Not Lovin’ It – Why we are against McDonald’s in Stirchley

Not Lovin’ It

Written by Matthew and Joseph.

[Matthew]

Everyone loves a burger now and then. The short burst of energy-rich, calorific food brings momentary joy as we take a break from work or childcare, or the drudgery of more healthy diets. The burger is the food of the free as the New York Times once wrote. It reminds us we’re free to choose what we put in our bodies, free to decide that sometimes a little bit of something bad is not so bad after all. In the 21st century burgers and other fast-foods are a deep-rooted part of our culture. And in the UK, a staple part of our high street. It’s no surprise then that the most famous and globally dominant junk food retailer is putting its greasy feelers out in our neighbourhood, with the hopes that Stirchley’s roads may one day be paved with gold(en arches).

McDonald’s have launched a publicity campaign in an attempt to sell us more burgers in Stirchley. A brave move perhaps since we already have plenty of indulgent food options on the high street. But McDonald’s have an extra special twist in their proposal which is that they’ll drop the bag of chips right through the driver’s window of the Nissan Qashqai and we can eat it in their lovely new car park whilst looking at other people eating chips in their cars. It sounds great, and nothing says ‘food of the free’ like a meal you eat with your seatbelt on.

Drive-throughs are a thing of the past. Literally. The first drive-through, opened in 1921 and was aptly located at The Pig Stand (1). They were a revolutionary new way to eat fast food, faster and born out of the buzz of the motorcar which was rolling out across America. The car became a ubiquitous part of modern industrial society and so the drive-through became a natural passenger. Although more present than ever a century later, cars are now understood for their harmful impact on the seen and the unseen. The location of the proposed McDonald’s already exceeds three World Health Organisation limits for air pollution (2) and the pavements are commonly littered with cars, blocking the walkway for people in the community. The truth is, we need fewer cars and we need transport systems that allow us to make the culture shift needed to get there. The idea of proposing a drive-through business in this climate is outdated, ill-conceived and not in the interests of Stirchley.

The nimbys will say that it’s all about Stirchley, but the local cannot be viewed in isolation from the global and the global is where McDonald’s really pisses on the chips. In 2019 McDonald’s emitted more than 53 metric tonnes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere (3). Globally they sell nearly three million Big Macs a day and it’s been calculated that the production of each one equates to the same CO2 emissions as driving a petrol car for a 7.9 mile journey (4). The seven million cows they slaughter each year are fed on mono crops that disrupt ecological cycles and the company is regularly linked with reports of forced labour in their soy, beef and coffee supply chains (5).

McDonald’s, by sportswashing through financial investment in sports clubs and events, ensure multiple generations of kids grow up recognising the golden arches from their footy bibs. In this proposal, they want to paint them on our street too (6). From a corporate standpoint they want us and our children to continue buying these burgers so their tenants (the franchise owners) can continue to pay the board. Or put more brazenly by the first McDonald’s CEO Harry Sonneborn, “We are not technically in the food business. We are in the real estate business. The only reason we sell fifteen-cent hamburgers is because they are the greatest producer of revenue, from which our tenants can pay us our rent.” Burgers are certainly not so cheap these days, but this is often still the big argument put forward by the small pro-McDonald’s group. “McDonald’s cheapness is good for ‘working class’ people.” But in reality because of lobbying and corporate control by global players like McDonald’s we have had stagnant wage growth and greater casualisation through zero hour contracts. The solution to people being poor isn’t cheap food – it’s affordable housing, secure jobs and increased wages.

At SCD we’re calling for the rejection of all aggressive landlordism in Stirchley in the form of franchises or buy-to-let developers. We’re calling on the council and city planners to wholly reject this proposal and any others that attempt to take our transport systems backwards and our local pollution levels skywards. Instead, this land should be used for a community-led development in the form of much needed social housing, or other community assets such as the ones we’ve lost and are still losing. We must reject the false idea that endless capitalist growth is a good thing and that it’s OK for some to get rich whilst the rest of us get heart disease and asthma.

