The activities of British businesses, financial institutions and public bodies are increasingly tied to human rights abuses and environmental damage, often escaping accountability. In the Global South, corporations exploit weak laws and enforcement, leaving vulnerable communities and fragile ecosystems to suffer lasting harm.
A Labour government now has the chance to change this by introducing a Business, Human Rights, and Environment Act. This landmark legislation would require businesses and public institutions to identify, prevent, and mitigate/prevent the human and environmental impacts of their activities, both at home and abroad.
The Labour Campaign for Human Rights sat down with Gemma Freedman, International Officer at UNISON, to discuss why this act is essential. With over 20 years in the international trade union movement, Gemma leads UNISON’s work on business and human rights, public services in the Global South, and the Asia Pacific. Having recently stepped down as Vice-Chair of Electronics Watch, she champions workers’ rights in global supply chains through independent monitoring, offering invaluable insight into why Labour must act now.
Why does UNISON support the Labour Party adopting a Business, Human Rights and Environment Act (BHREA), specifically in the context of public procurement?
From supporting the Anti-Apartheid Movement to defending the rights of Palestinian, Turkish and Colombian workers, as well as supporting public services in the Global South, UNISON has always been proudly internationalist. People everywhere deserve quality public services and decent work for a decent life.
UNISON’s members don’t want to wear uniforms and PPE, serve and eat food[1], and use computers and medical equipment powered by solar energy that has been made with forced labour[2] and/or union-busted workers[3]. With a spend of nearly £407bn[4] in 2023/4[5], UK public procurement has the collective leverage to set and enforce high standards, rather than follow the private sector.
The link between human and workers’ rights being upheld and the strength of democracy cannot be overstated. The erosion of one amount to the degradation of the other. UNISON also believes the environment and workers’ rights are indivisibly linked. Therefore, since 2018 UNISON has participated in the Corporate Justice Coalition’s campaign for a BHREA and has led the public sector strand of work.
But it’s not just about public procurement. For example, the first ever UK court case holding a public authority (the National Crime Agency) to account for failing to investigate forced labour and Uyghur forced labour cotton imports, was won in June 2024[6]. Therefore, we believe the whole of the public sector must be included in scope.
How would the proposed act work in practice to ensure better compliance in public procurement with human rights and environmental standards?
The Labour Party’s ‘Make Work Pay[7]’ agreement with UNISON and other affiliated unions commit to a new National Procurement Plan which will among other things will “drive up employment standards across the economy and strengthen supply chains, so these standards are upheld throughout the whole chain of the contract.”
To level the playing field and ratchet up suppliers’ preventative action and remedy, we believe the public sector should use its collective leverage to extend this throughout the value chain. This would reward the best suppliers rather than those that gain competitive advantage by cutting corners rights and the environment; or those that treat human rights and environmental due diligence as a mere tick-boxing exercise. This should be done by:
- Not contracting with a supplier unless that supplier is conducting reasonable and effective human rights and environmental due diligence (HREDD) in line with international standards, including the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights[8] (UNGPs), the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises[9], and the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work[10].
- Developing selection criteria that requires companies to perform reasonable and effective HREDD to be eligible for bidding. Whilst the burden of proof should rest with the companies, the duty to verify should rest with the public procurers.
- Ensuring reasonable and effective HREDD practices are part of the award criteria and that contracts include performance conditions relating to the implementation of HREDD and remediation in case harm occurs.
- Enabling public authorities to investigate human rights and environmental due diligence at any stage of the procurement process and terminating contracts based on a failure to conduct reasonable HREDD.
- Share liability for any harms with its supplier based on the principles of reasonableness, proportionality, and level of influence.
The language of public procurement law and international human rights law is not well aligned. To ensure practicability, UNISON sought legal opinions for our ambitions and has found them to be legally feasible.
What would be the key challenges in rolling out a Business, Human Rights and Environment Act for public procurement, and how can these challenges be effectively managed
A BHREA would give the public sector the authority to consider human rights, labour rights and environmental protection when making procurement decisions. Key challenges lie in building expertise and capacity on HREDD to ensure effective implementation by procurers. This is particularly challenging as the resourcing and professional development of the procurement profession was badly neglected by the last government.
However, by working collaboratively the government could collectively repurpose money to build expertise and capacity in public procurement to genuinely uphold standards. For example, our members in public procurement tell us a central registry listing suppliers that have been excluded or terminated is essential. In its response to the Modern Slavery Act review, the Government said it will set up a Procurement review unit with a central debarment list which will also publish investigation reports. However this doesn’t capture other egregious abuses and so should be expanded (in the least) to all labour rights and the environment.
Another idea is the development of an in-house national government procurement training centre for HREDD excellence. Not only would these drive up standards but they would also reduce duplication and expensive fees paid to external providers. Further, to meet such an ambitious programme, fines paid under the law should be used to fix problems in the system and support victims to receive genuine worker-driven remedy[11].
Increased economies of scale and leverage to minimise harm due to poor purchasing practices can be gained through the mass expansion of purchasing consortiums. Advantage should also be taken of digital developments to ensure the highest standards of data sharing, collaboration and collective leverage.
