Joint Committee on Human Rights: New inquiry: Forced Labour in UK Supply Chains

The Joint Committee on Human Rights has announced a new inquiry into forced labour in UK supply chains. The inquiry will examine the UK's legal and voluntary frameworks underpinning the UK's response to forced labour in international supply chains. It will also consider if change is needed to improve the effectiveness of the UK's response to this form of exploitation. 

It is estimated that 27.6 million people globally are subject to forced labour, including 3.3 million children. There is evidence that goods made using forced labour are available to buy in the UK, meaning business practices that violate human rights may be making profits from UK consumers. 

Labour exploitation exists in countries across the globe and can be hard to detect due to the complexity of trans-national supply chains. For example, recent news reports indicated that processed tomatoes sold as being produced in Italy were likely to have been produced under forced labour conditions in China. Forced labour has been reported in a wide-range of industries such as textile production, mining and agriculture. 

The UK's response to labour exploitation in international supply chains is largely governed by the Modern Slavery Act 2015, which sets out offences of slavery, forced labour and human trafficking, as well as enhancing protections for victims of these crimes. There are concerns that while this legislation was seen as world-leading when enacted, the UK has since fallen behind other nations in its response to modern slavery in supply chains. 

Announcing the inquiry, Chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, Lord Alton said: 

“The complexity and range of global supply chains mean that consumers in the UK may be buying goods made using forced labour. Over recent years we have seen reports of alleged forced labour involving food, clothing, electronic and solar panel goods. This is in the extraction and production of raw materials as well as in the production of finished goods themselves."

“It is vital that there is a strong framework of measures in place to prevent these goods from entering the UK marketplace, that is why we have launched this inquiry. We want to see if current legislation is effective and whether lessons could be learnt from the approaches taken by other countries. We also want to explore how businesses can manage the risk of forced labour in their supply chains and better protect consumers. Businesses have human rights obligations too and we must ensure that they are better supported and guided through their obligations."  

Terms of reference 

The inquiry will examine the UK's current legal and voluntary framework in relation to forced labour in international supply chains, and whether it is effective in managing forced labour exposure risks in the UK market, or if changes are required. Supply chains based in the UK are covered by a different legal framework (as noted above) and hence will not form part of this inquiry. 

The Joint Committee on Human Rights invites written submissions on the following questions. Further information about how to submit evidence is available on the committee's website. 

The deadline for submissions is Thursday 13 February. 

Legislative Framework

1. Are the obligations created by the Modern Slavery Act 2015 effective in preventing goods with international supply chains linked to forced labour being sold on the UK market? If not, what changes are needed to prevent goods linked to forced labour from being sold in the UK market? 

2. How effective is other UK domestic legislation in preventing goods with international supply chains linked to forced labour entering the UK market? Are there any gaps? If so, what legislative improvements could be made? 

3. Recent case law against the National Crime Agency suggests that British authorities and courts can have a role in addressing instances of forced labour in supply chains occurring outside the UK. What impact is this development likely to have on the way that companies consider the risk of forced labour and human rights in their supply chains, for example which suppliers they choose? 

4. What international legal obligations does the UK have in relation to forced labour in supply chains? Is the UK's current domestic approach compliant with those obligations? 

5. What, if any, obligations does international law place on corporations when it comes to forced labour in their supply chains? Are these obligations effective?  

6. Where should the responsibility lie for preventing products linked to forced labour from entering the British market? E.g. government, regulation, business, consumers, others? 

Enforcement 

7. In the UK, there are three public bodies which may potentially have a role in addressing goods linked to forced labour: the Anti-Slavery Commissioner, National Crime Agency, and Border Force. 
8. What role does each body play in detecting and preventing goods produced using forced labour being available on the UK market?
9. Do these bodies have sufficient powers? If not, what other powers should they have? 
10. How could these agencies work together most effectively?

Corporate activity  

8. Are any sectors serving the UK market at particular risk of forced labour in their international supply chains?

9. Should companies of all sizes be required to manage the risk of forced labour in their supply chains? How could such an obligation be delivered in a manner which is proportionate to a company's exposure to forced labour risks, number of employees, and annual turnover? 

10. What could be done to improve corporations' ability to identify forced labour risks in supply chains, and select suppliers that meet government's expectations? 

11. Where forced labour is a risk, what level of investigation/due diligence is it reasonable to expect from companies and public sector buyers before deciding whether to contract with suppliers? 

12. How can a level playing field be achieved, where companies who operate supply chains free from forced labour are not at financial disadvantage? 

13. How effective are the UN Guiding Principles at encouraging corporations' consideration of  the human rights impacts of business decisions? Please provide examples or evidence. 

Consumer behaviour  

14. If it becomes known that a company is using or at high risk of exposure to forced labour, what impact does this have on consumer attitudes or profits? Are consumers incentivised to avoid buying products that are likely to be linked to forced labour? 

15. To what extent do existing transparency measures translate to accurate awareness of risk in customers?

Procurement 

16. Does public procurement attract a higher risk of exposure to forced labour? If so, why is this the case? 

17. How can the risk of exposure to forced labour be effectively managed in procurement? 

International approaches 

18. Are there particular elements of the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act of 2021 in the USA that would be appropriate for consideration within a British Act? Please explain why you think such measures would be beneficial. 
19. Are there any weaknesses or flaws in the US approach?

19. EU Member States have agreed two instruments to prevent the sale of goods linked to forced labour in the EU. Firstly the ‘Prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market' and secondly the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). Are there elements of either the regulation or the directive that would be appropriate for consideration in the UK? Please explain why you think such measures would be beneficial. 
20. Are there any weaknesses or flaws in the EU approach? 

20. Are there any other nations with effective legislative frameworks to address goods linked to forced labour which may be useful for the Committee to consider?