TV chef Gordon Ramsay is like many other celebrities. They think that because they can sing or dance, or kick a football, or, in Ramsay's case, cook, that their political opinions are worthy of attention. But celebrity opinions are no more, or less, special than those of anyone else. Despite this they get the chance to push their cause with prime ministers, presidents and popes.
Celebrities are listened to not because of what they say but because of who they are -- and occasionally they can be dangerous. Gordon Ramsay's cause is dangerous. He is opposed to free trade in food and he wants the British Government to ban the import of produce from foreign countries. Last month he told British Prime Minister Gordon Brown that "fruit and veg should be seasonal ... chefs should be fined if they don't have ingredients in season on their menu. I don't want to see asparagus on in the middle of December. I don't want to see strawberries from Kenya in the middle of March. I want to see it home-grown". He believes prohibiting food imports will force people to eat healthy, locally produced food, and this will reduce the greenhouse gases caused by transporting food.
Ramsay displays the sort of hypocrisy that characterises much of the modern-day environmental movement. He's an example of ambitious governments and self-appointed "experts" who want to control what we eat, what we drink and what we do. He and those who think like him should be forced to confront the consequences of their opinions.
Of course, Ramsay doesn't practise what he preaches. His chain of restaurants feature on their menus ingredients imported from all over the world.
Many European governments, in an effort to protect their inefficient and heavily subsidised farming sector, are now pushing for food to be labelled with the details of the greenhouse gases produced during its transportation. The idea is that locally produced food has travelled less distance than food from overseas and, therefore, consumers who want to save the planet will buy domestic instead of foreign products.
The aim of such regulations is to stop farmers from countries like Australia and New Zealand getting access to European markets. The most obvious problem with such regulations is that they don't take account of the greenhouse gases that result from the production of the food. For example, growing an apple in New Zealand produces one-third the emissions that growing an apple in Britain does. And even after transportation, New Zealand apples sold in Britain have produced fewer emissions than British apples sold in Britain.
A debate about Gordon Ramsay's personal ethics is interesting, but ultimately inconsequential. What's more significant is the influence his ideas might have. If developed countries adopted Ramsay's plan, the effect on the world's poor would be disastrous.
As Oxfam's head of research has said: "I'm sure the millions of farmers in east Africa who rely on exporting their goods to scrape a living would see Gordon Ramsay's assertions as a recipe for disaster."
Despite what is taught in our universities, free trade is not a plot by US multinational companies to increase their profits. Free trade is the best way to lift the world's poor out of their poverty. If Western developed countries cut farm subsidies and opened their borders to overseas food, the need under-developed countries have for foreign aid would be reduced. And trade develops self-sufficiency in a way that aid does not.
Ninety-five per cent of Britain's fruit and vegetables are imported. Ramsay hasn't said where the British will get their bananas and oranges from if food imports are banned. If Ramsay were serious about getting people to eat healthier food and consume more fruit, he'd be doing everything possible to encourage imports.
But the benefits of free trade aren't confined to food -- they also apply to motor cars. If the Federal Government were serious about getting motorists to drive hybrid cars, it would eliminate the import tariffs on foreign-built hybrids instead of giving handouts to car companies to make them in Australia. Imported hybrids would then be able to be sold to Australians more cheaply than the locally made alternative.
Gordon Ramsay and Kevin Rudd would both do well to learn these lessons.
ADVERTISEMENT
No comments:
Post a Comment