‘Until
Nestlé stops promoting infant formula to mothers who abandon
breastfeeding in favour of artificial milk products which they
do not need, cannot afford and are unable to safely use;
to mothers whose
babies fall sick and sometimes die because they have been bottle-fed;
until then we won’t buy Nestlé products.’
Of course
there are many companies involved in the promotion of babyfoods to
the Third World. but Nestlé controls almost half this
estimated
$1.72 billion market.
The Nestlé
Boycott is the largest nonunion boycott in history. Begun in the
US in 1977, it has spread to Australia, Canada,
Sweden and
West Germany. Der Spiegel, the West German political journal,
called it, ‘A
gigantic movement which has cost Nestlé millions of dollars.’ Interestingly,
Nestlé announced that its profits declined by 16 per cent
in 1980.
The passage
of the WHO Code in 1981 was a victory for the
local action groups that had been urging their governments
to vote
for the Code.
The publicity generated by the Boycott helped raise public
awareness of the babymilk marketing scandal.
The
letter below was made available by
INFACT (Infant Formula Action Coalition) USA.

A prominent
business weekly for managers of transnational corporations Business
International, called the Nestlé Boycott ‘devastating’ and
predicted:
‘In
the future, the boycott will stand as an example for other campaigns.’ And
since the Boycott started, Nestlé has cut back on direct advertising
to mothers on billboards and in publications. But violations
continue.
Church,
health and development groups in the US studied the controversy over
babymilk sales. They followed with particular interest
the ‘Nestlé
Kills Babies’ lawsuit in Bern, Switzerland during 1974. At the
eleventh hour the company dropped all but one charge. Although the
judge found that the words used were technically libellous, he said
that the verdict did not amount to an acquittal of Nestlé’s
advertising practices in developing countries.
The Interfaith
Center on Corporate Responsibility, a National Council of Churches
agency, suggested that their
groups should file shareholder resolutions with US-based
babymilk companies requesting information of their promotional
activities.
Despite
the Bern judge’s call for a ‘fundamental rethink’ of
Nestlé’s advertising practices, by 1977
the US groups recognised that nothing had changed. So
they formed INFACT (the Infant
Formula Action Coalition) calling for renewed protest against Nestlé.
Many INFACT groups used Peter
Kreig’ s Bottle Babies
documentary film. Audiences reacted by declaring ‘We’re
going to stop buying Nestlé products.’ The
Minnesota chapter of INFACT formally launched its Boycott
in July, 1977.
By November
the Nestlé Boycott had gone national.
Local
educational campaigns spread the boycott Students organised to get
Nestlé products off their campuses.
Major church and
health organisations
endorsed the Boycott.
Nationally
coordinated Boycott events linked local events like the ‘Clip
Nestlc Quik’ campaign in 1979. Local groups clipped out thousands
of Nestlé’s ‘cents-off’ discount coupons and loaded
them onto a ‘Boycott Express’, a
truck that travelled from San Francisco across
the continent
to the Nestlé US Headquarters
at
White Plains, New York, where the coupons were
dumped.
Stouffer’s hotel and restaurant chain is a Nestlé subsidiary.
In 1980, Boycotters organised a Stop Stouffers’ campaign to persuade
the public not to frequent the chain. Nestlé lost thousands of dollars
as major organisations cancelled their conferences at Stouffer’s
hotels.
Nestlégate
In late 1980, an internal memo
from the then Nestlé Vice-President Ernest Saunders to
Managing Director Arthur
Furer was leaked to INFACT. The memo revealed
Nestlé’s
latest anti-Boycott strategy. Openly challenging
the Boycotters would draw public attention
to the issue— precisely what Nestlé wanted
to avoid. So they intended, instead, to engage ‘credible spokesmen’ — that
is, third parties apparently unconnected with Nestlé — to
speak on their behalf and to attack the activists
from a position of impartial
authority.
