APPENDIX 16
Memorandum submitted by J Sainsbury plc
(R 23)
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 J Sainsbury plc is one of the world's
leading retailers serving 15 million customers a week. Our largest
subsidiary, Sainsbury's Supermarkets, offers over 23,000 products,
40 per cent of which are own brand. Sainsbury's brand products
are sourced against our own specifications. Their quality, composition
and safety is managed by Sainsbury's 200-strong Technical Division.
1.2 In response to overwhelming customer
concern, Sainsbury's has eliminated genetically modified ingredients
from all own brand products. This was a considerable task, involving
over 10,000 products and was achieved by replacing soya and maize
ingredients with alternatives or by using guaranteed non-GM sources.
Our policy covers soya proteins, oil and lecithins, and maize
proteins, starches, syrups and oil.
2. SAINSBURY'S
GM TOMATO PASTE:
UPDATE
2.1 In February 1996, Sainsbury's (along
with a competitor supermarket) were first to introduce an own
brand genetically modified food product—a genetically modified
tomato paste. It was sold along side a standard equivalent and
was clearly labelled "made with genetically modified tomatoes"
on the front of the can so that customers could make an informed
choice. Its launch was supported by customer leaflets displayed
in store and the company gave a full pre-briefing to the media.
The product was introduced with minimum fuss and with maximum
consumer acceptance.
2.2 From the start, we recognised the need
to clearly label the genetically modified tomato puree and thus
worked in partnership with the grower and planned for segregation
to deliver appropriate labelling.
2.3 Initially the GM tomato paste sold very
well as there was a clear cost benefit for the consumer. However,
towards the end of last year sales were affected as more and more
customers did not want genetically modified ingredients in their
products. At the end of June 1999, the supply of our tomato paste
finished and in light of customers' wishes we have not sought
further supplies.
3. SOURCING NON-GM
FOODSTUFFS: A RETAILER'S
PERSPECTIVE
3.1 We believe that the low level of consumer
acceptance of genetically modified commodity crops is, in part,
directly attributable to the way in which they were introduced
to the market. Had they been segregated and clearly labelled then,
given our experience with the GM tomato paste, we believe that
consumer acceptance would undoubtedly have been considerably higher.
3.2 Over three years ago, we tried, but
unsuccessfully, to persuade Monsanto and the American Soya Bean
Association of the need to segregate genetically modified soya
from the standard crop for reasons of consumer choice. We have
continued to meet with these organisations' representatives to
help them to understand the hostility our customers feel towards
their products.
3.3 At the same time, we put a great deal
of effort into understanding the structure of the soya ingredients
industry and worked to source identity preserved soya and identity
preserved soya-protein derivatives for as many of our own brand
products as possible. About a year ago, we were in the position
that we had reduced the number of our own brand products containing
GM soya or soya-protein derivatives down to about 45 products.
These products were clearly labelled so that our customers could
make informed buying decisions.
3.4 It became clear to us, however, that
the only way we could secure long term supplies was to aggregate
demand. In March (1999), in conjunction with Marks and Spencer
plc, we helped to launch an international consortium of food retailers
and industry experts to establish validated sources of non-GM
crops, products and derivatives. The member companies of the consortium
provided a long-term commitment to farmers and the commodity industry,
guaranteeing them a large market for non-GM raw material both
now and in the future.
3.5 We have now found sufficient sources
of non-GM soya for all our own brand products and as a result,
in July 1999, we completely eliminated genetically modified ingredients
from our own brand foods.
3.6 A common technical standard for non-GM
verification is essential to achieving an elimination goal. We
have been working with Law Laboratories and Genetic ID who have
now set up a verification programme called CERT ID. We have advised
all our own brand suppliers that all food ingredients which may
be at risk of cross contamination with GM variants should ultimately
be obtained from non-GM sources which have been audited and tested
to the CERT ID or an equivalent standard.
4. SAINSBURY'S
CUSTOMER CARELINE
4.1 Media coverage of GM has been highly
charged and has undoubtedly helped to leave the consumer alarmed,
confused and sceptical. One of Sainsbury's established mechanisms
for communicating with our customers is via our freephone Customer
Careline. This is manned by a team of 28 full time staff answering
about 10,000 customer calls over a 60 hour period each week.
4.2 During the spring and early summer of
1998, about 50 calls a week related to GM. In August 1998, following
a World in Action programme this rose to 900 calls a week for
a period of about a month. This then subsided to a base of about
70 calls a week until February 1999 when the Daily Mail, Express
and Independent commenced GM campaigns and GM became a topic for
Prime Minister's Questions. We immediately opened a dedicated
freephone Customer GM information line which took over 300 calls
in the first four hours and over 2,500 calls in three days following
the Blair-Hague exchange (3.2.99). Calls receded to about 3,000
per month in March. Since July 1999, when we announced our policy
of elimination, calls have dropped off to such an extent that
we have closed the GM dedicated freephone line and GM calls are
once again dealt with by our Customer Careline.
5. CONCLUSION
5.1 Sainsbury's always wanted GM and standard
crops to be separated and we were extremely disappointed when
this did not happen with the US soya crop.
5.2 In the absence of segregation, we have
had to take it upon ourselves to try to meet our customers demand
for non-GM food products.
15 November 1999
| 
