You have probably heard that the Union Nestle boycott policy is lapsing at the end of this term, and I would like to know whether you think it should be renewed.
You all know the arguments against Nestle, so I won't bore you to death. I am still strongly convinced by them (not helped by the fact that the information sent by Nestle PR to defend their case was 6 years old), so personally I would continue to boycott Nestle products with/without the policy. I make that choice everyday whether they are on sell at the shop or not, and I won't stop you from eating bottom grade chocolate (that's a reference to Kit-Kat by the way) if that is what you want. This isn't defeatist or a cop-out - I would love the Union to be as ethical as possible, but that also means respecting the masses.
So let me know what you think. If enough people support the boycott, I am happy to propose a motion to Union Council... but you will have to second it by Monday.
uczxeso, 9:36PM on 11 May 2007
I also boycott Nestle and want the boycott to continue, but UCL supplies Nestle products so didn't enforce the boycott?
Mandeep Grewal, 8:29PM on 31 October 2007
For someone who is new to UCL. What is the matter with Nestle? Feel free to email me: djinncito@gmail.com
Greets!
Pablo Giner Casares, 3:15PM on 2 November 2007
UCL Union currently has a Nestle boycott in place. UCL may supply Nestle products, but UCL Union doesn't.
medcom, 2:44PM on 9 November 2007
According to the Policy File at http://www.uclunion.org/student-union/downloads/policy-file.pdf the boycott policy isn't due to lapse until September 2009. Can someone clarify matters?
More on the reasons for the boycott is on the motion listed in that file under the September 2009 header.
Jeremy
Jeremy Harris, 7:32PM on 13 November 2007
It was the former ethics and environment officer (Joyce Ngai) who wrote this first comment in this topic (back in May). She then renewed the nestle boycott. As jeremy points out, it's not due to lapse until September 2009. To my knowledge Nestle still aggressively markets its bottled milk for babies in many parts of the developing world including much of Africa (the boycott came into place because Nestle used misleading information to claim that their milk is better for babies than breast-feeding. I think the boycott should continue until Nestle can prove that they've amended their conduct - and anyway, the policy has another two years to run until it lapses
Craig Griffiths, 2:36PM on 16 November 2007
"I think the boycott should continue until Nestle can prove that they've amended their conduct" You think Nestle are going to care that UCL Union aren't selling their Kit Kats?
Thomas Mason, 7:12AM on 19 November 2007
Using that logic, no motions would be passed, really. It's a fact that UCL Union can't do anything about the troubles in the Middle East, or the behaviour of Nestle, or anything like that. I think that people want UCL Union's intentions made clear, rather than any concrete effect.
It is a shame though, because KitKats are really really good.
medcom, 11:27AM on 20 November 2007
Whilst an isolated boycott at UCL might not change things we are part of the largest consumer boycott in the UK. Nestle are being harmed by it, particularly by campus boycotts which make it hard for them to attract bright graduates. It is not affecting the choices of the masses who can walk to Tottenham Ct Rd for their Kit Kat if they are really that desparate. Rather it is sending a small message to Nestle and helping to raise awareness about an enormous public health issue on campus. The global decline in breast feeding has resulted in an additional 1.5 million infant deaths per annum from diarrhoeal diseases. Nestle, who are the biggest player in the infant formula market and persistently break the World Health Association code on marketing infant formulas, must take a large portion of the blame.
Thomas Yates, 11:29PM on 9 March 2008
If you log in, you can contribute to discussions
and start your own.
Greets!
More on the reasons for the boycott is on the motion listed in that file under the September 2009 header.
Jeremy
You think Nestle are going to care that UCL Union aren't selling their Kit Kats?
It is a shame though, because KitKats are really really good.
It is not affecting the choices of the masses who can walk to Tottenham Ct Rd for their Kit Kat if they are really that desparate. Rather it is sending a small message to Nestle and helping to raise awareness about an enormous public health issue on campus.
The global decline in breast feeding has resulted in an additional 1.5 million infant deaths per annum from diarrhoeal diseases. Nestle, who are the biggest player in the infant formula market and persistently break the World Health Association code on marketing infant formulas, must take a large portion of the blame.