The ‘best opportunity we’ve had’ so far, according
to the memo, was brought about by an article commissioned by the Ethics
and Public Policy Center. The EPPC was a tax-exempt, non-profit body
headed by a senior government official, Ernest Lefever. The article
was entitled ‘The Corporation Haters’ and attempted to
destroy the Boycotters’ credibility by tagging them ‘Marxists
marching under the banner of Christ’. The leaked memo showed
Nestlé to be delighted with the results of the article, which the EPPC
was to reprint and disseminate to a mailing list chosen by Nestlé: ‘We
should review the optimum mailing list . . (and)
decide how to finance the operation.’
Lefever’s
EPPC was given $25,000 by Nestlé in 1980, according to research published
by the
Washington
Post. Nestlé and Lefever
do not deny the donation. They insist
the money and the article were unconnected.
The ‘chocolate connection’ cost Lefever his nomination
as Reagan’s Assistant Secretary
of State for Human Rights.
(Copies
of the Nestlégate memo, providing insight into the mechanisms by
which
large companies
try to buy ‘positive image
development’,
are available from: INFACT 1701
University Ave. SE, Minneapolis MN
55414, US,
from
the Baby Milk
Action Coalition,
34 Blinco Grove, Cambridge,
UK.)
The Nestlégate
scandal received international publicity, as did the Reagan Administration’ s
opposition to the WHO Code. But the real strength of the Boycott
has always been its local
base. Local
newspapers and newsletters provide
the most reliable and extensive coverage.
Most
of the funds for the Boycott campaign come from individual donations.
And
committed local
organisers,
most of them
working from their homes
in the evenings, provide a volunteer
workforce that has taken on Nestlé’ s
expensive public relations professionals.
Action
The Boston Nestea Party was organised by Lois Happe (a student of theology,
mother of two and a minister’s wife); a demonstration on
Boston Common ended with a march to Boston Harbour where Nestlé
products
were symbolically dumped.
Recently
she organised a fundraising event with Linda Kelsey, a television
actress who once did a Nestlé commercial and now contributes
her royalties to INFACT.
In North
Caroline. another activist, Lew Church, concentrated on supermarkets.
Shoppers were persuaded not to buy Nestlé
products by pickets and leaflets.
One shop owner agreed to print an explanation of the Boycott
on all his shopping bags.
The former
top health official of the US Agency for International Development,
Dr Stephen Joseph, who resigned in protest when his government said ‘No’ to
the WHO Code, advised Boycotters: ‘The Nestlé Boycott should
continue and even intensify. For it has proved an effective tool
in cracking
the wall of industry’s non attention.’ U This
article was prepared by
Doug Clement, the co-ordinator of INFA CT’s International Programs
and IB FA N-Minneapolis Clearinghouse.
Boycott
these products
Nestlé owns over 476 subsidiaries producing
thousands of brand name products. When shopping, make sure
to avoid:
In
North America
Nestlé branded products: Nescafe. Taster’s
Choice, Cams Coffee, Manhattan Coffee Co. Nestlé’s
Crunch, Toll House Chips, Nestlé's Quik Hot Cocoa Mix, $100,000 Candy
Bar, Nestlé Cookie Mixes.
Crosse & Blackwell
products: wines, and canned foodstuffs.
Libby,
McNeil & Ubby products: canned fruits and vegetables
Stouffers: hotels and restaurants. frozen foods
Rusty
Scupper: restaurants.
Other
products: McVities cheese. Swiss Knight cheeses, Beech Nut
Baby Foods, Lancome.
In
Australasia and Europe
Nestlé branded products: Nescafe, Nestea, Gold Blend,
Fine Blend, Blend 37, Nesquik,
Nescore, Nestlé chocolate,
Milky Bar. Gala. Soir de France,
Ideal Milk. Milo, Blue Butterfly, Ashbourne mineral water.
Crosse & Blackwell
products: soups, Branston pickle and sauces, Waistline.
Chambourcy
products: yoghourts, cream cheese.
Findus
products: frozen foods and Sweetheart desserts.
Libby,
McNeil & Libby products: tinned fruit vegetables
and fruit juices.
