CMA Drops Investigation Into Unilever’s ‘Green’ Claims
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said yesterday that it had closed an investigation into whether Unilever had overstated the “green” credentials of some of its products after the consumer goods company made changes to its packaging.
The competition regulator stated that its probe, which was launched in December last year, had been closed following “changes Unilever has made to claims on some of its products”, as well as wider changes seen across the industry following the regulator’s focus on this area.
The CMA said last year that it was looking at some of the environmental claims made by the manufacturer, suggesting it could be overstating how “natural” some of its cleaning products and toiletries were. The competition watchdog was also concerned that the use of some images and logos – such as green leaves – could make items appear more eco-friendly than they actually were.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, it said: “The CMA’s Green Claims Code and successful enforcement action to date has helped businesses understand how they can promote their green credentials whilst staying on the right side of the law. The CMA has seen positive changes to the claims made, including in the fast-moving consumer goods sector.
“Given these points and the ongoing impact of the CMA’s work, the CMA has decided as a matter of administrative priority to close this investigation. The CMA has not taken a view on Unilever’s compliance with consumer law. Businesses should ensure they comply with the law and read the Green Claims Code.”
The regulator stated that it had not taken a view on Unilever’s compliance with consumer law.
In response to the decision, a spokesperson from the manufacturer said: “We are pleased that the CMA has confirmed they are closing their investigation. We have complied with all requests for information throughout this process.
“We have always been committed to making responsible claims about the benefits of our products on our packs and to these being transparent and clear, and we have robust processes in place to make sure any claims can be substantiated.”
NamNews Implications:
* The CMA achieved compliance with its code…
* …a mark of good and effective regulation.
* (and patently leaving the nuances of compliance with Consumer Law to the judiciary)
* In the end, as always, much depends on consumer perception of compliance with the Spirit of the Law vs. Letter of the Law…
#SustainabilityUnilever #Regulation
🌟In training TRAC – Certified Travel & Tourism Consultant + niche training as Wellness Travel Specialist 🌍Trilingual SE EN DE 💫Founder: Sveriges Holistiska Hudvårdsvecka
4w"Problematic claims include the use of vague and broad eco-statements, for example packaging or marketing a product as ‘sustainable’ or ‘better’ for the environment with no evidence; misleading claims about the use of recycled or natural materials in a product and how recyclable it is; and entire ranges being incorrectly branded as ‘sustainable’." Anything a company says, they must be able to back up - or change their marketing. Like in this case. Thanks for highlighting this Mark 💡