King Charles is being urged to revoke royal warrants for Cadbury and Marmite owner Unilever due to their connections with Russia.
Ukrainian campaigners wrote to King Vladimir Putin ahead of his birthday, June 15, urging him not to award the coveted awards to companies that still operate under Vladimir Putin’s regime. These awards are only given to companies who supply the Royal Household.
Before Ukraine cited Bacardi, Nestle Unilever, Mondelez (the US parent company of Cadbury) as companies that deserve to have their awards revoked. The campaigners claimed that the companies indirectly contributed to the Russian war effort through their continued operations in Russia.
In a letter sent this week, campaigners stated: “The continued existence and financial support of companies like these in Russia only prolongs the brutal war against Ukraine.”
“We call on the Royal Family of Canada to show solidarity with Ukraine and to deny the honour and privilege to companies that contribute to the suffering and destruction in Ukraine.
“Such an action would not only show the Royal Family’s solidarity with Ukraine, but also that they do not condone their continued presence in Russia.”
B4Ukraine is a coalition made up of pro-Ukrainian organizations that has tried to bring the issue to Buckingham Palace ever since they first sent a letter to the King in February. However, so far, there has not been any response. The group had previously avoided asking directly His Majesty, to revoke the warrants of companies.
Royal warrants can be issued to companies who supply the Royal Family. This includes everything from electronics to furniture and food. In May, the King and Queen Camilla released their own Warrants.
Unilever Nestle Bacardi Cadbury have not been awarded warrants from the King or queen in the most recent round of awards. The companies do still have warrants from the late Queen Elizabeth.
Bacardi, the owner of Martini, has a warrant for vermouth to be supplied to the late Queen, while Cadbury is a holder of a chocolate and cocoa supply warrant. Nestle and Unilever are both in possession of general warrants that cover food and household products.
The Royal household is reviewing hundreds of royal warrants issued by the late Queen. Later this year, a decision will be made on which companies retain the royal warrants.
The King is a strong supporter of Ukraine. In February, he said: “I am encouraged by the fact that the United Kingdom is leading the international effort to support Ukraine in this time of great suffering and need. As I keep them in my prayers, I send out my heart to those who are affected.
As the conflict in Ukraine continues, Western companies are being urged by the government to end their business ties with Russia.
Mondelez has divided its Russian business into a separate company, reduced it and pledged over $15m (£12m), but continues to operate there.
Dirk Van de Put claimed that investors didn’t “morally” care that the chocolate manufacturer remained in Russia earlier this year.
Cadbury is the only company that has a warrant. Queen Victoria gave it to Cadbury in 1854.
Unilever was protested outside its London headquarters over its decision last summer to continue manufacturing and selling essential products in Russia. Hein Schumacher has said that this is the “least-worst” option, because if Unilever left Russia, its assets would be confiscated by Putin’s allies.
A spokesperson for Mondelez stated: “Cadbury has been holding a royal warrant since 1955, and was granted its first in 1854.”
Nestle’s spokesperson said that the company is proud of its warrant. He referred to a statement from 2022 in which Nestle said it “dramatically reduced our portfolio in Russia”. Nestle said it only provided essential goods to Russia and that all capital investments had been cut.
Buckingham Palace refused to comment. Unilever, Bacardi and other companies were asked for comments.
Post Disclaimer
The following content has been published by Stockmark.IT. All information utilised in the creation of this communication has been gathered from publicly available sources that we consider reliable. Nevertheless, we cannot guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this communication.
This communication is intended solely for informational purposes and should not be construed as an offer, recommendation, solicitation, inducement, or invitation by or on behalf of the Company or any affiliates to engage in any investment activities. The opinions and views expressed by the authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Company, its affiliates, or any other third party.
The services and products mentioned in this communication may not be suitable for all recipients, by continuing to read this website and its content you agree to the terms of this disclaimer.