About Slow Food/Recent Slow UK history

1. Slow Food UK History: a catalyst for positive and lasting change in the seeking and preserving good, clean and fair food. We are a unique, not-for-profit education and research based voluntary organisation. We aim to protect and preserve traditional foods and food cultures in the UK, preserve biodiversity, promote food and taste education and raises awareness about high quality and taste, environmental sustainability and social justice in the food we eat.

We are the national association representing the UK in the worldwide Slow Food movement. In August 2005 a founding congress was held in Skye, Scotland but for many years before Slow Food was active through local convivia (local branches) supported by  Slow Food in Italy. The Slow Food movement was founded in Italy over 20 years ago. Slow Food UK was founded because the growing membership and convivia required support and services through a national UK office, now located in the heart of Shropshire, in the Cittaslow of Ludlow. Slow Food UK works in partnership with local convivia active in their respective communities.

Our model is a voluntary one. It combines the dedication and management acumen of our convivia, which are made up entirely of volunteers, with key strategic objectives and activities around: good food policy advocacy for the public, especially for children, youth and families; the promotion of biodiversity; raising awareness of local produce; promoting local purchasing of food; taste education; and preserving the food heritage of the UK.  Slow Food UK’s activities seek to improve food understanding and purchasing choices in local communities, creating long-term sustainable changes to the quality of food consumed and, in the process, bringing about a profound effect on the quality of life of individual communities. Many convivia, for example, have witnessed an improvement in well-being and comprehension of obesity and its causes and effects.

We want the Slow Food movement to be open and accessible to all.  Slow Food activities are, wherever possible, run free of charge or at cost to participants. We offer bursaries where the funding of an activity cannot be found. There is a modest subscription fee to become a member of Slow Food, but this does not cover the cost of running our activities or Slow Food UK itself. The Slow Food movement in the UK is supported by a select group of dedicated partners and donors we call “sustainers”. Our sustainers, combined with the energy and efforts of our volunteer force across the country have allowed Slow Food UK to pursue its goals.

2. Slow Food UK recent schism/controversy:

During 2008/2009, Slow Food UK was riven by a conflict which may come to the attention of new or prospective members and will be familiaar to some existing ones.  Towards the objective of providing an accurate  account of the UK movement, we append , following, a document written by Slow Bristol’s Philip Sweeney on this subject.

Recent Slow UK Schism: a personal perspective, latest news, November 2009

Some months ago I rashly promised to produce an analysis of the confusing events taking place within Slow Food UK this year. Apologies for the delay in doing so, due mainly to the ongoing nature of the disputes, making it difficult to decide at what point to draw up a definitive account. Plus of course the endemic Slow problem: like all our members, I don’t have time for this. However I recently attended a meeting which was supposed to mark a watershed, and, since no other national event of greater importance will occur until an AGM is called, probably in 2010, it seemed now is as good a time as any to deliver.

The term analysis is now somewhat diluted however: I’ve come to the conclusion that limitations on time and access to data indicate it would be more realistic and useful to present a personal account, partially factual, but partially impressionistic. This is doubly the case given that my own prejudices and motives form part of the data required to make sense of the matter. And also because it must be made clear that I’m not speaking on behalf of co-chair Nick Miller, whose superior experience of the inner workings of Slow Food UK has led him to conclude that, unless one is planning to devote massive time to participating in a leadership campaign, it’s best to let Slow Food UK get on with its business, as long as the national capacity for Slow action seems to be broadly advancing. (Nick has of course always made clear his readiness to discuss the issues with anyone of a masochistic disposition).

Background.

Slow Food UK is a sort of franchise of the Slow Food International organization, paying a proportion of membership fees to the Italian HQ, and conforming to a set of regulatory statutes. Until the beginning of 2009, Slow UK was run by a company registered as Slow Food UK Ltd. Several years back, during the national chairpersonship of Bristol’s own Sue Miller, Slow UK had been promised a very large donation by the publisher and Sheepdrove Farm proprietor Peter Kindersley. Although the £200,000 first instalment of this money had been transferred, subsequent tranches had not, and rumours circulated that Kindersley was unhappy with the performance of the Slow UK leadership (which had taken over from Sue M). This included general ineffectiveness in national campaigning as well as specific blunders such as being obliged to pay out around £50,000 of the initial gift in legal fees due to a dispute over which of two food festivals to grant the Slow imprimatur to.

