Fairtrade product search

From Fairtrade Australia New Zealand

Click on Find Fairtrade on the Fairtrade Australia New Zealand website to use a great new product search function. Type in a product type, location or simply browse the many brands of Fairtrade Certified products available. Generated by Fairly Local, you too can contribute to the database by submitting locations where you have seen Fairtrade Certified products - read more here on how to contribute.

You can't make this stuff up: Republicans' recent asssaults on women's rights

While we're on the topic of threats to women's human rights - and in light of International Women's Day coming up - I've posted the list below, courtesy of MoveOn. It lists the top 10 Republican assaults on women's rights in the US. If you're interested in the list of sources for these claims, let me know in the comments section, and I'll post those links.

1) Republicans not only want to reduce women's access to abortion care, they're actually trying to redefine rape. After a major backlash, they promised to stop. But they haven't.

2) A state legislator in Georgia wants to change the legal term for victims of rape, stalking, and domestic violence to "accuser." But victims of other less gendered crimes, like burglary, would remain "victims."

3) In South Dakota, Republicans proposed a bill that could make it legal to murder a doctor who provides abortion care. (Yep, for real.)

4) Republicans want to cut nearly a billion dollars of food and other aid to low-income pregnant women, mothers, babies, and kids.

5) In Congress, Republicans have proposed a bill that would let hospitals allow a woman to die rather than perform an abortion necessary to save her life.

6) Maryland Republicans ended all county money for a low-income kids' preschool program. Why? No need, they said. Women should really be home with the kids, not out working.

7) And at the federal level, Republicans want to cut that same program, Head Start, by $1 billion. That means over 200,000 kids could lose their spots in preschool.

8) Two-thirds of the elderly poor are women, and Republicans are taking aim at them too. A spending bill would cut funding for employment services, meals, and housing for senior citizens.

9) Congress voted yesterday on a Republican amendment to cut all federal funding from Planned Parenthood health centers, one of the most trusted providers of basic health care and family planning in our country.

10) And if that wasn't enough, Republicans are pushing to eliminate all funds for the only federal family planning program. (For humans. But Republican Dan Burton has a bill to provide contraception for wild horses. You can't make this stuff up).

Fair trade maybe, but what about the use of palm oil

Bluestocking member, Liza Beinart, originally wrote this letter to Tim Costello, Director of World Vision. I'm posting it here (with her permission) to highlight some of the challenges with fair trade labelling and certification.

Dear Mr Costello,

I read with interest the story in The Age about your meeting with Arnott’s about the use of child labour to produce cocoa in west Africa. Congratulations for advocating for such an important issue.

I wonder if you are aware that Arnott’s products contain palm oil. As I’m sure you know, palm oil is sourced from South-East Asia and palm oil crops have contributed not only to massive deforestation, but also to the loss of natural habitat for orang-utans, one of the world’s most endangered species. Palm oil is used in products such as tim tams and mint slice biscuits.

I raise this because I do not think that the removal of child labour from the production of cocoa for these biscuits necessarily means the products – or Arnotts for that matter – will have earned an ethical certification label that “ensure[s] products met agreed environmental, labour and developmental standards”. Ensuring that “the chocolate in these biscuits has been produced ethically” is not enough to make this an ethical product – Arnott’s would have to address their use of palm oil, the trade of which is causing devastating environmental and ecological damage, and basically wiping out the orang-utan population.

I understand that World Vision’s focus is not ecology but children (I work for a children’s rights organisation myself) – but I think it’s important to avoid stamping “ethically produced” labels on products simply because one aspect of the production is ethical. Ethical production is a multi-layered issue and we run the risk of letting companies off the hook lightly if we applaud them for only addressing one small part of the problem. Likewise, it runs the risk of misleading consumers to believe that they are buying “ethical” products, when in fact they are only buying a product that has responded to one ethical issue. Yes, they should get part credit, but not resounding approval with a label saying “ethically produced”. It’s like calling washing powder “environmentally friendly” because the box it comes in is made from recycled cardboard – even though it might be full of noxious chemicals that pollute our waterways.

I would be interested in your perspective on this.

Kind regards

Liza Beinart
Perth, WA