letters

SUBVERTISING Irritated by the annoying Gary Lineker in his attempt to shift more crisps to children? Well, someone in Burnhamon-Sea has got their own back by radically altering a billboard . . . PHOTO: Jeff Brewster

A BEAR, A LION AND A CHICKEN MEET . . . The bear says: ‘If I roar

in the forest, the entire

forest is shivering with

fear.’

The lion says: ‘If I roar

in the desert, the entire

desert is afraid of me.’

The chicken says: ‘Big

deal – I only have to

cough, and the entire

planet shits itself.’

ALAN REDCAR

LEEDS

Send letters for

publication to: Letters,

The Ecologist, Unit 18,

Chelsea Wharf, 15 Lots Road,

London SW10 OQJ. Email:

editorial@ theecologist.org.

The Ecologist reserves

the right to edit letters

as necessary.

GM RESISTANCE I received an email from the Soil Association recently, detailing an EU proposal to allow GM contamination of organic food and requesting the recipients email their MEPs to object. Whilst I consider Dr Caroline Lucas to be ‘my’ MEP, I also emailed the others who represent my region. As expected, Dr Lucas’ replies and actions were both prompt and very helpful but, with one exception, no other MEP replied. The exception was Richard Ashworth (a Conservative MEP), who stated: ‘I don’t share your views and am not prepared to support them with the European Commission.’ Okay, we are all entitled to our views, but what followed was extraordinary. Richard Ashworth’s email went on to state: ‘Given the likelihood of more GM crops being grown worldwide, and the distinct possibility that GM techniques may now offer us a new way of producing foods better tailored to dietary requirements (obesity etc), it seems to me sensible

for EU organic farmers to accept and indeed welcome the Commission’s position. Otherwise, they will fi nd that if their organic crops do contain very low levels of GM material, possibly by accident, they will be ruled as nonorganic and could lose their organic status.’ I re-read that paragraph two or three times before being able to believe that someone really has such an opinion. Richard Ashworth’s reply is the kind that makes my heart sink and wonder whether we can rescue ourselves from the mess we have created. Still, it makes me even more determined to do my little bit.

David M. Davison

By email

RE>PAINT I was very interested to see an article about paint in February’s edition of the Ecologist. Over 414 million litres of paint are sold in the UK each year (retail and trade), of which an estimated 80 million litres (enough to fi ll 50 Olympic-sized swimming

pools) is stored in homes and garages or just thrown away. This paint tends to be stored and then disposed of in landfi ll. Community Re>Paint provides a practical solution to this waste stream that is environmentally and socially benefi cial. Unwanted, surplus paint is diverted from the waste stream and redistributed for reuse by community groups, charities and voluntary organisations. The paint is passed on to those in social need free of charge (or for a small donation towards overheads).

Vicky Wren

Community Re>Paint

Development Worker

www.communityrepaint.org.

uk

WASHABLE NAPPIES Having read the article on washable nappies in February’s Ecologist, I was pleased that Matilda Lee found the nappies so easy to use. We have used washables on both our children with no problems at all, and campaigned for our local government (States of Jersey) to follow some councils in the UK by giving vouchers to encourage reducing unnecessary waste on the island. Now, couples get a £30 grant towards the purchase of washables. I don’t think parents even realise that they have a choice – over nappies, food, baby products, baby clothes. Parents tend to be very sheep-like in their purchases, which is probably why all my friends use washable nappies. I was the fi rst of my group of friends to have a baby – they thought that washable nappies were normal!

Catherine Jackson

By email

006 THE ECOLOGIST