consortium: http://www.brc.org.uk

Competition Commission: http://www.competition-commission.org.uk

Food Climate Research Network: http://www.fcrn.org.uk

Office of Fair Trading: http://www.oft.gov.uk

Issues:

Environment

Carbon Footprint

Greenhouse Emissions (Greenhouse Gases)

Transport

Packaging

Obesity

Health

Advertising

Waste

Climate Change

Global Warming

Supermarkets

Agricultural Methods (Farming)

[Why not take a look at www.alternativevet.org , while you're here?]

Reference:

http://news.uk.msn.com/Article.aspx?cp-documentid=7553251

The march of GM and the commercial hold that biotechnology has on officialdom are legitimate concerns.

There are serious questions raised by such possible moves:

Many do not want GM, on their back doorstep or elsewhere. What happened to liberty?

Does the Freedom of Information Act not cover this? DEFRA is, after all, a government body.

There is no way to pull back, if GM field research causes a disaster. Once the damage is done, it's done.

Of course, 'legitimate research' should enjoy the freedom of a democratic state but is this 'legitimate research', in view of the uncertainty and the potential (and unknown) dangers?

It may prejudice a neighbouring farm's 'Organic' status, with loss of livelihood.

European law demands disclosure of sites.

[Why not take a look at www.alternativevet.org , while you're here?]