Do Tesco Propose People Will Live And Shop In-Store?

Having just emerged bleary eyed from the recession and with a General Election just around the corner. Societies economically vulnerable have become the darlings of politics. To claim to speak for those people the tabloids like to label “hard-working families” is no doubt considered a vote winner. It brings with it the inference that the speaker cares and is a familiar cry of the Pro-Tesco supporter in Sheringham.

Both within the town, and elsewhere throughout Norfolk, the choice is simplistically seen as being Waitrose or Tesco. However this simplification glosses over the numerous other benefits a Waitrose, in partnership with the Greenhous Community Project would bring to our town. Nonetheless the choice is regarded as Waitrose or Tesco. The stereotypes thus run that those “hard-working, economically vulnerable, families” want an affordable Tesco, whilst the financially comfortable middle-classes want their premium quality products, at premium prices and to hell with those who can’t afford it. On the face of it this seems a fair assumption to make but scratch below the surface and the picture is wildly different. 

First we need a little context.

Currently over 500 people sit on the waiting list for affordable housing in the Sheringham area and North Norfolk District Council was recently listed as the 285th worst provider of affordable houses, out of the 323 councils in the UK. As this story from the Eastern Daily Press highlights: http://www.edp24.co.uk/content/edp24/news/story.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=News&tBrand=EDPOnline&tCategory=xDefault&itemid=NOED19%20Mar%202010%2009:53:28:697

What does this have to do with a supermarket you might reasonably ask? Well if Tesco are given planning permission on their proposed site, 19 social houses and flats will be razed to the ground. “No worries” the Pro-Tesco supporter will cry, “Tesco are offering the council £1.2 million to fund replacement social houses”. How very noble you might think, until you realise that this £1.2million will not be given to the council, but will be spent by Tesco themselves on a replacement 8 social houses and flats. Now I am no mathmatician but to me 0 – 19 + 8 = -11. What that means in real terms is that if Tesco are given planning permission 11 social houses and flats will be lost to make way for a superstore that proposes to cater for the very people it is putting on the street. To me though that doesn’t seem overly caring. Furthermore who will pick up this shortfall? North Norfolk District Council of course. And who will pay for it? Us, the taxpayers. The same taxpayers who have just had to shell out a further £500,000 fighting another Tesco appeal against the democratic “no” they keep receiving.

This fact does not seem to have gotten through to those who still loudly shout, claiming to be the voice of the forgotten working class, that a Tesco is needed. In the spirit of comparison the Greenhouse Community Project (GCP) will tear down no social houses. Tesco will create 150 jobs, the GCP will create 155. On top of that, through the innovative Food Academy the GCP will see Waitrose invest back into the community with the provision of educational facilities which will enhance further the employment prospects of those who attend, in the hospitality industry, an industry Norfolk, and in particular North Norfolk are reliant upon.

It seems to me that the Pro-Tesco supporters are missing the bigger picture. If the argument for Tesco is on price, and lets be honest what else could it possibly be based on? Waitrose have a range of “everyday essentials” which are competitive with any Tesco value range you care to mention. In addition to that the GCP, of which Waitrose is only a part, provides numerous positive benefits to the community in a sustainable, environmentally responsible and ethical way without tearing down existing community provisions. In fact the only community provision that was affected by the GCP was the allotments which the GCP have already replaced, not promised to replace at some point like Tesco have with the community centre and fire station they also propose to demolish. They have also more than doubled the number of allotments available and given each holder the option of a free, eco-friendly shed, all at no cost to the taxpayer.

The choice is a simple one, after all people can’t live in a supermarket.

Before I am strung up as someone who is well-off and clearly out-of-touch with those on low-incomes, it is worth pointing out I currently work part-time on a wage barely above the minimum for someone of my age while burdened with a debt far above my annual salary. I am a low-earner. I need affordable food, but one-day I may also need social housing, or the oppurtunity to re-train and the offer of those things are more appealing to me than a 10p tin of baked beans.

Save our Sheringham.

Tags: allotments, Community, Democracy, Fight, Good vs Evil, Greenhouse Community Project, hard-working families, living in a supermarket, low-earners, Norfolk, North Norfolk, Sheringham, social housing, taxpayers, Tesco, Waitrose