Complementary to Labour’s commitment to ensure supply chain resiliency[12], the causes of forced labour and other mass exploitation that keep civil society weak, should be tackled head-on. This includes the creation of a well-resourced 10-year road map to achieving Freedom of Association within the supply chains of public sector suppliers to stop the suppression of trade union growth and protect all workers’ rights.
Has there been any successful implementation cases from other countries that the UK can draw on?
The best examples come from our partner Electronics Watch’s[13] (EW) affiliates in Denmark, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the UK. EW’s mission is to use public procurement leverage to promote and protect the rights of workers in global supply chains. It works with its affiliated public buyer and civil society monitoring partners, to coordinate industry-independent supply chain monitoring and facilitate the remediation of human rights abuses in public procurement electronics hardware and Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) supply chains. Peer-to-peer collaboration and learning occur among the 1,500 affiliates across Europe and Australia. This inexpensive model is more effective than expensive social auditing[14].
Impactful results include a three-year investigation into two suppliers to the largest electronics manufacturer in Thailand, Cal-Comp[15], which led to the largest ever IT supply-chain settlement for migrant workers and led to more companies beginning to pay people back for excessive or unlawful recruitment fees – and faster. Further, when EW investigated and upheld workers’ and trade union complaints in a Hungarian Foxconn factory during the Covid-19 pandemic, its affiliates engaged and negotiated with their suppliers and the trade union and corrective action was undertaken[16].
Whilst it doesn’t always mean the problems were perfectly resolved, these cases illustrate that it is possible for the public sector to successfully intervene to prevent and remediate violations, but they could also do much more if enabled to.
How might a business human rights and environment act help the Labour Party with its standing domestically, and on the international stage?
The UK is currently far behind our international allies. Tesco’s, the British Retail Consortium and others have already claimed that the UK is at risk of becoming a “dumping ground” for goods that are banned from the EU and the US under their forced labour import bans, including their recent Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA). And Parliament’s Business and Trade Select Committee recently concluded the same[17].
With 4 in 5 people in the UK want laws obliging companies to prevent human rights abuses (81%) and serious environmental damage (83%) in their operations and supply chains this is already popular with the public.[18] And civil society and trade unions are also united in this call.[19]
Further, the current piecemeal approach with the Modern Slavery Act and the Environment Act increases the compliance burden rather than having one approach for everything. Instead, by levelling the playing field and providing legal certainty, the BHREA would enable the UK to play a leading role on the international stage. Additionally, as the BHREA provides for more effective enforcement than the EU’s CSDDD Directive it would increase the attractiveness of UK business in countries aligned with our values. The BHREA work is aligned with Labour’s intent to “promote progressive values” internationally “and to uphold human rights and international law”[20].
Finally, exploitation of workers, growing inequality, environmental degradation and climate change is already leading to global instability and authoritarianism. Ignoring the interconnectedness of these challenges with current business practices is much costlier over time than requiring businesses to prevent their negative impacts to begin with. On the other hand, studies[21] have shown that integrating sustainability considerations into business operations and value chains improves the resilience of supply chains. As the BHREA would therefore be a win for people, the planet and business, can the Labour Party afford NOT to adopt a world-leading BHREA?
References
[1] Government expanded visa… | The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (thebureauinvestigates.com)
[2] Clean-dirty-energy-1.pdf (unison.org.uk)
[3] https://www.industriall-union.org/malaysias-booming-electronics-industry-leaves-little-room-for-workers-rights
[4] https://corporatejusticecoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CJC_CaseStudy_Malaysia.pdf
[5] https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9317/#:~:text=Public%20Spending%20Statistics&text=Gross%20spending%20on%20public%20sector,10%25%20in%202024%2F25.
[6] https://www.antislavery.org/latest/court-of-appeal-win-shows-that-companies-risk-prosecution-if-they-continue-to-profit-from-forced-labour-goods/
[7] https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/MakeWorkPay.pdf
[8]https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/publications/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf
[9] https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/policy-issues/responsible-business-conduct.html
[10] https://www.ilo.org/about-ilo/mission-and-impact-ilo/ilo-declaration-fundamental-principles-and-rights-work
[11] https://www.linkedin.com/posts/electronics-watch_principles-for-worker-driven-remedy-electronics-activity-7160213874657439745-FgUU/
[12] https://labour.org.uk/change/britain-reconnected/
[14] https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/big-issues/labour-rights/beyond-social-auditing/
[15] https://electronicswatch.org/cal-comp-a-lesson-in-the-importance-of-worker-driven-monitoring-to-end-forced-labour-in-global-supply-chains-february-2020_2569307.pdf
[16] https://electronicswatch.org/en/victory-for-trade-union-rights-in-czechia_2626919
[17] https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/46693/documents/241361/default/
[18] https://corporatejusticecoalition.org/news/press/press-release-four-in-five-uk-adults-support-new-laws-to-tackle-environmental-harm-and-human-rights-abuses-in-company-supply-chains/
[19] https://corporatejusticecoalition.org/uncategorised/principal-elements-of-a-uk-corporate-duty-to-prevent-adverse-human-rights-and-environmental-impacts-a-failure-to-prevent-law/
[20] https://labour.org.uk/change/britain-reconnected/
[21] https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/7a3e9980-5fda-4760-8f25-bc5571806033_en?filename=240719_CSDD_FAQ_final.pdf)
