Belching Out the Devil (44 page)

Guardian
, Saturday 10 May 2008 Interesting to see Lauren Branston defending Coca-Cola against ‘alleged misdeeds in the past' (Letters, May 8). Especially as I visited India last month to research the current accusations levelled at the company. Lauren and Coca-Cola have not been able to reply to these serious questions about their business practices. So here are a few of them, in the hope that I can get a reply now. 1) Didn't Coca-Cola formally sponsor the TERI foundation, which carried out the ‘independent report' Lauren refers to? 2) Despite this potential conflict, the report noted the company's refusal to give crucial documents and data needed for a proper assessment of the company; are you going to make this data available? 3) The report says the company's efforts to deal with the water crisis in Kaladera rely on rainwater harvesting - the company's much-vaunted solution to its water consumption problems. However, the report also notes that rainwater harvesting relies on rainfall, so can you tell me where this rainfall comes from in a drought-prone area, ie, a place with not much rainfall? Even the report concludes the company's efforts are ‘unlikely to be meaningful'. 4) The report lists possible options to address the water crisis in Kaladera - one of those is to shut the Coke plant down. Any chance you will follow the report's advice? 5) Should I send other questions for Lauren to answer via the
Guardian
letters page?

Mark Thomas
London

Dear Mark, Thanks for your email with another set of questions, which I would like to reassure you that we are working on. I am happy to come back to you once, to all your questions and will endeavour to meet your deadline of the 8th of July, however, I hope you understand that this involves a lot of work, pulling together answers from questions directed to our operations in many different countries around the world on important, and complex issues.

Moreover, I have to tell you that when you say ‘these are all the questions I have at the moment', I have to say to you - we will not continue to answer your questions ad nauseam. I would suggest that if you have any further questions you submit them now (and we will let you know how quickly we can come back to you with answers, which will most likely be later than the 8th of July, at this stage).

Best wishes,
Lauren

Dear Lauren

Thanks for your mail. I understand you're very busy and that you will need to contact your colleagues abroad for some of the answers. I appreciate your efforts to find these answers. If I do have any other questions I will send them to you in the hope that you will be able to do your best with them.

Moreover, I should remind you that the Company has responded to precisely none of the questions for the book, some of which were submitted well over a month ago. Thus the use of the term ad nauseam, meaning a sickening or excessive degree, might be more appropriate for example in a phrase like, ‘The Company prevaricated ad nauseam'.

Kindest Regards
Mark