During the latter part of 2008, various developments occurred. A financial crisis loomed. The Chair of Slow Food UK resigned and was replaced by the current incumbent, Gerry Danby, a lawyer and leader of a Slow Food convivium in Yorkshire. At the same time, an American named Catherine Gazzoli, with experience of freelance work for a United Nations agency of which her father was a senior figure, contacted Slow UK looking for work and was hired, initially as temporary fund raiser.

In early 2009, it was announced that due to the imminent probability of insolvency, Slow Food UK Ltd  had ceased trading and all paid employees had either been dismissed or resigned. Operation of the UK franchise was passing to a newly created entity, the Slow Food UK Trust, with the approval of Slow Food International. This was to be run by a new Board of Trustees chaired by Danby, and including Peter Kindersley’s wife Juliet as well as appointed names such as Prue Leith. The office was to be moved from Ludlow to London, in premises connected to another of the new Trustees, and run by Catherine Gazzoli, who was now described as Chief Executive Officer, at a salary equal to the total of those paid to all the previous employees. It was reported by a member of the old board and Ludlow resident, John Fleming, that the financial life of Slow UK had been saved by a cheque from Peter Kindersley given on condition that it be used solely for the employment of Catherine Gazzoli and the transfer to London. A number of members of the old board, including Fleming, were unhappy with this but were defeated by the decisive vote of Silvia Monasterolo. the Italian-based representative of Slow International (the Board was otherwise evenly split on the issue).

During early 2009 the anti-Trust faction collected sufficient signatures among the UK membership to oblige the calling of an Emergency General Meeting, which took place in Birmingham in April. This EGM voted a motion calling for the adoption of a new structural plan for Slow Food UK, different from the Trust solution which had already been put in place. The Trust disregarded this vote on the grounds that it was too late, and that the Italian bosses, Slow Food International, had already accepted the new arrangement.  This gave rise to continued dissidence among convivia who felt the process was undemocratic, and a Declaration was circulated, and signed by over a hundred convivum leaders and members, calling for further consultation and discussion. Slow Food International responded stating that the Convivium leaders would have an opportunity to ratify the new arrangements, and vague mention was made of a vote. In the meantime, Catherine Gazzoli had became a focus for hostility from a number of the convivia she had visited to seek sources of funds: this subsequently reached a point at which some members and Convivium leaders declared they would not continue working with Slow Food as long as Gazzoli was in position.

In July 2009 a suggestion was made by Bristol member Barny Haughton that a national conciliation meeting should be held in Bristol for all issues to be fully aired under the chairmanship of a neutral person. Gerry Danby agreed to this, but after a number of weeks had passed without news announced that some of the dissident faction had rejected Bristol as a venue on the grounds that it was not genuinely neutral territory.  Eventually the Trust announced a national Convivium Leaders’ Meeting to take place in London in late October, in lieu. By this time, the Trust was de facto Slow Food UK. A number of the old Slow convivia had dissolved, and others had announced the intention of their officers to resign in the near future. Several of the former created a new breakaway organization, the snappily named Taste Real Food, which coincidentally celebrated its formation in Ludlow the evening of the Slow Convivium Leaders’ Meeting in London. (For more details on this, see www.tasterealfood.com)

The issues in contention were far too numerous and complex to bear laying out in detail here. They included allegations that the new Trust had been set up secretively, negotiations taking place without the knowledge of the full board and without any consultation of the membership ; that the new structure might in some way grant less decision-making power to the grassroots members; that the Slow badge would be available to endorse products and that this is inappropriate; that sub-celebrity chefs were being made advisors without proper criteria for their selection, and much more. A constant undertow was the suspicion that Peter Kindersley was taking over Slow Food UK surreptitiously. Although it was not clear to what extent this should matter if it were so, one could see that if Catherine Gazzoli should turn out to be a major liability for the continued cohesion of the organization, and if the Kindersley financial support necessary for Slow UK survival should be forthcoming only on condition of her continued employment, a somewhat delicate situation would certainly ensue, and one which Slow members would be entitled to wish to know about before forking out their 35 quids.

Which brings us to the recent Slow Convivium leaders meeting, held in a meeting room in the South Bank complex, London.

Shortly before the meeting the Slow Food Trust announced that it would be run according to a procedure known as Open Space, by an independent “facilitator”, without any pre-set agenda. This was regarded with suspicion by critical parties who had supposed the meeting would provide the opportunity for detailed questioning of the Board and officers. Was this an attempt to evade that potentially acrimonious eventuality?

