So it was with delight that I read two outstanding lawmakers, National’s Greg Fleming and Labour’s Camilla Belich, have picked up the mantle of William Wilberforce in taking action to prevent not just slavery, but servitude, sexual exploitation, indentured labour and other similar evil.
Their bill, the Modern Slavery Bill, was destined for the biscuit tin of obscurity but thanks to recent parliamentary reforms, if 61 MPs sign up to a bill it goes straight onto the order paper. And this has happened. Hooray!
What’s in this pending legislative breakthrough?
New Zealand firms with over a hundred million in revenue must report on the slaves they own, the number of people they have in indentured servitude and women they have trafficked for the purposes of sexual exploitation. This includes any of their subsidiaries and any enterprise within their supply chain.
This report must provide a detailed “…description of the structure, operations, and supply chain…both domestic and international, including any entities owned or controlled by the reporting entity.”
Now. I know what you may be thinking; isn’t this onerous to compel firms to outline such commercially sensitive information? And, yes, it will damage the competitiveness of New Zealand firms, force them to disclose their operations and provide a strong incentive for our large multinational firms to shift offshore.
But think of the children!
Companies that fail face consequences. Fines up $600,000, being prevented from competing for government contracts and subject to a relentless series of articles in the Spinoff.
These mega firms must complete a detailed auditing of anti-slavery training they are undertaking; in case anyone at, say, Fisher and Paykel or Air New Zealand were under the mistaken impression that forcing people to do things against their will and own interests was morally acceptable.
How marvellous!
The public will learn how many complaints each firm has had in relation to slavery and any known risks that they may acquire slaves, traffic women or force people into servitude. This extends to all of their supply chain. And to be clear; the term ‘supply chain’ is not defined. Pretty straight forward.
This is brilliant stuff. If a conglomerate is going to purchase coffee they will need to be sure that the beans are not sourced from a country where there is a tangential possibility that one of the growers in some remote valley may have trapped some urchins to work in the fields. Not only will this bring an immeasurable and possibly undetectable reduction level of human suffering it will provide an extensive opportunity for consulting firms.
Sadly, second tier insolvency firms will still be able to purchase coffee from disreputable suppliers, as will the vast majority of New Zealand firms. Which is a worry.
Still. Let’s keep positive. These reports must be posted on the companies’ website and, even better, the Human Rights Commission’s powers will be expanded and budget increased so they can collect, collate, and retain all of these reports.
The Human Rights Commission is one of our most self-important government organisations so this will be welcome news for the agency as they have been struggling for relevance in recent years.
New Zealand has often led the world in these sorts of area. Female suffrage. Splitting the atom. Bungee jumping. We are pioneers; often achieving a level of achievement in excess of what could be expected given our population size, geographic dislocation and declining economic standing.
So. You can imagine my excitement in seeing Aotearoa stepping boldly onto the off-Davos stage of international affairs to exert cultural leverage unrelated to sailing or Lord of the Rings.
And yet. I am left wondering. I have worked in the grey long enough to know that large firms are run by a professional-managerial class who prioritise their own self-interest over the welfare of shareholders and customers. The modern middle manager is so timid they are reluctant to purchase hotel movies lest their credit charges get audited.
The prospects they would pump quarterly returns with supply from a sweat shop declines the further up the corporate ladder they scramble. No. The real villains are not the antipodean chaebols but small importers, back-yard traders doing deals on WhatsApp and grifting in the shadows. As well as local firms who do not take care that the pencils they are purchasing have not been made with graphite hewn from the earth by workers with undefined labour rights.
If the Bill is going to reduce modern slavery why are we limiting this initiative to firms with over a hundred million in revenue? If you cared about modern slavery you would demand all firms commit to this new regime. Anything else is posturing.....The full article is published HERE
Damien Grant is an Auckland business owner, a member of the Taxpayers’ Union and a regular opinion contributor for Stuff, writing from a libertarian perspective
What’s in this pending legislative breakthrough?
New Zealand firms with over a hundred million in revenue must report on the slaves they own, the number of people they have in indentured servitude and women they have trafficked for the purposes of sexual exploitation. This includes any of their subsidiaries and any enterprise within their supply chain.
This report must provide a detailed “…description of the structure, operations, and supply chain…both domestic and international, including any entities owned or controlled by the reporting entity.”
Now. I know what you may be thinking; isn’t this onerous to compel firms to outline such commercially sensitive information? And, yes, it will damage the competitiveness of New Zealand firms, force them to disclose their operations and provide a strong incentive for our large multinational firms to shift offshore.
But think of the children!
Companies that fail face consequences. Fines up $600,000, being prevented from competing for government contracts and subject to a relentless series of articles in the Spinoff.
These mega firms must complete a detailed auditing of anti-slavery training they are undertaking; in case anyone at, say, Fisher and Paykel or Air New Zealand were under the mistaken impression that forcing people to do things against their will and own interests was morally acceptable.
How marvellous!
The public will learn how many complaints each firm has had in relation to slavery and any known risks that they may acquire slaves, traffic women or force people into servitude. This extends to all of their supply chain. And to be clear; the term ‘supply chain’ is not defined. Pretty straight forward.
This is brilliant stuff. If a conglomerate is going to purchase coffee they will need to be sure that the beans are not sourced from a country where there is a tangential possibility that one of the growers in some remote valley may have trapped some urchins to work in the fields. Not only will this bring an immeasurable and possibly undetectable reduction level of human suffering it will provide an extensive opportunity for consulting firms.
Sadly, second tier insolvency firms will still be able to purchase coffee from disreputable suppliers, as will the vast majority of New Zealand firms. Which is a worry.
Still. Let’s keep positive. These reports must be posted on the companies’ website and, even better, the Human Rights Commission’s powers will be expanded and budget increased so they can collect, collate, and retain all of these reports.
The Human Rights Commission is one of our most self-important government organisations so this will be welcome news for the agency as they have been struggling for relevance in recent years.
New Zealand has often led the world in these sorts of area. Female suffrage. Splitting the atom. Bungee jumping. We are pioneers; often achieving a level of achievement in excess of what could be expected given our population size, geographic dislocation and declining economic standing.
So. You can imagine my excitement in seeing Aotearoa stepping boldly onto the off-Davos stage of international affairs to exert cultural leverage unrelated to sailing or Lord of the Rings.
And yet. I am left wondering. I have worked in the grey long enough to know that large firms are run by a professional-managerial class who prioritise their own self-interest over the welfare of shareholders and customers. The modern middle manager is so timid they are reluctant to purchase hotel movies lest their credit charges get audited.
The prospects they would pump quarterly returns with supply from a sweat shop declines the further up the corporate ladder they scramble. No. The real villains are not the antipodean chaebols but small importers, back-yard traders doing deals on WhatsApp and grifting in the shadows. As well as local firms who do not take care that the pencils they are purchasing have not been made with graphite hewn from the earth by workers with undefined labour rights.
If the Bill is going to reduce modern slavery why are we limiting this initiative to firms with over a hundred million in revenue? If you cared about modern slavery you would demand all firms commit to this new regime. Anything else is posturing.....The full article is published HERE
Damien Grant is an Auckland business owner, a member of the Taxpayers’ Union and a regular opinion contributor for Stuff, writing from a libertarian perspective
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.