Supermarkets and planning

Overview of the Planning System

1. Lobbying of Government

Lobbying is used in influencing legislation and all kinds of government decisions. It is for this reason that lobbying is of particular use to supermarkets who need the government on their side. Lobbying companies today have access to extensive files on politicians and other influential people, this way they know who best to approach and in what way in order to further a campaign. It is a known fact that there is a very close relationship between the government and PR companies. Many top lobbyists begin their careers working in political circles and many top PR people have worked in the government. They use the skills they have learned to create favourable public images in the media for large companies and supermarkets. Between 1995 and 2000 one fifth of local shops and services were lost including post-offices, banks, butchers, grocers. Furthermore over five years to 2002, around 50 specialist stores are closed every week. (http://www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=21&query=bye+bye+high+street#byebye. These businesses are closing because superstores such as Asda and Tesco are offering more choice to consumers. They are selling almost everything you could need from food, electrical equipment to clothes and garden furniture. Consumers do not have to shop anywhere else. Many of the small and local businesses would like to see the government take more responsibility for what is happening, however, even the government is under the thumb of these large supermarkets. One way in which supermarkets are gaining this much power is through lobbyist groups set up to influence the government and prevent decisions going against them. For example in July 2005, Asda representatives visited the deputy prime minister at number 10 to urge the government to “change the test used by competition authorities so that it can open up new space to compete directly with Tesco.” (http://www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=2357). It has also been reported that Lord Sainsbury lobbied the government to soften its line on supermarket development. More of these examples will be discussed below.

Asda is an example of a large superstore that has taken advantage of its’ position to gain influence over the government and its’ decisions. It became a subsidiary of Wal-Mart in 1999 and is currently the second largest chain in the UK after Tesco. Asda’s turnover is not disclosed but based on market share it is thought to be in excess on £15 billion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASDA). In 2002 Asda supplied £2 million in sponsorship to the Commonwealth Games in Manchester. This coincided with the building of a new Asda Wal-Mart super centre on the site next to the stadium. (http://archive.corporatewatch.org/profiles/asda/asda4.htm). Asda has many links with government; especially the Conservative party through the former chief executive of Asda, Archie Norman who subsequently became a Tory MP and was also said to be a close advisor to William Hague. While Norman chaired Asda in the mid-nineties, the supermarket offered hundreds of thousands of pounds to Manchester City Council for a piece of land in an effort to prevent rival Kwik Save building a store there. (http://archive.corporatewatch.org/profiles/asda/asda4.htm). Many cases go on like this where large companies and supermarkets pay for things to go their way and the government accepts this. Another example according to Ethical Consumer Magazine is that Wal-Mart donated $630,000 to George Bush’s 2000 election campaign and also gave a small amount to the Democrats. Before Wal-Mart tried to move Super centres into New England they hired a PR firm to implement a public relations campaign in order to provide a positive image of Wal-Marts making it known to the public and the media that they will have a positive impact. Also Asda uses a PR company called ‘Communique’ who works in public relations trying to create a better image for Asda stores in the UK. Asda, along with many other supermarkets is a member of the British Retail Consortium (BRC), which “exists to speak for the retail industry and develop a range of ways for the industry to improve its performance.” (http://archive.corporatewatch.org.profiles/asda/asda4.htm). This group also lobbies the European government. In 2002 the BRC set up a ‘Retail Strategy Group’, the aim of the group is for “the retail industry and the UK government to work in partnership to identify key issues that impact on the competitiveness and productivity of the UK retail sector, and together take action to maximise opportunities for, and minimise threats to, UK retailers.” (http://www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=802). Lastly Asda is also a member of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) who is the ‘premier lobbying organisation for UK businesses on national and international issues.’ They work with the UK government and legislators “to help UK businesses compete effectively.” (http://www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=802). It is clear from these examples, of which there are many others, that Asda and Wal-mart by being part of these lobbying groups are one step closer to government and therefore one step closer to influencing legislation and policies which could otherwise have negative consequences for them. Another way that Asda cleverly promotes to the government and to consumers that they are a positive organisation trying to do good is through influencing education. It is well known that Asda targets schools, encouraging teachers to bring the children to the stores to promote healthy living. This is seen as an educational experience for the kids. Examples of Asda having particular influence over education is through the programmes such as “the Big Read” in 1999 where they supplied book donations to libraries and schools. Also in 2001 a project was set up called “the Big Eat” where children were taken on a trail around the store. This undoubtedly encourages parents to shop in Asda and also makes them look like they are promoting healthy living for kids. In 2004 ASDA started up an employee-training scheme in which employees gain a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ). This is of particular use to the government as this helps the government in trying to meet their target number of young people in apprenticeships. From these examples it could be argued that Asda is taking on the responsibilities of government in encouraging children to eat healthily, better people’s qualifications and so on. This puts them at a much favourable advantage with the government.