In the event, there was a good turn-out, nearly 100 people, and Carlo Petrini himself came over, along with Paolo di Croce, General Secretary of Slow International, and Silvia Monasterolo, the UK Board rep from the Slow Vatican in Bra. Petrini and di Croce opened proceedings with morale-boosting generalisations.  Gerry Danby, Chair of the new Trust, then gave a short statement. The membership has dropped 22% to 1636 during the year, with 5 convivia closing down. However 10 new convivia have either been formed or are about to be. The ”seed funding“ provided by Peter Kindersley is being used to attempt to attract more diversified financial backing (so far the coffee giant Lavazza, a Parmesan producer and a whisky company are on board), as membership fees alone cannot come near covering planned expenditure unless the UK membership increases hugely. Governance of the new organisation is not undemocratic, but “similar” to the previous arrangement, with Board members both elected by the national membership, and appointed,  as in the case for example of Prue Leith. One third of elected members are obliged to retire and be replaced (i e voted in by full membership) each year.

Following Danby’s statement, one Jeffrey Hyman, a “chartered facilitator” was introduced to conduct  the Open Space procedure. Prior to the meeting, there had been speculation as to what exactly Hyman was, as there is no evidence of the role of chartered facilitator existing: I was able to clarify this with Hyman, who, he claims, is indeed chartered, by something called the Creative Problem Solving Group of Buffalo. He is also a food industry executive who regards Slow Food and sustainability as “trends” to be brought to the attention of the Food and Drink Innovation Network he chairs. He was invited to run the meeting by Catherine Gazzoli, whom he had earlier invited to address one of his conferences. Hyman explained that, according to the Open Space procedure, based on ancient practices discovered to have operated in Africa “thousands of years ago”, the participants would propose subjects for discussion, then congregate in small groups to discuss, then report back on their discussions. Participants could be full members of a  group, or “butterflies”, flitting from one group to another, or “bumblebees”, doing something else, while Hyman himself would be on hand for consultation, bearing constantly in mind the facilitator’s motto  “on tap, but not on top.” Why this arrangement should be dignified with a name or require an outside “facilitator” was not explained.

The delegates, seated in a circle, were then invited to propose subjects. Instead of provoking ribald laughter and a shower of fair-trade lager cans, Hyman’s instructions were seized upon like chewy toys by a gaggle of puppies, as one delegate after another stood up eagerly to propose subjects such as How Can I Establish a Successful New Convivium, and were applauded spontaneously by the floor. In no time at all the room was a well ordered kindergarten, abuzz with flipcharts and felt tips. The morning ended with each group leader summarising their discussion, again to applause from the floor.

The afternoon was scheduled to follow the same format, and it would theoretically have been possible to propose that Slow Food International and the Board make themselves available for questioning by the full meeting instead. Nobody did, including myself. In my case, a lethal cocktail of boredom, cowardice and self interest impelled me to take the alternative opportunity of proposing a chat group on Slow Travel, in other words the gastronomic tours I am currently setting up for our members’ delectation, and my financial advantage. So the afternoon consisted of another round of Afro-encounter groups, with Petrini hovering on the edges, ear bent towards his interpreter. Then a report back, followed by “Closing the Circle”, a bonus dose of self-congratulation in which the acolytes were invited to say how great it had been for them, punctuated by suitable amounts of hands together Praising the Lord. By four o’clock, Carlo was on his feet, rattling off track 16 of his greatest hits (“we don’t eat food, we are eaten by food!”) and then the goody bags, with a whisky miniature and a Parmesan logo baseball cap, were being handed out and it was all over.

“Didn’t you get the feeling a lot was swept under the carpet?” I heard one delegate say to another as they left. “Yes, but a lot of the objectors have left Slow UK already, and I expect a lot of the remaining ones will now” was the reply. What did Petrini make of it, I asked him, had he been very worried by the state of dissent in the UK? Yes, he replied, but not now, after seeing this tremendous demonstration of enthusiasm. “You know, sometimes all you need when the ship is in difficulties is to change the setting of the sails a little, and it sorts itself out..”  “And maybe throw some of the crew overboard?”  I suggested. “Er, yes” replied Carlo, a touch uncertainly, and made off, giving my elbow a godfatherly squeeze.  I asked Silvia Monasterolo if this meeting had constituted the ratification of the new Trust referred to earlier in the year. No, she said, this was more of an opportunity for convivium leaders to get to know each other. The ratification would happen, probably, at the first AGM of the new organisation.

