food waste petititon

lilpunkkitty

hi all,
just logged onto my facebook and there is a new page about changing the law to let supermarkets give out of date or nearly out of date food to charities instead of being thrown away, and they are starting a petition to get people to sign if you want to, here is the link..
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/44195

https://www.facebook.com/FoodWasteUK?ref=stream
tht is the link to the fb page

malcumms7898

Thanks for sharing, sounds like a great idea.

antrobus

In fact it's such a great idea, that there's already one whole charity known as FareShare doing just that. What's more, they have somehow managed to do it without obtaining any kind of legal immunity.

Why do people organise petitions on subjects they clearly know nothing about?

Savvy_Sue

To be fair, any food FareShare takes which is close to its sell-by date is passed on to charities on the strict understanding that it will be used within the guidelines on the packaging.

It does mean that charities receiving such food may end up paying for disposal if they can't actually use it all in time. And it can be difficult to predict what your needs will be.

There are many other complications ...

antrobus

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

To be fair, any food FareShare takes which is close to its sell-by date is passed on to charities on the strict understanding that it will be used within the guidelines on the packaging. ...

To be even fairer, isn't that exactly how it should be?

Or am I the only one that thinks there is something ever so slightly morally dubious about granting charities legal immunity from civil action in respect of the passing on of 'unsold food'? Are the 'homeless and the needy' not allowed the same protection under the law as the rest of us?

What are we saying here? That the poor should be denied the right of legal action against those that supply them with food that poisons or kills them?

StacFace

antrobus wrote: »

To be even fairer, isn't that exactly how it should be?

Or am I the only one that thinks there is something ever so slightly morally dubious about granting charities legal immunity from civil action in respect of the passing on of 'unsold food'? Are the 'homeless and the needy' not allowed the same protection under the law as the rest of us?

What are we saying here? That the poor should be denied the right of legal action against those that supply them with food that poisons or kills them?

What are you saying? That the poor should be denied food that many who aren't would still be happy to eat?

I agree if food is found to have some harmful ingredient in it or something then it should be chucked. But if it's something like the cereal I have that "expired" at the end of March or the bread that takes me until 2 days after "expiry" to finish then I see no problem in allowing them the choice of whether to eat it or not.

antrobus

StacFace wrote: »

What are you saying? That the poor should be denied food that many who aren't would still be happy to eat?

I agree if food is found to have some harmful ingredient in it or something then it should be chucked. But if it's something like the cereal I have that "expired" at the end of March or the bread that takes me until 2 days after "expiry" to finish then I see no problem in allowing them the choice of whether to eat it or not.

If there is "no problem" why do you need to be "protected from being sued"?

mjm3346

StacFace wrote: »

But if it's something like the cereal I have that "expired" at the end of March or the bread that takes me until 2 days after "expiry" to finish then I see no problem in allowing them the choice of whether to eat it or not.

That's best before and not use by dates, best before food can and is still sold for consumption, Approved foods is one company that does it.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2624867

gildius

Amazing idea - I'll sign!

Savvy_Sue

antrobus wrote: »

To be even fairer, isn't that exactly how it should be?

Or am I the only one that thinks there is something ever so slightly morally dubious about granting charities legal immunity from civil action in respect of the passing on of 'unsold food'? Are the 'homeless and the needy' not allowed the same protection under the law as the rest of us?

What are we saying here? That the poor should be denied the right of legal action against those that supply them with food that poisons or kills them?

No, I agree with you completely, just that what FareShare does isn't quite the same as what the petition proposes.

IMO, the homeless may need MORE protection from dodgy food, because their immune systems can be shot to pieces. That's one of the complications I mentioned.

And I'll outline what another is: the charity DH works for offers food. Tonight the team of volunteers who prepare and serve this food didn't arrive, not sure what happened. But it means there's a heap of food waiting to be cooked, and no-one to cook it. He can't pass this food on to anyone at this short notice, because everyone needs to plan ahead. I wondered about driving around trying to find a van which I know does an outreach service to pass on some croissants, but where do I find them? The office is closed ...

StacFace

antrobus wrote: »

If there is "no problem" why do you need to be "protected from being sued"?

Because they don't want the hassle of defending themselves if a homeless person does become ill or the risk of them being held responsible if they can't prove it wasn't the cause.

As long as the issue is pointed out and it isn't clearly bad (ie lumpy milk or bread that's gone so moldy there'd be none left if you tried picking it all off) I don't see the problem with allowing them to have the choice. I don't think people or charities should be sued just for trying to help and I don't like the idea of food that could have benefitted someone being thrown away.

mjm3346 wrote: »

That's best before and not use by dates, best before food can and is still sold for consumption, Approved foods is one company that does it.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2624867

I know about Approved Foods for 'best before' but 'use by' products can still be fine for a short while too. I'm pretty sure bread is a 'use by' product so thought I'd given one of those examples but if not there are other things I know are 'use by'. For example I often drink milk the day or two after its 'use by' and it regularly takes me a week or two to finish off things like a tin of pineapple or carton of passata, which if you believe the label must be consumed within 2-3 days of opening or thrown away.

Assuming they do have to follow the packaging guidelines with all food as it was said above then they'd have had to throw away the above examples when I can personally vouch for them tasting fine and causing no illness whatsoever.