Tesco is another corporation renowned for having a sizeable influence over government. It is suggested, “Tesco has a bit of a problem with national and European regulation, and through lobby groups and close links with the government, has sought to loosen restrictive regulation.” (http://archive.corporatewatch.org/profiles/tesco/tesco3.htm#govt). In 2003, Tesco made contributions of £44,713 in the form of sponsorship for political events. The Labour party received £14,368; Conservative party £5,502 and the Liberal Democrat Party £6,340. However, during 2003 Tesco claimed to have made no political donations at all. (http://archive.corporatewatch.org/profiles/tesco/tesco3.htm#govt). Tesco was also a sponsor of the Millennium Dome, putting in £12 million. It was reported at the time that a lobbying firm working for Tesco to block plans for a tax on shopping centre car parks suggested that the £12 million donation was put forward for a government project in order to side with Labour at the time. There has been many cases where Tesco have went out their way to support various governmental projects and schemes, not likely because they want to support the government but more likely that they want the government to support them when it comes to policy making decisions and legislations that could work in their favour. It has also been reported that Tesco are keen to employ former government officials. In 2001, Tesco paid Philip Gould, one of Tony Blair’s political advisors to help reorganise its publicity, media and lobbying operation. (http://archive.corporatewatch/org/profiles/tesco/tesco3.htm#govt). Tesco also hired Tony Blair’s private secretary, David North to take on a post dealing with corporate social responsibility. There have been many more cases where Tesco have employed government officials. This obviously works in Tesco’s favour. Tesco, like Asda is a member of various lobby groups such as the ‘Freight Transport Association’ which campaigns against, for example restrictions on lorries travelling through residential areas at night, against constraints on the size of lorries and for increases in the speed limit for large lorries on small country roads. All of which if passed would have a positive impact for Tesco. Tesco are also influential within the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), which is one of Britain’s biggest business lobby groups. From looking at both examples of Asda and Tesco and the way they manage to influence government decisions it may be argued that even the government cannot rupture the power of the supermarkets.

2. Relationships with Local Councils

The roll out and expansion of supermarkets to attain a growing number of regional monopolies in the UK increasingly takes the form of a renlentless and imperial capital conquest. When it comes to negotiating and gaining planning permission at local level the supermarkets appear unstoppable. The tactics and resources available at their disposal amount to nothing short of a legal and financial conquest of land needed to secure dominance of the food and increasingly non-food retail industry. Every new development for a supermaket needs planning permission and the developer/supermarket must submit a planning application to the relevant local authority. This application must be made public by the local authority and members of the public should have the opportunity to make a case against the development [[1]] Supermarkets have far more political and legal muscle when it comes to fighting planning decisions. Local councils are often intimidated by the threat of of bearing legal costs should the supermarket win its appeal. Resources available to the public to mount a challenge or appeal to a planning decision are miniscule or non-existent by comparison to supermarket developers.

Richard Lochhead MSP for North East Scotland (SNP) recently asked the following question of the Scottish Executive:

"Q. How many supermarket planning applications were a) accepted and b) rejected in each local authority area in each year since 1999?" (S2W-22514).The answer was provided in written answers on Tuesday 31st January 2006 http:..www.scottishparliament.uk/business/pqa/wa-06/wa0131.htm No figures for 2004 or 2005 were available but information was provided for the 5 year period 1999-2003.

