Skip to main content

What price a cup of tea?

 I do love a cup of tea.  My mum liked a cup of tea too.  Whenever we returned from shopping or some other activity, visiting friends, etc. she would immediately say "Let's put the kettle on and have a nice cup of tea!"  In those days, the 1950s, it was always Co-op 99.  Co-op 99 is relevant to this story because it was the first branded tea in the UK to become 'Fairtrade.'  But what price our cup of tea? 

Joanna K Photography
According to the Tea and Infusions Association, in Britain, we drink an estimated 165 million cups of tea a day or over 60 billion in a year.  That's a lot of tea.   There is only one country that drinks more tea than does the UK - Ireland. 

In the UK, tea varies in price from £1.10 for a Tesco's own box of 80 tea-bags to £2.40 for a branded variety, such as Typhoo.  But, whichever you choose, very little of it finds its way to the tea pickers in the fields of India, China, or Africa.  The lion's share goes to the retailers.  For Tesco's own-brand, that would be 58 pence taken by Tesco, while the blender (Typhoo, Tetley, etc.) takes 36 pence; eight pence goes to the factory,  7 pence to the global trader, and a penny to the auctioneers.   That just leaves 0.2 of a penny (less than an old farthing) for the tea picker. 

Tea is a poverty-wage product.  The tea business is India‘s second-largest employer. It employs over 3.5 million people across some 1,686 estates and 157,504 smallholdings, most of the workers being women.  It is barely short of slave labour. Tea plantation workers are mostly Adivasis, who are descendants of workers forcefully recruited and brought by colonial planters more than 150 years ago from neighbouring states such as Jharkhand, Bengal, Bihar, Odisha, and Madhya Pradesh to work exclusively on the plantations.  We don't see many, if any statues of them, yet we depend on them for our cuppa.  It is a history of appalling subjugation of a people by a landed aristocracy, and it continues today. 

In Assam and West Bengal, a tea picker's daily wage is around 115 rupees in Assam and 122 rupees in West Bengal. By comparison, the minimum wage for an unskilled agricultural worker in India is 222 rupees, almost twice as much as that paid to female tea pickers.  They are poorly nourished, tied to the land, while their children have limited access to education.  A recent report described it as 'a life without dignity.' 

Tea is a monoculture and a haven for pests, and many producers have switched to chemical pesticides to increase yields.  There have been many reports of the amounts of pesticide residues found in the tea that we drink.  As for the workers, they are exposed to these pesticides with the minimum of protection.  Many of these pesticides are damaging to cognitive development.  We often pride ourselves on our advanced regulations regarding the use of pesticides, but what purpose are these if we allow trade predicated on poverty and potential harm to those who produce the products we consume? 

392,700 farmers and workers across 11 countries are involved in Fairtrade tea production. 10,700 tonnes of tea was sold as Fairtrade in 2017. This means certified farmers and workers earned €5.3 million in Fairtrade Premium in 2017.

On plantations, workers invest almost half of their Premium in community services such as housing, education and healthcare. However, Fairtrade certified organisations sell only around 7 per cent of their tea on Fairtrade terms – this means they don’t benefit from being certified to the extent that they could.

In the UK, while sales of Fairtrade tea have more than doubled since 2000, they still only account for roughly 8 per cent of all UK tea sales. When UK shoppers choose Fairtrade tea, tea producers sell more of their product on Fairtrade terms and can work towards a more sustainable livelihood for themselves and their families.  

We should insist that the UK government puts fairtrade at the heart of new trade deals post-Brexit. We should care about the consequences of the cheap products we consume.  We should ask who pays the real price. 




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

When Finance Drives Destruction

Tackling climate change means stopping the funding of rainforest destruction, says a significant study commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund.  The UK's financial services have provided directly over £8.7 billion to 167 different traders, processors, and buyers of forest-risk commodities (cocoa, rubber, timber, soy, beef, palm oil, pulp & paper) from 2013 to 2021.   With direct and indirect investment,  the figure rises to a staggering £200 bn.  Whilst not all that investment is in destructive projects,  the study concludes there is little transparency on the risk.  Finance is the oil in the economic machine.  But it also drives decisions. We all know the importance of money. We borrow to invest. So much depends on it, such as company pensions.  Do we really know what our pension pots are doing? We invest for the future. But what kind of future? Is all investment good?  Much investment is bad. Investment drives the nature of our economy. It drives our decisions as individuals,