An Irishman's Diary

Superquinn used to be famous for their own delicious meatpies and their superb t-bone steaks; and now they sell neither, either…

Superquinn used to be famous for their own delicious meatpies and their superb t-bone steaks; and now they sell neither, either because of some EU damnfoolery which prevents cooked meats being sold next to breads, a ruling you can be sure that the French, God love them, would simply ignore, or because of some idiotic political correctness of the kind which which prompted the British government to make the selling of t-bone steaks a criminal offence.

Nothing personal here, Feargal, but this is rampant nannydom. Why shouldn't meatpies be sold next to breads? Why shouldn't we choose to take whatever minuscule risk is involved in eating a t-bone steak? That risk is as nothing compared to the one we take driving to Superquinn, though Superquinn haven't closed down their car-parks.

Strangely enough, they haven't felled the trees outside their supermarkets either, though there's a far greater chance of a tree keeling over and braining a would-be Superquinn shopper than of the same shopper contracting something horrible from a Superquinn meat. Even more amazingly, Superquinn haven't dynamited neighbouring buildings in case an earthquake toppled one of them on a Superquinn shopper.

Protect the consumer

READ MORE

Why has Superquinn done nothing to protect the consumer against these perils? More people in Ireland have died from falling trees than they have from mad-t-bone disease; and there was an earthquake in Ireland as recently as 1493, causing a shepherd in Wicklow to fall and hurt himself quite badly.

Things happen to the unprepared in this world. I wonder - has Feargal taken the necessary precautions against his customers being ravished against the deep freeze by lesbian crocodiles in wellingtons or being consumed by a new breed of carnivorous geranium? One must be vigilant.

Just how vigilant we can discover from the ethics police of Friends First who now guard against us investing in the politically incorrect. Friends First offers investment to those who wish to do something with their money, but simultaneously not be involved in impiety in any form. So Friends First does not countenance investment in banks - but not, apparently, because some of them have a habit of helping themselves to their customers' money, but because one cannot discover how the banks invest that money once they have made off with it. They might invest immorally, perish the thought.

Waterfood Foods was on the list of Friends First approved, politically correct companies, but was removed when it merged with Avonmore because of the latter's red meat business. Kerry Foods was ruled out for the same red-meat reasons. Hmmm. How do chickens feel about that? And Jurys was ruled out because of its large bar business.

Looking for morality

An investment company which dislikes banks, booze and burgers seems to be operating in the wrong country when it opened up shop in Ireland - perhaps Tibet would make a little more sense? Yet inevitably, as Robin Cooke has discovered with a foreign policy based on morality, investment based on "ethics" soon proves to be an illusion. Looking for morality when you trade is rather like looking a supersonic airliner which can also excavate coal, shell peas and dance a neat bossa nova.

So of course our friends in Friends First have to close their eyes to what they do not want to see. The British supermarket chains Safeway and Sainsburys are both acceptable to Friends First, though they both sell vast amounts of alcohol and red meats, including, of course, red meats from Kerry and Avonmore, and huge quantities of booze from Guinness, Irish Distillers and Gilbeys.

And if these "ethical" British supermarkets sell produce made in India, China, Pakistan or much of North Africa, they might well be selling items what were at least made in part by child-labour. How does one deal with that? Boycott the products, just in case? Good.

So what happens when demand dries up across the world as ethical trading sweeps all before it? Does it mean that the owner of the sweatshop in Bombay introduces a welfare state on the Swedish model? Or does it mean that the little waifs he employs are all laid off and turfed onto the street?

Trade in oil

Virtue is an elusive quality in the conduct of foreign policy and of trading. The basis of the prosperity of the world is oil, most of which emanates from undemocratic countries with legal systems which revel in executions and amputations. Every single investment in a capitalist economy, "ethical" or otherwise, will sooner or later, one way or another, help to shore up the regimes of Kuwait or Saudi Arabia. Even when trade is "controlled", we know how ineffective that control is - witness the proceeds from the sale of oil from Sadam Hussein's Iraq, which do nothing for the diseased and dying children of his country, but instead are used to bolster his army and his security apparatus.

Of course, investing in "ethical" outlets like the Bodyshop seems like the shortcut to heaven; but most Bodyshop products are sold in plastic containers, made from petroleum. We live in a world contaminated by exploitation, tyranny, pollution, barbarity and slavery. There is no such thing as the virtuous purchase or the sinless stock market share. My advice is, go the whole hog and invest in Lockheed Nuclear and Biochemical Weapons Inc; at least that way you are spared the agony of doubt. Best of all, it'll make nanny furious.