Convenience Supermarket Developments over 1,000 sq. metres in size but less than 2,000 sq.m

Between 1999 and 2003 a total of 40 planning applications were received. Of these 31 were granted and 9 refused. This is a success rate of 77% which would suggest that supermarkets are extremely successful in achieving planning permission for this type of store. Across Scotland this was an average increase of 6.2 stores per year for the 5 year period. To break the success rate down by 13 local authorities the following was found.

Success Rate of Applications by local authority

• 100% - Aberdeen(5), Angus (1), Dumfries & Galloway (1), Fife (1),
• 80% - Aberdeenshire (4 of 5), Highland (4 of 5)
• 75% - Edinburgh (6 of 8)
• 66% - South Ayrshire (2 of 3), Glasgow (2 of 3)

Only East Renfrewshire (1 app) and Scottish Borders (2 apps) did not give permission for a development of this size during the period and there were no applications made to West Lothian or North Lanarkshire.

Convenience Superstore Developments - (over 2,500 sq metres in size)

Between 1999 and 2003 a total of 83 planning applications were received. Of these 65 were granted and 18 refused, a supermarket success rate of 78.3% surprisingly proving that the larger the store, the more successful the rate of application. This lies in direct contradiction to the PPS6 Planning and Policy guidelines which place emphasis on town centre development as a priority before edge of town development and finally out-of-town stores.

Success Rates of Application by local authority

• 100% - Aberdeenshire (1, Clackmannanshire (1), Dumfries & Galloway (3), East Ayrshire (1), Falkirk (1), Highland (3), Midlothian (2), North Lanarkshire (2), Perth & Kinross (3), Renfrewshire (3), Stirling (2)

• 92% - Glasgow (12 of 13),
• 83% - South Ayrshire (5 of 6)
• 80% - Edinburgh (8 of 10), West Dunbartonshire (4 of 5)
• 66% - Dundee (4 of 6), Moray (2 of 3)
• 50% - East Dunbartonshire (1 of 2)
• 50% - North Ayrshire (1 of 2)
• 37% - Aberdeen (3 of 8)

Only Angus council successfully rejected both applications during this period and Fife received no applications.

With so many store applications being approved the case could be made for retail need. A Friends of the Earth study [[2]] carried out in 2000 suggests that: 'decisions made by local councils are in many cases not made on the grounds of retail need, but because the weak planning system and the power imbalance on a local level makes it increasingly difficult for them to refuse'. Even when applications are refused, supermarkets have the determination and resources to play a long-term game. They can sustain campaigns to get the permission they need for over a number of years.

There are a number of factors which make the system so weak:

• The Government's Planning Policy Statement (PPS6) is failing to prevent out-of-town development. This is direct contrast to its stated aim of promoting town centre vitality.

• Supermarkets can circumvent the planning system. Local council resolutions to resist supermarket developments are often overturned by lobbying or the whole planning proceedure is even bypassed by direct agreements between council and supermarkets

• The planning system is ignored - stores (esp. Tesco) sometimes build beyond the limits of their planning permission then claim this was an 'accident' or 'one-off' only to continue this practice.

• Supermarkets have greater power than local councils due to:
  • Section 106 agreements whereby supermarkets can use the offer of much needed community facilities as leverage to gain planning permission
  • The costs of appeal. Councillors' decision to approve an application may be influenced by how much it will cost the council if the supermarket successfully appeals the decision
  • Tesco owns a vast land bank of 185 sites. This can be used to ensure monoploly or call the shots with local authorities in need of land for community development and housing.

• Supermarkets actively lobby for new stores with local councils and communities.
  • methods include setting up campaign websites, writing letters to local councillors and making gifts like bicycles, charitable donations etc.
  • there is often a lack of substantial consultation with local communities in advance of planning decisions being made.

Source: Calling the Shots [[3]]

The Planning Application system is weighted in favour of developers over the public because 'none of these tactics are illegal yet they constitute a serious erosion of democracy' (www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/calling_the_shots.pdf)of the people who live in local communities and their best interests.

