The Prince disputed Fisons’ claims that there were no viable alternatives to
the use of peat in forestry and horticulture, citing research by the respected
Henry Doubleday Research Association showing that substitutes were
available. The Prince went on to announce that peat would not be used on
his own estates in the Duchy of Cornwall, and urged other landowners to
follow his lead.
The Peatlands Campaign did not stop there. In May 1990, it turned to
Pensions Investment and Research Consultants (PIRC) – a consultancy
which advises clients on social and environmental issues – for expert help.
PIRC duly contacted 50 investment managers controlling over £870 million
worth of the company’s shares (around 42 per cent of the total) in advance
of the company’s forthcoming annual meeting.^18 Institutional shareholder,
The Borough of Lewisham, supported by the South Yorkshire Pensions
Authority (SYPA) and the Pearl Assurance Pension Fund, agreed to press
the company to end its peat-cutting operations, urging it to invest instead
in the development of peat substitutes. The campaigners received sympa-
thetic hearings from other large institutional shareholders, including the
British Telecom Pension Fund, Eagle Star and the Cooperative Insurance
Society, but failed to secure sufficient support ahead of the company’s
annual meeting to raise a motion on the matter. Fisons’ response to the
campaign had been to distribute half a million leaflets promoting its case
to garden centres. In the press it was pointed out that Fisons had already
given 10 per cent of its total peat holdings for conservation purposes,
including 106 acres for a habitat for an endangered species of bird – the
nightjar.^19 As for the demand that it should develop peat substitutes, the
company retorted with claims that it was already spending large sums in
the search for peat substitutes, and had considered alternatives such as
coconut scrapings but these were too expensive. It went on to complain
that it was unfair to single out Fisons for such attention, because other
companies had bigger environmental problems.^20 An advertising cam-
paign was later launched, claiming that ‘Buying British peat-based
compost in no way endangers our remaining wetlands of conservation
value’. The campaign subsequently earned Fisons the less-than-coveted
Friends of the Earth ‘Green Con of the Year Award’.
At the annual meeting itself, Fisons produced a video and detailed hand-
outs for shareholders explaining ‘The Case for Peat’. PIRC’s Stuart Bell
questioned Kerridge on the matter, and again urged the company to cease
cutting peat. Kerridge politely declined the request, informing the meeting
that peat was not a scarce resource globally – 3 per cent of the world’s land-
mass was peat – and restated the company’s position that no practical
alternative to peat was available.^19
Pressure on Fisons continued. The issue was debated in the House of
Lords, and in the House of Commons, where an Early Day Motion in
support of The Peatlands Campaign was signed by 25 Members of
276 Relationship Marketing