leader
Get the full story at thegrocer.co.uk 17 August 2019 | The Grocer | 3W
e need a proper, robust defence ’. That was the
rallying cry from the meat sector this week (p10), as
processors and farmers faced a fresh round of attack
headlines about meat and its role in climate change.
Last week’s IPCC report – though far wider in scope than just
meat – once again prompted an avalanche of coverage about
‘cutting out meat to save the planet’.
At a time when meat is under scrutiny more widely (think
post-Brexit production standards, welfare exposés, health
concerns and Goldsmiths College’s controversial decision to ban
beef from campus), the industry is understandably feeling on
edge. So what can it do to robustly defend itself?
Visibility in the national media and a willingness to put up
high-pro le spokespeople would be a good starting point.
That burden is shouldered disproportionately by farmers
right now. NFU president Minette Batters is an e ective, punchy
defender of the industry, even if you disagree with her Twitter
jibe at ‘metropolitan elites’. But where are the processor CEOs?
Finding the right messages – and the right tone to deliver
those messages – is also key. All this talk of robust defences
must not be allowed to turn into a shouting match. There’s a
di erence between being rm with critics and lashing out at
anyone who dares to question their meat consumption.
Similarly, the temptation to invoke the ‘vegan lobby’ every time
concerns about meat are raised must be resisted.
Most consumers are not extreme in their views and they’re
certainly not hapless victims of some shadowy lobby. They are
asking legitimate questions about what it means to eat ethically
in the 21st century. In doing so, they are having to navigate a
complex web of narratives. If they ask questions it’s because
this is a confusing area – not because they’re spoiling for a ght.
Levelling with consumers and openly acknowledging where
there’s uncertainty or a lack of data is a more credible strategy
than either trying to shout the problem out of existence or
burying heads in the sand and hoping it will go away.
Radical openness and transparency could prove to be the
most robust defence of them all.“There’s a
di erence between
being rm with
critics and lashingout at anyone who
dares to questiontheir meat
consumption”Julia Glotz, managing editor“Companies
have been le
to speculate as
to whether theymay get help”
Ian Quinn, chief reporterSo instead of Project Fear we
now have Operation King sher,
the government’s attempt to
rescue companies in the Brexit
ring line.
As industry leaders
acknowledged this week,
the most signi cant thing
about the bailout plan is it
nally o ers recognition
from the government that
many companies fac e disaster
from cash ow problems if 31
October brings the hard Brexit
nightmare companies dread.
Yet, Operation King sher
is aptly named so far. We
saw a ash of it with reports
over the weekend before the
government disappeared intothe undergrowth. This le
companies, with fewer than 80
days to go before a cli -edge
scenario, only able to speculate
as to whether they may get
help – or if they’ll hav e to cope
with devastating cash ow and
supply chain problems on their
own.
Because promising a bailout,
amid horror headlines of the
mass slaughter of sheep, is
one thing. Giving nancial aid
to far less totemic businesses
in the supply chain, which
face possible extinction just
as much as farmers and their
lambs, is quite another.More on page 5for more opinion see pages 00 –
To comment on an article, or read what
others say, go to thegrocer.co.uktop stories
this week onthegrocer.co.uk
Quorn teams with Adelie
for sandwich & wrap rangeSean Toal to take over as
WH Smith MDA new generation of fmcg
CEOs is ghting backAsda to face mass contract
change protests at HQPower list: the champions
of English winequote of the week
“This is recognition that
it’s not Project Fear but
Project Fact”
p