Case Study: Inverness

A recent edition of the Sunday Herald's 'Seven Days' magazine ran a recent feature on Inverness as 'The Town that Was Eaten by Tesco'. Such is the food retailer's dominance in the new city that "for every £1 spent on food in Inverness, 51p is spent at Tesco. Welcome as the locals say, to Tescotown". [[4]]

In Inverness, there are three superstores - all Tesco and one of them is a 24 hour store. Plans for a fourth store will leave the town entirely monopolised by this retailer. Local fashion retailer Charles Morgan says of the store: "They're an absolutely brilliant business and they're taking blind advantage of arcane planning laws to get they want." He also points out that "Supermarkets are supposed to provide choice but if you have one store dominating the market they can just manipulate the price". [[5]] He seems in awe of their ruthless spirit as much as let down by the system which allows stores like Tesco to dominate the urban and retail landscape.

Inverness is the fastest growing urban area in Europe. It is also a new city which depends on tourism. If Tesco forces smaller high street stores out of business there will be little for visitors to enjoy in the town centre. Despite this, "the Scottish Executive is proposing to pilot a Business Improvement Districts scheme in Inverness. BIDs, first used as a method of improving Times Square in New York, is designed to fund improvements to city centres by levvying extra rates contribution from the surrounding businesses." [[6]]. This is a clear case of expecting small independent businesses to subsidise regeneration of town centres with comparably less committment expected of larger chain stores. As suggested above, local investment by stores in projects such as infrastructure often has greater benefit to their business objectives than the local community.

Having proved adept at playing the planning process supermarkets are extending their skills to extend further into the non-food sector and branch out into housing. A proposal for what has been referred to as 'Tesco Town' in Glasgow's West end involving one of the largest Scottish stores at 80,000 sq ft and six blocks of flats has met with opposition from local groups and Strathclyde Passenger Transport who warned that the development could get in the way of potential future rail expansion. [[7]].

'This new strategy has a duel impact, firstly it gives the supermarkets an advantage in gaining planning permission for their stores. Secondly, it gives the supermarket a wider role in shaping urban development - 'it also doesn't hurt that they have an instant captive audience for their store'. Tesco Corporate Affairs Manager Katherine Edwards admits ''We're now thinking a lot more like a developer and not just like a retailer.[[8]]

To make an example of Tesco and summarise the impact of the weak planning system on corporate gains, in recent years Tesco has:

• grown unchecked by the competition authorities and aided by a planning system which has not been robust enough to stop it building new stores and extensions even where there is strong local opposition.
• Taken over convenience stores with no intervention from the competition authorities.
• More than tripled the proportion of floorspace in its huge Tesco Extra hypermarkets (over the last five years).
• Significantly extended existing stores without planning permission by inserting mezzanine floors.
• Created ‘Tesco towns’ where it has over 45 per cent of the market share.

[[9]]

The Competition Commission is currently considering a full inquiry into the dominance of the big four supermarkets (Asda, Sainsbury, Tesco and Morrisons) which could see chains 'forced to abandon further expansion plans or sell off existing stores'. [10]] Tesco in particular has come under fire for amassing a portfolio of land banks prevent rival retailers for developing sites in the vicinity of their own stores. As the supermarket which has gained the most, including some 185 sites, it could gain to lost the most if a Whitehall inquiry into anti-competitive practices is borne out.(source: Birmingham Post, 26th April 2006).

References

^ Corporate Watch. Supermarkets and the Planning System [[11]]

^ Written Answers Tuesday 31st January 2006 [[12]]

^ Calling the Shots, How Supermarkets Get Their Way in Planning Decisions, Friends of The Earth, 2000. [[13]]

^ Sunday Herald, Torcuil Crichton 'The Town that Was Eaten by Tesco', 'You've Been Tescoed', 19th March 2006

^ Friends of the Earth Press Release, 25th April 2006, [[14]]

