Modern slavery in supply chains expert advocates for stricter legislation and rewards for compliant firms at House of Lords
Dr Bruce Pinnington has stressed the need for stricter supply chain legislation and rewards for compliant firms, during a House of Lords Select Committee session looking at the effectiveness of the Modern Slavery Act.
Held on March 18, the public evidence session specifically focused on Section 54 of the Act on transparency in supply chains (TISC), which requires large firms to prepare a slavery and human trafficking statement for each financial year, with detail on the steps taken to find issues and eradicate them.
Bruce was joined by Sian Lea, Business and Human Rights Manager at Anti-Slavery International, and Baroness Young of Hornsey OBE, Chancellor of Nottingham University and author of a current Lords Private Member Bill on Modern Slavery.
Mandatory due diligence
In response to a question by Chair of the Committee, Baroness Frances O'Grady, on whether Section 54 is “fit for purpose”, Bruce highlighted factors limiting commitment to discovery-related actions, which are a necessary pre-cursor to disclosure.
Despite acknowledging the Act’s usefulness in increasing awareness, Bruce argued that while “it’s supposed to be levelling the playing field and engendering a race to the top”, the Act is “neither of those things, unfortunately.”
Bruce noted these policy objectives will not be achieved until due diligence becomes a statutory obligation for all large organisations, as now it’s seen as “a competitive disadvantage for them to go investing in what can be quite expensive supply chain mapping and investigations.”
Lack of incentives for compliant firms
However, he also pointed out that alongside increasing costs, the Act doesn’t currently incentivise good businesses practice and it’s perceived as jeopardising due to the potential to cause reputational damage.
Bruce explained the Act is not “putting anything on the benefit side of the equation for anyone who is transparent and honest, and says: look I have found modern slavery in my supply chain and I have done something about it.”
He urged policymakers to change the existing rhetoric, Government processes and the reporting process (eg through NGOs) “to reward those firms that are actually doing something, that are investing something,” because otherwise they will prioritise avoiding cost and risk.
Issues in TISC reporting
In his evidence, Bruce also referred to research undertaken with Professor Jo Meehan regarding issues on modern slavery in supply chains reporting, and emphasised how a substantial amount of businesses are publishing lists of policies without explaining their relevance and ways to enforce them.
According to their findings, it’s easier for firms to report on their structure, policies and training, “but even in those areas the structural descriptions and statements are generally very basic and few describe the governance structures.”
Bruce underlined the importance of obtaining detailed information, such as “what sort of oversight committees they have in place, what processes they have, etc”, as part of the descriptions required in TISC reports.
He noted TISC reports currently include “too little on enforcement policies and actions” and very few businesses “are actually sharing the policies.”
Moreover, Bruce warned that in many cases “there was no indication that they had even done mapping”, with only two out of 95 firms in one of their studies specifically referred to supply chain mapping.
He also drew attention to the fact that this should be highly concerning, as all of the organisations in the study were Government suppliers.
Existing knowledge gaps and education
Furthermore, Bruce referred to a different study where results indicate some of the practitioners “didn't fully understand what a supply chain was” and often focused on tier one supplies, which suggests “they weren't actually even thinking vertically at all.”
Bruce posited that while they claimed “they were doing more supply chain mapping”, in practice they were actually “doing supplier management, not supply chain management.”
According to Bruce, these findings suggest that in addition to stricter and more regular assessment of supply chain operations, “there's an educational piece there and that's something that also should be picked up in law as well.”
Further assessment and improvements
Following the session, former Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner (IASC), Dame Sara Thornton, thank Bruce and expert colleagues for their “clear and measured evidence to the committee” and stresses she “could not agree more on discovery/disclosure.”
Following its appointment in 24 January 2024, the House of Lords Select Committee on the Modern Slavery Act 2015, has until the end of November to report on the effectiveness of this piece of legislation.
This includes an assessment on how the Act’s provisions have been implemented, how it has been impacted by recent political developments and whether it requires any improvements.
As well as increasing awareness on the research on modern slavery undertaken at the Management School and the Centre for Sustainable Business, Bruce’s participation will enhance the prospects of involvement in further related developments in public procurement policy.