Other
products: Maggi soups, Swiss Knight cheeses, Sarsons vinegars,
Chefs products, L’Oreal
cosmetics.
REMEMBER the
Canadian boycott activist who asked a Nestlé marketing
manager if the boycott was making any impact The reply: ‘Of
course. Every time a consumer comes into a store and
makes a conscious decision not to buy one of our products,
it hurts
us.’
|
How you can
help
• Join your country’s Boycott group — or start one!
• Stop buying Nestlé products
and tell your grocer why you stopped.
• Write
a letter to the editor of your local paper about the Boycott
• Invite
friends to a meeting in your home to discuss the Boycott
• Ask
your local church, school or social group to publicise the
Boycott issues. Write to INFACT for educational
resources.
• Ask organisations to which you belong — local,
regional or national — for an endorsement of the Boycott. Make
sure they publicise in their newsletters and stop buying
Nestlé products themselves.
• Write
to your government representatives using material from this
magazine. Ask them to take up the issue.
• Write to your national Nestlé offices.
Useful
Addresses
AUSTRALIA
INFAC Group, do CAA
75 Brunswick Street
Fitzroy 3065
Victoria
CANADA
Nancy Hawley
INFACT Canada
10 Trinity Square
Toronto
AFRICA
Margaret Kyenkya
Medical Research Centre
P 0 Box 20752
Nairobi Kenya
ASIA
Choong Tet Sieu
International Organisation of Consumer Unions
P0 Box 1045
Penang Malaysia |
CARIBBEAN
Hazel Brown
P.O. Box 410
Port of Spain
Trinidad
NEW
ZEALAND
New Zealand Coalition for Trade and Development
P 0 Box 11 345
Wellington
New Zealand
UNITED
KINGDOM
Baby Milk Action Coalition
34 Blinco Grove
Cambridge
UNITED
STATES
IBFAN/INFACT Clearing House
1 701 University Ave. SE
Minneapolis
MN 55414 |
|
‘My discovery has a tremendous future. There is no other food to compare
with it.' With these words an unknown Swiss laboratory assistant,
Henri Nestlé, described his cow’s-milk based infant formula
food. It was the 1860s and Nestlé was adapting one of the few natural
products
of the country, the milk generated in such profusion from the rich
Alpine pasture. For the next 70 years the Nestlé empire expanded
on milk-based products: condensed milk, evaporated milk, milk chocolate.
Diversification
began in the 1930s when the company recognised the marketing possibilities
in the coffee crop surpluses that were being
destroyed in Brazil. They developed a long-lasting instant powdered
coffee — Nescafe — and sales rocketed with huge contracts
to supply the US military in the Second World War. Since 1945 Nestlé
has bought into many other food industries.
After
Unilever, Nestlé is the largest food firm in the world, with a 1978
turnover of
$11 billion. Its headquarters remain,as they started, at Vevey on
the shores of Lake Geneva With over 300 directly owned factories
and about
700 offices in 70 countries, there is scarcely a more international
company amongst the world’s leading corporations. More than
90 per cent of its 147,000 workers are not Swiss, and more than 95
per
cent of its profits come from outside the country. Europe provided
46 per cent of the company’s sales in 1978, North America 20
per cent and some 31 per cent of sales were in the vulnerable underdeveloped countnes.
Henri
Nestlé’s company now spends more on just advertising
its products than the total budget of the World Health Organisation.
The
company’s annual turnover is greater than the gross national
product of every African country apart from Nigeria and South Africa
While working to diversify into other food products, the corporation
is still firmly attached to processing cow’s milk for much
of its profit. In Brazil, for example, Nestlé controls 100 per cent
of
the artificial babymilk market, 75 per cent of the powdered milk
market and 95 per cent of the condensed milk and cream market.
Nestlé’ s infant formula sold in the Third World accounts
for only two per cent of the company’s global turnover. So why does
it persist with energetic promotion of artificial babymilk? Perhaps
it’s the prospect of an enormous potential market Perhaps
it’s
just old-fashioned sentiment for Henri Nestlé’s famous
formula.