^Birmingham Post,Big Four Braced for Whitehall Inquiry, 26th April 2006

3. Corporate Social Responsibility activities

In today’s economy it is estimated that the five largest supermarkets in Britain now sell 70% of all food sold, and that roughly 30p of every pound spent in Britain is spent in a supermarket.(http://www.ethicalnetwork.org/essays/supermarkets.php) Groceries are also not the only thing that supermarkets are selling these days. They have moved on to incorporate other specialist retailers and there products into there store to make a literal “one stop shop.” Shoppers can know find pharmacies, drycleaners, post offices, banks, tax filing services, and even photography studios all lumped together. Wal-Mart, owner of Asda and America’s largest hypermarket, profits are five times higher in non-food sales than in food sales.(http://corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=217) This is due to there extensive clothing, athletics, automotive, appliances, and home decor lines. Supermarkets today have a tremendous influence on their buying customers lives. Looking at the reversal of this, the customers have also come to demand certain values from the stores that they do business with. Today corporate social responsibility plays an important role in almost any business operating in the global market. Supermarkets are no exception. As they have come under fire the last few years, supermarkets have started to make an attempt to change their practices so that they are bettering not only the customers but the community as well. Issues like fair trade, the community, and the environment have seemed to become the most focused on by both the shopping community and the supermarkets themselves.

Fair trade is the idea that business should be conducted most directly with the individual farmers and artisans that produce the products which the companies sell. By doing this it is believed that artisans and farmers will be paid a fair wage for the products that they produce. When this idea is discussed most usually believe that it only pertains to people in third-world countries, but many supermarkets in the United Kingdom are also working with local area farmers. Research by Mintel group shows that British shoppers have a strong preference for buying locally grown and produced items like meat, fruit, and vegetables. They found that people liked the idea of supporting their local community and at the same time receiving the freshest quality of products. In response to this all of the major supermarkets have started to carry fair trade and locally produced items. Tesco boast that it buys over “1.5 million euros worth of goods per annum from some 800 Irish companies, over 80% of which are small to medium sized enterprises.”(http://www.tesco.ie/csr/index.html) While this year Asda has launched their new program called the “Four Point Pledge to Dairy Farmers.” Asda boast that it is now paying its dairy farmers five pence more per liter of milk that it’s competitors. They say that “were committed to paying our farmers a fair price every day for their milk.”(http://www.asdafourpointpledge.co.uk) In this campaign Asda also boast that it practices a form of “transparent pricing” in which they actually tell the consumers how much they are paying the farmers for the products that they buy which is something that most supermarkets do not do. The idea of fair trade, although quiet good in theory, has also come under certain backfire. Many farmers still believe that the supermarkets are still not paying farmers enough for there produce. John Turner who is a founding member of FARM said that; “Tesco’s commitment to sources as much UK produce as possible means very little unless there is an equal commitment to maintain fair & sustainable prices paid to farmers. Supermarkets have to recognize that there is a point at which their methods of continually driving down suppliers’ margins have a negative impact on farming methods and animal welfare standards.”(http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/tesco_exposed.pdf) FARM and other grass roots organizations have been making an effort to not only get higher prices for what they produce, but to also educate the public so that they know what’s going on.

Another area which shoppers have demanded supermarkets take on an idea of corporate social responsibility is concerning the environment. Issues like recycling, emissions, and energy usage have all been tackled by the major supermarket chains in the last few years. Supermarket Tesco states in its Statement on Current Corporate Social Responsibility that its reusable plastic crates, also know as green trays, have lead to the elimination of 36 tons of secondary waste packaging every year.(http://www.tesco.ie/csr/index.html) Tesco, as well as Asda, also provides recycling facilities at nearly all of there stores so that shoppers my bring there recycling to them. When it comes to the issue of food waste Sainsbury’s participates in a program in which it’s out of date food is donated to local charity groups. Coming under considerable fire after the release of Wal-Mart the Movie: High Cost at Low Prices, Asda’s parent owner started a campaign in the United States where that by 2015 it shipping tucks would be equipped to double there fuel efficiency. It is said that this will be achieved by adding side skirts to make the trucks more aerodynamic and by giving them larger back tiers to make them more efficient so that they will consume less diesel fuel.(http://walmartstores.com/globalwmstoresweb/navigate.do?catg=217) Other Supermarket chains have insisted that by striving to buy locally that they were able to reduce there emissions by not having to ship products over long distances resulting in high emissions for the shipping and waste from the extra packaging that is evolved. Wal-Mart also equips all of there stores with sky lights as a way of reducing the amount of energy they use to light their buildings. Supermarkets are still not in the clear though as chains like Tesco and Asda have both come under considerable fire for there building practices which many people believe hurt the environment.

