Napoleon once referred to England as a nation of shopkeepers. In reality, Britain is a nation of consumers. Most people support fair trade. Nine out of ten of us buy Fairtrade products - but how many understand the real impact our consumer choices have on international development?
In search of answers, an audience of around a hundred gathered at Starbucks on Oxford Street for a discussion hosted by the New Statesman. Before them sat an august panel of campaigners, politicians and ambassadors chaired by journalist Justin Rowlatt, the BBC's "ethical man".
The atmosphere felt cosy as we slurped piping hot "ethical" coffee and scoffed complementary fair trade brownies. But the event was no love in. Mark Littlewood, director general of the Institute of Economic Affairs, opened proceedings with a strong plea on behalf of the skeptics.
"The best that can be said about fair trade is it brings about a very very modest amount of good indeed and in some cases brings about harm."
The alleged harm lies in the potential for "disastrous distraction". Detractors fear the Fairtrade brand undermines the less populist but more critical aid agencies, dismissing it as just a way for affluent middle-class Westerners to assuage their guilt. The recent news that 95 per cent of the $100m aid raised by Live Aid to fight famine in northern in Ethiopia in 1985, was misappropriated by rebels, gives this argument newfound poignancy.
Back at Starbucks Oxford Street, Harriet Lamb, executive director of the Fairtrade Foundation conceded: "There's a danger that Fairtrade gives people a license not to worry about the other stuff." She politely dismissed critics by saying:
"People want an easy way to play their part in tackling poverty and I don't think we should decry that. It is having direct impact for one and half million farmers and their families; including their dependents this comes to about 7 million across the developing world, which I think is not nothing."
"It also gives a mandate to the Government to make the bigger moves in World Trade," she added. These "bigger moves" refer to the liberalization of protectionist laws, which currently restrict the access of developing-world governments to global markets; and moving the question beyond aid, as advocated by the economist Dambisa Moyo in a recent New Statesman interview.
For real change, the debate must shift from fair trade to free trade; followed by changes in the law such as dismantling the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), limiting subsidies for European farmers and full commitment to the World Trade Organisation's Doha Development Round negotiations.
In Ethiopia, the practical experience is that about 325 farming families have benefited from the Fairtrade movement. These people are able to send their children to school, access clean water and build clinics. Western consumers are sending the right signal to the international community that there should be a fair price for the produce that comes from developing countries.
According to Harriet: "As with the internet, everyone will have to adopt it in the end." The companies that adopt it earlier will gain the most. Doing nothing is no longer an option.
The work of ethical consumers to plant the plight of exploited farmers in the public conscience, thereby driving it up the political agenda should be recognised and celebrated; while still accepting that there is tremendous work still to do in other areas.
