Four-point plan to end the boycott
Last update 2 November 2006
The following plan was put to Nestlé in March 2001 at Cambridge University when, thanks to boycott pressure, Nestlé agreed to debate its baby food marketing practices with Baby Milk Action. Prior to this date Nestlé refused to even speak in public if Baby Milk Action was present in the room.
The plan was immediately rejected by Nestlé executives and has been repeatedly rejected since when Baby Milk Action has written asking the company to reconsider or raised it again at debates.
4
Point Plan |
Nestlé's
response |
| 1. Nestlé
must state in writing that it accepts that the International
Code and the subsequent, relevant World Health Assembly
Resolutions are minimum requirements for every country. |
Nestlé
does not accept that the Code applies to all countries, only
those on a list of its own invention and even then, Nestlé
follows its own weaker Charter rather than the Code. Nestlé
refuses to recognise that the subsequent Resolutions have
equal status to the Code.
Progress: In 2003, during a week of demonstrations in the UK, Nestlé agreed to stop labelling complementary foods for use before 6 months of age, although this has not been implemented in all countries. This was prompted by a 9-year campaign following Resolution 47.5 setting out the appropriate age of introduction of complementary foods in 1994. |
| 2. Nestlé
must state in writing that it will make the required changes
to bring its baby food marketing policy and practice into
line with the International Code and Resolutions (i.e. end
its strategy of denial and deception). |
Nestlé
continues to dispute any wrong-doing even in the face of documentary
evidence of malpractice, fines, convictions and rulings against
it.
|
| 3. Baby Milk Action
will take the statements to the International Nestlé
Boycott Committee and suggest that representatives meet with
Nestlé to discuss its timetable for making the required
changes. |
Nestlé
has not provided the necessary statements. |
| 4. If IBFAN monitoring
finds no Nestlé violations for 18 months, the boycott
will be called off. |
Nestlé
continues to violate the Code and Resolutions in a systematic
manner. |
Further information
Nestlé claims it is doing nothing wrong, though it fails to convince at debates, losing every vote and fuelling support for the boycott. In its Public Relations materials it does not mention the outcome of debates, stating only:
"We have been attending debates up and down the country at student unions, debating societies and AGMs, answering students' concerns and questions about our policies on infant nutrition".
In an attempt to make further progress, Baby Milk Action has proposed that an independent, expert tribunal is held where evidence of Nestlé malpractice can be presented and Nestlé can respond in depth, with witnesses being called as appropriate.
Nestlé has rejected this proposal totally.
In attempting to overturn the boycott at the University of East Anglia in November 2005, Nestlé's Senior Policy Advisor did say in a radio interview that Nestlé would consider taking part. However, when asked in a follow-up letter by Baby Milk Action to set out its terms and conditions, Nestlé refused to do so. Instead the Senior Policy Advisor denied saying Nestlé would consider taking part. The interview can be heard in full by clicking here.
Those who would like the evidence and claims to be thoroughly investigated by an independent, expert tribunal can encourage Nestlé to attend by sending a message to Nestlé.
Organisations wishing to publicly endorse the call for Nestlé attend should contact Baby Milk Action. |