Probably the most important issue that supermarkets have had to deal with concerning social responsibility is their effects on the communities in which they build their stores. It has been estimated when a supermarket opens it effects or closes village shops within a seven mile radius, as well as cause around 276 people to loose there full time employment positions.(http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/tesco_exposed.pdf) 2001 reports showed that for every one pound spent at a local village shop the equivalent was generated for the local economy. Where as for every one pound spent at an Asda store on 14 pence was generated. This issue has not only been a problem in rural areas in villages, but in larger city centers as well since supermarkets are now opening local quick stores on high traffic streets. To combat the negative response they have received from the public each supermarket chains has started their own massive community campaign. Tesco states that, “[w]hen proposing a new store development it is our policy to actively develop community relation, anticipating and addressing local concern [.]”(http://www.tesco.ie/csr/indes.html) They claim that they will work closely with local city councils to make adapt their supermarkets to how they will fit best in the community. Another way in which Tesco stores are trying to show communities that they care is through there Computer for Schools Scheme. With this program schools can collect school vouchers in-store and then redeem them for computer equipment.(http://www.tesco.ie/csr/indes.html) Other companies have also started a “charity of the year” program in which the supermarkets endorse charities that provide support for children, education, healthcare, and the elderly or disabled. Supermarkets hope that by doing these things they will be able to gain more customer loyalty and support which would allow them to expand their business.

4. Local resistance and its success

Supermarkets claim to offer convenience, choice and value for money to their customers; however it is fairer to say that their domination has and will increasingly have disastrous consequences for local communities. I will discuss the effects that supermarkets have on local communities and their efforts to resist their overwhelming powers. Furthermore, the methods which supermarkets use to lobby local communities will be discussed with reference to Tesco as a case study.

The monopoly of supermarkets has threatened to wipe out local convenience stores. They are accused of aggressive pricing tactics such as ‘price flexing’ that involves adjusting prices to undercut local competition. Furthermore, offers of ‘loss leaders’, products sold at very low prices, are used purely to draw customers in and to encourage them to buy more. Obviously, local shops cannot afford to compete with these tactics, as they do not benefit from the economies of scale enjoyed by chain store supermarkets. Closures of local butchers, greengrocers, bakeries and fishmongers to name a few have led to ‘ghost towns’ in rural areas when supermarkets open in the area. (www.thisismoney.co.uk/small-business/article.html?in_article_id=404135&in) The widespread growth of a single retailer endangers smaller, more vulnerable, shops and allows that retailer to raise its prices without challenge. Clearly, this is unhealthy for local economies and consumers. Plans for Tesco to open 100 Tesco Express stores in London alone over the next 10 years has led to the All-Party Parliamentary Small Shops Group to caution that independent food shops in London may be totally wiped out by 2015 if nothing is done to buck the current trend. In addition to the effects on local economies and peoples’ livelihoods, the closure of local shops will have a detrimental effect to the local character which define London’s individual neighbourhoods. (http://web.lexis-nexis.com/professional/?ut=1008147365270) On the other hand, the transformation of Britain into a ‘supermarket culture’ is seen by some as a positive move. To use separate shops to buy meat, bread, fish etc is time consuming and some specialist shops are expensive. (http://web.lexis-nexis.com/professional/?ut=1008147365270) The incredible growth in the market share of supermarkets has been put down to society’s need for a weekly shop due to changing and increasingly fast moving lifestyles coupled with a huge rise in car ownership. Moreover they operate efficiently and, on the whole, consumers trust them because they are so well recognised. While the lure of supermarket shopping is understandable, what is essential is fair competition. However this will be impossible to achieve while supermarkets continue to use bullying tactics to put local stores out of business. (www.corporatewatch.org.uk/lid=217)