So there we have it. No explicit resolution of issues, and no formal ratification of the new system, but no overt hint that the overwhelming majority of convivium leaders present was not perfectly happy to follow the Trust. An unqualified success for the Trust’s tactics, and vindication for Jeffrey from Buffalo and his performing flip charts, thanks in large measure to the supine behaviour of the few sceptical delegates present, which to a degree includes myself. Perhaps a deserved success. The support of Peter Kindersley,  who has ploughed years of his life and millions of his money into helping excellent causes such as the welfare of farm animals, has been retained, and it’s hard to see how this could be anything other than desirable. During the course of the South Bank love-in, I met Kindersley, who seemed a pleasant un-domineering hands-on member of Slow Food, albeit one to whom Carlo Petrini pays the attention appropriate to a very major benefactor, apparently to Slow International as well as UK. I asked about his alleged disenchantment and re-engagement with Slow Food UK.  Yes, he’d been frustrated with what he regarded as missed opportunities over the last couple of years, he said: he cited refusal to take up his offer of a free office in London for an intern. And is it true he has placed conditions on his future financial support? No, he said. Am I going to spend the next few months attempting to verify this? Unfortunately, this would be an investigative hobby too far, therefore negative.

So…

What implications are there for Slow Bristol members? Well, the first rather technical point is that people who joined before 1 April 2009 are still members of the old Slow Food UK Ltd: unless you expressly assent to change your membership to the new Trust you cannot be obliged to do so. The Trust seems not to have informed members of this. However, you are a member of an organization without any practical existence, and if you rejoin, or join, now via the new website it will be the new Slow Food UK Trust.

Does this matter? Arguably not. We don’t have to be particularly concerned with Slow Food UK’s actions. It’s unlikely that the national organization will do anything positively malevolent, global food chain-wise. A degree of cringe-worthiness may henceforth be apparent in public pronouncements, witness the recent Slow UK letter to producers containing the celebrated references to swelled grapes and the plight of a certain type of bee. But we in Bristol can continue with the events programme, which has been rather successful this year, plus whatever else we see fit.

On the other hand, members are entitled to ask what they’re getting, on a national level, for their fee. This used to include two magazines, an international one and a UK one. Both are now defunct, and the new Slow UK newsletter is so far of scant significance. The fees also contribute, of course, to the main function of Slow Food UK, which is presumably to campaign and raise awareness, and it’s too early to predict what the new management will come up with in this respect. There is a very vague outline policy document viewable via the website (www.slowfood.org.uk). For anyone keen to influence and participate in national policy making and campaigning, now is an excellent time to get involved, and this can be done  either through Bristol – just propose what you’d like to set up – or by contacting Slow UK directly.  It should be mentioned that Gerry Danby and Catherine Gazzoli have both been happy to respond to questions and criticisms, so if you feel any of the points in this document require clarification do contact them (info@slowfood.org.uk) There are, incidentally, on the new Slow UK website and elsewhere, various documents and leads, including financial projections, which will enable the study of this subject in greater depth. Since I thought it unlikely many of our members would make it through the present document, I’ve spared myself the trouble of listing them. But if anybody does want to investigate further, get in touch, bearing in mind that there will in theory be a national AGM at some point, at which all members may ask questions, vote Board members in or out, etc.

There is one final point to make. Slow Bristol members will deduce, in the unlikely event that they didn’t know it already, that I am not the best choice of co-Chair if active cooperation with Slow UK on  campaigning is required. I mostly support the food reform aims of Slow Food, insofar as concrete ones can be discerned, and for the time being, am content to contribute my membership fee towards those aims. However, I am more actively committed to the dining club tendency which Slow UK is so desperate to play down (to the extent, apparently, of trying to ditch the rather fun Latin terminology for fear it might be called elitist). I am quite happy to continue arranging events for Slow Bristol and keeping the admin in not quite terminal disarray. But there may be dynamic young cochairpeople of tomorrow out there gagging to take Slow Bristol to the next level, or even upwards. If so, let them please get in touch, and we’ll talk successions and AGMs (one due in February), and maybe eventually a cut of the pizzo.

Many thanks for reading this, if you have. Now back to more serious business, the Christmas party.

Phil Sweeney, Nov 2009