Connect with us

Emerging Markets

Britain’s necessary but insufficient battle on modern slavery

Published

on


Britain may have banned slavery outright since the 1830s. But the practice has hardly ended. As recently as 2017, the International Labour Organization estimated there were 40m “modern slaves” around the world.

Last week saw an official warning to UK bosses against profiting from these unfortunates. Speaking about the Chinese province of Xinjiang, the foreign secretary Dominic Raab reminded UK companies of their obligations to ensure their suppliers were not staffed by slave workers. He said the Chinese government had detained more than 1m Uighur Muslims in the province and sent many to factories as forced labour.

“Barbarism we had hoped lost to another era [is] being practised today, as we speak,” he thundered.

Unveiling new rules to curb it, he said companies would now face fines if they failed to ensure their supply chains were free of slaves. “Our aim, put simply, is that no company that profits from forced labour in Xinjiang can do business in the UK and no UK business is involved in their supply chains,” he said.

Mr Raab’s words certainly strike a different tone from that of former prime minister David Cameron’s government. The then chancellor George Osborne unblushingly downplayed human rights and spoke of a “Golden Era” between Britain and China, while pushing for inbound investment in everything from nuclear infrastructure to his pet “Northern Powerhouse” project.

But aside from the diplomatic message, it is worth considering how potent the foreign secretary’s warning was to UK bosses. And the answer is: not a whole lot.

First, let’s look at those new sanctions, which have been tacked on to the 2015 Modern Slavery Act, Theresa May’s landmark legislation that aimed to stamp out forced labour and trafficking. These will not fine companies for using slave-owning suppliers. They will fine them for not publishing a so-called “Modern Slavery Statement” prominently on their website, as all companies and public bodies with a turnover of more than £36m are supposed to do. 

To fulfil that obligation, companies simply need to produce a form of words saying that they have looked into their suppliers’ practices.

Just how seriously companies take this bare-bones obligation is open to question. A 2019 review of the legislation claimed that about 40 per cent did not even bother to publish a statement. And no law presently exists to punish those companies that are found to have profited from forced labour through their supply chains, whether wittingly or not.

Even those that tick the boxes may not fully understand what goes on at their suppliers — especially in distant countries. Many rely on consultants, whose reports can vary in quality. While some are doubtless assiduous, the worry is that others may scratch the surface no more deeply than those accounts given by 1930s “fellow travellers” such as George Bernard Shaw about the joys of life in Stalin’s USSR.

An Channel 4’s Dispatches programme in 2017 found that garment makers in the English city of Leicester paid well below legal minimum wages when producing clothes for such well-known UK brands as New Look, River Island, Boohoo and Missguided. The companies’ response? The work had been subcontracted to those factories without their knowledge or consent. A 2018 investigation by the Financial Times also exposed labour exploitation in Britain’s garment industry.

The government seems to hope that it can subcontract enforcement to the City of London, with investors dumping the shares and bonds of those that do not abide by ethical standards. But there’s little sign of that working. 

Last June, following a Sunday Times investigation, Boohoo again came under fire for buying from companies that did not pay minimum wages. Yet while the share price briefly halved when the story broke, it quickly recovered when it was clear Boohoo would face no real sanction, despite a critical report commissioned from a barrister, Alison Levitt QC.

Of course, it’s not just about the bankers. Consumers are also responsible. They may talk a lot about ethics. But there’s not so much enthusiasm for changes that could push up the cost of clothing or the price of the next airline flight.

The UK is, of course, right to condemn Beijing for its mistreatment of China’s Muslim minority. But simply chiding bosses yields limited returns. The government needs to give them more reason to worry about their suppliers’ labour practices. Until that happens, the gap between words and deeds will be large.

jonathan.ford@ft.com



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Emerging Markets

Brazil virus variant found to evade natural immunity

Published

on

By


The P.1 Covid-19 variant that originated in Brazil and has spread to more than 25 countries is around twice as transmissible as some other strains and is more likely to evade the natural immunity people usually develop from prior infection, according to a new international study.

The research, conducted by a UK-Brazilian team of researchers from institutions including Oxford university, Imperial College London, the University of São Paulo, found that the P.1 variant was between 1.4 and 2.2 times more transmissible than other variants circulating in Brazil. 

It was also “able to evade 25-61 per cent of protective immunity elicited by previous infection” with any earlier variant, the researchers found, in a sign that current vaccines could also be less effective against it.

International concern about the P.1 variant has escalated recently, with more than 25 countries detecting the variant, including Belgium, Sweden and the UK, which has identified six cases.