The growing unease of consumers and local communities at the lack of real choice and feelings of powerlessness has contributed to a rise in local resistance to supermarket development. In February of this year an unlikely Battle between American retail giant Wal-Mart and Neil Stockwell, a stallholder at Queen’s Market in London, began. Stockwell is a leading figure in the protest against Wal-Marts’ plans to build on the historic 105-year-old Queen’s Market that supports dozens of workers. Not only does the market provide local jobs it also fosters a sense of community as many of the traders are the fifth or sixth generation of their family to run a stall. Furthermore, the market presents a cheaper alternative to fresh fruit and vegetables bought from a supermarket. In support of the markets struggle the locals who shop there have stopped buying American produce. It has been suggested that the traders will be provided with a space nearby to continue their work but there are concerns that this area will be too small, expensive and the move will be disruptive to the market. As well as a supermarket, Wal-Mart is reportedly working with private developers St Modwen to build 130 flats close to its store. As yet the dispute remains unsettled but in addition to the boycott of American produce 12,000 signatures have been collected and sent to the local council in protest of the bulldozing of the market. (http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money-savers/article.html?in-article-id=406815&in_p) A further example of local resistance to the development of supermarkets was seen in October 2005 in Manningtree, England. In January 2005, the Manningtree Tesco branch changed from a supermarket to a Tesco Express store that required deliveries up to six times daily compared with the previous twice a week deliveries. According to Mr Caldow, a local resident of the town who took direct action against Tescos disruptive and environmentally harmful actions “Manningtree is a very old, traditional market town and our roads simply aren’t made for huge lorries. Every time a Tesco delivery arrived it performed a complicated reverse turn outside my house and would go up on the pavement on both sides of the road.” In response to Tesco’s actions Mr Caldow took a chair and sat in the middle of the road for two hours to block the passage of Tesco deliveries. This resulted in the delivery being left uncompleted and Tesco were forced to use smaller vehicles more suitable for Manningtrees’ roads. Between 2002 and 2005 Tesco opened 546 Tesco Express stores earning them heavy criticism from environmentalists, in particular Friends of the Earth. These groups hold the supermarkets and their enormous lorries responsible for damage to smaller roads, rising congestion and pollution. Further to environmentalist critics many residents of small communities across the country feel supermarket chains are simply too large to keep in touch with their needs. Mr Caldow highlights these community concerns: “they are such a huge firm they can’t understand the needs of local people. I’m very worried that they will simply trample on their needs and concerns as they spread across the country.” (www.thisismoney.co.uk/small-business/article.html?in_article_id=404716&in)

The increasing need for supermarkets to win locals over has meant supermarkets have had to find a means to influence local communities. Often this will include promoting their plans to communities before planning applications are even made and running public relation promotions before the store opening in order to appease any tensions in the community. Tesco have become experts in this area using their significant resources to create pubic relations campaigns of information which is both informative and persuasive. The supermarket chain has recently formed a partnership with Newcastle University and Newcastle Hospitals NHS Trust which has been heavily publicised using a dedicated website. The website aims to temper negative feelings about the creation of an estimated 120,000 square feet hypermarket, which would make it one of the largest in the UK. Already the council has stated that the area in question has a maximum capacity of only 30,000 square feet and has no need for more retail services. Although the plans have not been submitted to the authorities the site details Tescos’ views about the benefits it will bring to the area: “by encouraging people to shop locally, it will mean there is a greater call for other local shops and services,” adding “for older people Tesco stores often become meeting places”. Moreover, Tesco uses the site to communicate numbers of potential job opportunities and the money it would contribute to the NHS. Tescos’ hope is that when the plans are submitted and examined by the council the community will see the development in a positive light. Nearer the opening of a store supermarket chains are making increasing use of aggressive public relation campaigns to ease local opposition. Regularly this involves putting an intense focus on donations to charities and celebrities opening stores to draw in crowds and increase anticipation. (http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/calling_the_shots.pdf)