Fashion retailers face MPs on human rights issues

Senior representatives from a number of high profile fashion brands and retailers faced MPs yesterday to explain how they can ensure human rights abuses, including child labour, do not occur in their supply chain.

In attendance at parliament’s joint committee on human rights were ASOS CEO Nick Beighton, Marks & Spencer director of sustainable business Mike Barry, Mulberry director of group production and sourcing at Mulberry Rob Billington, and Next global code of practice manager Chris Grayer, who revealed that the retailer had discovered eight instances of child labour in its supply chain last year.

According to The Times, Grayer told MPs that retailers had to be constantly vigilant to prevent human rights abuses. He said the instances of child labour Next discovered were isolated and in some cases the children had only been working in the school holidays. However the retailer does not tolerate child labour an in any form and carries out unannounced spot checks at factories to ensure abuses are not taking place.

ASOS's Beighton said that ensuring there were no abuses of human rights in its supply were not just an option but a "business imperative".

The committee, which is chaired by Harriet Harman, also wanted to discover what action retailers took if they found abuses in their supply chain and whether overseas workers in clothing factories have a right to trade union representation.

"No one wants to be wearing clothes made by child labour, or slave labour. UK companies need to have high standards abroad as well as here at home," Harman said.

The hearing took place just days after a Dispatches documentary was aired on Channel 4 revealing that UK-based textile firms making products for fashion retailers, such as River Island, New Look, Boohoo and Missguided, are paying their UK workers between £3 and £3.50 an hour, less than half of the legal minimum wage of £7.20 an hour.

In most cases the work, such as labelling and packing garments, had been outsourced by the brands' approved suppliers. All of the brands concerned had taken steps to prevent future abuses on hearing of the practice and had been unaware of it.