Nestlé has been asked a number of questions about its new monitoring process, the Company's position on the WHO Code, and on Nestlé's willingness to discuss the Company's practices with external parties. Mr. Peter Brabeck, worldwide CEO of Nestlé, wanted to personally answer these questions, which are presented below.

Why did Nestlé initiate the new monitoring process with governments which you recently presented to WHO?

Nestlé listens very carefully to the recommendations of the World Health Organisation, and at the 1998 World Health Assembly, the WHO Secretariat asked companies to strengthen their monitoring practices. This was reconfirmed during a personal meeting I had recently with Director General Gro Harlem Brundtland.

Why was the emphasis on reviewing with governments Nestlé's compliance, rather than with WHO or other organisations?

The principal reason is that the WHO Code itself gives the responsibility for monitoring to governments. The authors of the Code knew that only governments are in the political position and have the authority to interpret, implement, and monitor the Code. It is also obvious that countries differ in social and legal framework, and consequently countries implement the Code in different ways. The Code itself states that. While our action is at the national government level, we will continue to report the results to WHO, as it alone has responsibility for Code implementation within the UN system.

What do you do if a government has a problem with your practices, and feels that you are breaking the WHO Code in that country?

We welcome governments telling us if we're doing something wrong, as it helps us to keep our practices in line with the Code as implemented in that country, and to correct our practices where necessary. As long as the government gives us enough information about where and when infractions occur, so that we can take corrective action, we are very happy to receive such information. Secondly, we would ask them to verify in writing when we have corrected our practices and verify that we are in line with the Code.

Doesn't the WHO Code go against the business interests of Nestlé, and limit what you can do in marketing infant formula?

We do believe that infant formula is a product for which special treatment can be justified, as we all agree that breastfeeding is, under normal circumstances, the ideal way to feed a baby, and should therefore be encouraged. So we strongly support the objectives of the WHO Code. From a business perspective, what's most important to us is that our competitors are held to the same high standards as Nestlé, which is why we favour strong enforcement by governments. The WHO Code only works if governments enforce it, as there is no international organisation, UN, NGO, or otherwise, which has the authority to implement and enforce the Code in each country. Dr. Brundtland recently restated the basic fact that the Code only has real lasting meaning if governments implement and enforce it.

But doesn't Nestlé try to stop countries from passing strong National Codes?

Quite the opposite. We want enforceable Codes which protect breastfeeding, but we actively oppose attempts to treat cereals, baby food, and milk for children in the same way as infant formula in national measures which implement the Code. Fortunately, most governments agree with us, but are sometimes put under pressure by organisations which want to put cereals and toddler foods in the same category. We don't think it is good for children or for mothers to treat these foods as if they were infant formula, because mothers need to know about nutritious complementary foods to adequately feed their children.

Is this the first attempt on Nestlé's part to monitor its employees' compliance with the WHO Code?

Nestlé has been taking strong steps on monitoring compliance since the Code was passed. The company started an independent Audit Commission within a year of the Code's passage in 1981, under the leadership of Senator Edmund Muskie, former Secretary of State of the United States, and it operated until 1992, when it concluded that its mission had been completed. Nestlé also has an extensive system of internal audits by our auditing department, totally independent of line management. We have completed over 130 such audits in the past 5 years, and I personally review any hint of wrongdoing that the auditors uncover.

Is this a one-time exercise, or will Nestlé do more of this monitoring with other governments?

This is an ongoing effort, and there will be future updates as we complete the process with additional countries.

How many more governments do you anticipate will give you verification of Code compliance? Will you be able to get all governments where you sell infant formula to verify your compliance?

We now have 54 countries verifying our compliance, with only 1 government writing to say that we don't follow the Code, and we hope to resolve that shortly. That represents over half our infant formula sales in developing countries, which is a good result for the first 8 months of the process. We will continue the process on an annual basis, with additional countries being included. It is difficult to say how many, as some governments hesitate about making any judgement, positive or negative, about a company's performance. We would like to see government-sponsored monitoring in all countries where we do business, but we realise that is a long-term proposition for some countries. Nestlé had an Infant Formula Audit Commission from 1982-91 under the leadership of Senator Edmund Muskie.

Why did Nestlé disband it, and is there any thought of doing something similar in the future?

The Muskie Commission stated that it had satisfied itself that Nestlé was living up to its commitment to follow the Code, and after 9 years in operation, saw no reason to continue. We could consider some type of similar audit study in the future, and have not ruled that out.

Are you prepared to publicly discuss the findings of this Report?

We are very open to discussing the findings of the Report with any organisations which will sit down with us and seriously examine them.

Nestlé and Communications:

You said in a recent interview for the press in the UK that you want Nestlé to be more open in its communication. How do you think that Nestlé is viewed in terms of communication, and how do you want to change that?

We realise that Nestlé needs to be more open in its communication in certain areas where it hasn't been one of our strong suits. We have a history of thinking that our acts will speak for themselves, and have shied away from talking, and preferred instead doing. Recognising that a more active information policy is necessary in today's open, global world, I am now placing a stronger emphasis on communication, and this Monthly Report on WHO Code implementation is only one part of that new openness.

How about communicating with organisations and facing your critics?

We have absolutely nothing to hide. We are willing to discuss our practices with any organisation which wishes to sit down and examine them in a thoughtful and objective way. We are very open to dialogue, and in fact, seek it.

Doesn't your new stance expose the Company to more risk?

It exposes the Company to a different kind of risk, since there is a risk in remaining silent as well. I believe that we are better off as a Company in having very open, direct, and transparent communication, and am consciously working to create that.