Sadly I missed the article in question, but my concern with fairtrade is that the difference in the price the consumer pays doesn't seem to all be passed on to the producers.  Or am I missing a trick here?

An avid reader of the Economist myself, I was disappointed with that article on ethical shopping. The Economist’s claims that the Fairtrade system props up prices, leading to overproduction which in the long run keeps agricultural commodity prices low are unconvincing.  Fairtrade remains a very small proportion of the market and cannot be held chiefly responsible for this issue; many factors affect commodity prices, notably agricultural dumping by western countries plays a far greater role in artificially depressing prices than fairtrade.

 Moreover, we cannot by any means assume that in the absence of the fairtrade system, small farmers will always grow the crop that will make them most profit. They are most likely to grow what they have always grown - diversifying in itself incurs further costs. And small farmers cannot always know what prices will be so may grow the 'wrong' crop anyway in a given year; if, in that year, prices fall, the sale of their crops may not even meet subsistence needs. It is precisely because agricultural commodity prices are so volatile that fairtrade is so necessary - guaranteeing a producer a fair minimum price for his or her produce is, at the most fundamental level, guaranteeing that producer a living wage. It is also important not to forget that the Fairtrade scheme does encourage farmers to diversify into production of other crops and other livelihood opportunities. 

The Economist concludes that "no amount of Fairtrade coffee will eliminate poverty" and we can't change the world by shopping. Which is quite frankly an absurd argument. Fairtrade does not pretend to be more than a partial and hopefully temporary solution, but it is a rapidly growing corner of the market, and one that does change the lives of the farmers involved. Yes, as the economist says, we really need to radically reform the world trade system, and yes, that change must come through governments. However, we cannot ignore our responsibility as consumers just because we intend to act responsibly as voting citizens (as the economist suggests). Buying fairtrade will not change the world overnight, but it will make the difference for many small producers between stability and a basic income and the threat of hunger and poverty. It also sends a clear message to businesses and politicians that consumers and voters prioritise these issues and expect action at the highest levels.

That organ of right-wing conservative liberalism, The Economist, recently said that Fair trade stuff was basically a waste of time, since it encouraged overproduction and therefore depressed prices for farmers or producers who weren't lucky enough to get on the fair trade bandwagon. They said that fair trade actually did harm to more people than it benefits. I can't argue with this. So fair trade is a waste of time. Right?

 . . . But before I beam back up to the mothership, here is a link that might be of interest to people who care about how they spend, as well as how they donate, their hard earned cash.

http://www.hippyshopper.com/fashion_accesso/

 Hippyshopper.com is a great site. And this is a link to their 'ethical fashion' page.

... and have e-mailed PT accordingly :)

I prefer to buy Fair Trade/ethical where I can. But only if I like it and would use it. Don't get me wrong, FT does not equal "lower quality" - usually the reverse. But if we're talking about "fairness", then in terms of quality and my desire/need for the goods, I take exactly the same attitude towards FT goods as I would to any other supplier - except that I am happy to pay a reasonable premium for FT on the basis that the makers are properly paid.

If I like PT's clothes (and they fit) then I won't let the minor point of skinny models stop me buying. But I won't compromise my own quality standards or buy something I don't need "just because" whatever I am buying is Fair Trade.

-----------------------------------------------

... nearly Vlad the Impaler

LMC, you're right. It's disgraceful that the fashion industry  seems so determined to perpetuate its beauty myth of emaciated female bodies. And it would be wonderful if People Tree bucked the trend by using more representative models.

 However, a) unlike the majority of clothing companies, I'm sure if you raised your concerns with People Tree, they'd be interested, take note, and maybe even change; and b) if I have a choice between buying my clothes from a company that treats its employees in developing countries fairly and humanely, or one whose only interest seems to be how to create clothes as quickly and cheaply as possible, regardless of the human cost, then I know where I'd rather spend my money. People Tree may not be perfect, but they are trying to do the right thing.

Just had a quick look - and the clothes look great.

However, since we're talking ethics here:

Given that the average size of women in this country is size 16, it's a shame that the clothes don't come in larger sizes. This would also widen PT's market. Plus, it's a shame that the models are all young and slim - even if some of them are from BME groups. It would be nice if a fair trade company could be brave and use more realistic people to model its clothes - representative of the population as a whole. Hawkshead, for example, is not fair trade but some of its models are - shock, horror - people over 40. With wrinkles and everything. OK, so PT is aimed at a younger market. But I have to say that the catalogue doesn't "do it" for me, because I'm not a clotheshanger like most of the models in there. I'm only a size 14, but tall with it, so will have to pop into Topshop and try before I buy - measurements in the catalogue make me suspect that most of the clothes will, unfortunately, be too short for me :(

-----------------------------------------------

... nearly Vlad the Impaler

I just want to applaud the work that Sheenagh does. Empowering people, and particularly women, in developing countries is the common sense approach to tackling poverty.

How we spend our money as consumers is just as important as where our charity donations go - if not more so - so I'm really pleased to see IG giving space to this issue.

 People Tree is another fairtrade company that helps people out of poverty by providing them with skilled jobs and a just wage. Here's their website -  www.peopletree.co.uk.

By the way, you can now buy People Tree clothes at Topshop (I promise I'm not affiliated with them in any way - I just think they're fantastic!).