[Joeseph]

The proposal is to use the land right between the new Aldi and the Co-op funeral home—close to the Morrisons, oh and don’t forget there’s that new Lidl that’s almost completed a bit further down the road, too.

These roads aren’t equipped to handle the vehicular demand these powerful corporations expect to attract. Neither is the environment, locally or globally. The inclusion of 32 on-site car parking spaces (only for customers) coupled with the drive-thru aspect itself means more cars, more fumes, more noise. In their publicity they say that the positioning of the new restaurant ‘will help with traffic flow along the Pershore Road.’ Meanwhile the sad irony here is that our project, just up the road, is providing 39 affordable homes without the need for any parking. If the McDonald’s were to go ahead, this small stretch of Stirchley would see our effort to keep 39 additional cars off our streets nearly reduced to nothing.

The argument that a restaurant concept which encourages you to harness the power of your vehicle in the name of convenience will reduce traffic and pollution is quite beyond quip and witticism. There are three such drive-through locations within three miles of Hazelwell Lane and McDonald’s have over 1450 locations in the UK and Ireland alone. It is just greed, pure and simple.

But perhaps this time the Clown has taken a step too far. Word spread of the proposal faster than you can say Quarter Pounder with Cheese, please. Up and down the high street it was all anyone was talking about, and within hours of the news being made public over three hundred residents took to WhatsApp to mobilise and plan a protest. How McDonald’s will react remains to be seen. But anyone au fait with the McLibel case will know they’re not the type of firm that take criticism particularly well. One thing does seem clear, for the most part, locals aren’t too keen on adding a set of Golden Arches to Stirchley.

Here at SCD we stand with the rest of the opposition in our shared refusal to accept that Stirchley needs a McDonald’s. We also want to make it clear that we feel the site could and should be used for affordable social housing—something, if the substantial demand for spaces in our current development are anything to go by, that is very much needed in the area—the space could also be better used for other community services or other centres of community leisure (replacing those we’ve lost in the name of supermarkets and car parks). What is needed and what is logical, what would be in line with the council’s transport vision for urban centres, is dense housing that aligns with the preexisting bus, rail, and cycle routes. Not another McDonald’s.

Couple this with the fact that the most recent developments in the area have been encouraging increased car use and it’s clear that a drive-through is not just bad for Stirchley but also a massive departure from the types of developments needed in urban centres across the city.

Another element to why we wish to see this proposal go no further is McDonald’s involvement in the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people. They are, rightly so, on the boycott list for, among other things, providing free meals to the Israeli Occupation Forces (7). McDonald’s purchased all the Israeli franchises following backlash from this, meaning corporate now own all 225 restaurants In the region. The region where employees are told that if they do speak Arabic they should not use it whilst working at Mcdonald’s (8). With another four years of Trump about to break across the horizon this means further suffering and continual punishment of the Palestinians and their right to life. Trump and his MAGA-ites are set to appoint three highly vocal, pro-Israeli men to the positions of secretary of state, secretary of defence and ambassador to Israel. The latter of which considers Israel’s illegal settlements in the West Bank as part of some kind of biblical prophecy. If it wasn’t already important to show our solidarity and support with the Palestinian people, now it is getting desperate, and everything we can do we should be doing. Boycott all McDonald’s, not just this hypothetical one.

Scanning the McDonald’s consultation website reads as a list of promises to fix problems they’ll be causing if they get the go ahead. Currently Stirchley is being praised for its strong sense of community, its artistic output, and its ever-growing throng of independent businesses. All of these things will come under threat if we allow places like McDonald’s to drown us in their corporate veneer. “If approved, the new restaurant will deliver significant investment into Stirchley, helping support the local economy.” — quote from proposal site lol. The local economy will suffer, through increased strain on services, increased spend on waste collection and increased delays to vital public transport. The economic growth, McDonalds and Rachel Reeves talk about is only beneficial in conjunction with many other things. It will have a net negative impact if it increases pollution, litter, light pollution, traffic and reductions in biodiversity.