The scientists are expected to release a paper describing the research on Tuesday. Dr Nuno Faria, the lead author, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The study has not yet been peer reviewed.

The researchers have dated the emergence of the P.1 variant to November 6, 2020, around one month before cases began to surge for a second time in the Brazilian city of Manaus. They found that the proportion of cases classified as P.1 in Manaus increased from zero to 87 per cent in the space of 7 weeks. 

The paper concluded: “Our results further show that natural immunity waning alone is unlikely to explain the observed dynamics in Manaus, with support for P.1 possessing altered epidemiological characteristics.”

“Studies to evaluate real-world vaccine efficacy in response to P.1 are urgently needed,” it added.

The researchers also found that infections were 10 to 80 per cent more likely to result in death in Manaus after the emergence of P.1. However, the authors cautioned that it was not possible to determine whether this meant the variant was more lethal or whether it was a result of increased strain on the city’s healthcare system, or a combination of both. 

The P.1 variant has over 17 mutations, which alter its genetic sequence from the virus originally identified in Wuhan, including 3 key changes to the spike protein that it uses to enter human cells.

Researchers in Brazil have been using genetic sequencing technology developed by Oxford Nanopore in the UK to identify and track the variant. The technology was first used in Brazil during the Zika outbreak in 2015.

Dr Leila Luheshi, director of applied and clinical markets at Oxford Nanopore, told the Financial Times that while the B.1.1.7 variant in the UK has similar properties of high transmissibility to P.1 — it is thought to be around 1.5 times as transmissible as variants that preceded it — there was no evidence to date that it evaded past natural immunity in the same way. Studies so far have also shown that current vaccines retain their efficacy against B.1.1.7.

Luheshi said that the concern with P.1 is that “because it has these mutations around the spike . . . the hypothesis is that the vaccine will be less effective.” But she added that there is not yet definitive evidence to support this theory. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Emerging Markets

Coronavirus latest: Production glitches to delay Johnson & Johnson vaccine distribution

Published

on

By



Coronavirus latest: Production glitches to delay Johnson & Johnson vaccine distribution



Source link

Continue Reading

Emerging Markets

Norsk Hydro blamed for birth defects in Amazon forest pollution case

Published

on

By


Maria do Socorro explains in graphic detail the spate of ailments affecting newborns in her remote community in the Amazon: her grandson died after being born with his intestines outside his body, while others were missing organs or had undeveloped bones.

For the 56-year-old community leader, there is little doubt about the cause of these illnesses. She said the rainforest town had for years suffered from toxic waste pollution from the local operations of Norwegian aluminium producer Norsk Hydro.

Long a simmering environmental scandal in Brazil, the allegations were brought on to the international stage this month when Socorro’s community sued the Norwegian giant in a Dutch court, seeking damages for claims that “the incorrect disposal of toxic waste” from operations in the area had caused a variety of health ailments, polluted the rainforest and destroyed economic opportunities.

“We cannot have future generations because the children are born and then die. Whole families are contaminated,” said Socorro from the Barcarena township in the northern state of Pará.

The case — filed just days before the UK’s top court ruled that Royal Dutch Shell could face legal action in London brought by thousands of Nigerian villagers over alleged pollution — is the latest international trial pitting large, resource-hungry companies against impoverished rural communities.

It also comes amid mounting pressure on companies to abide by strict environmental standards, a push being spearheaded visibly by Scandinavian investors.

One of the allegations in the lawsuit is that the pollution has caused birth defects © Alessandro Falco/Bloomberg

“If business can be global, why can’t justice? These companies have businesses everywhere, but then when they do something wrong they want to smother the possibility of people getting compensation,” said Pedro Martins, partner at law firm PGMBM, which is representing 40,000 alleged victims bringing the suit against Norsk Hydro.

“International corporations have different standards for how they do business in the northern and southern hemispheres as if life in the southern hemisphere does not have the same value.”

Through local entities, Norsk Hydro runs three facilities — a bauxite mine, a refinery and a smelter — in Pará, a vast Amazonian state that is a flashpoint for illegal deforestation, gold mining and land-grabbing.

The company said it would respond to the request before the court in the Netherlands, where its subsidiaries controlling the local entities at issue are headquartered. It denied that in 2018 pollutants from its facilities spilled over during heavy rains and polluted nearby rivers and earth. The company declined to comment further.

A source close to the company said, however, that it did “not see the [health] effects that have been claimed. The actual impact is hard to see and there aren’t any studies showing that.”

Map of Brazil

A combination of poor sanitary conditions and the tropical climate could be behind many of the health issues, he added: “There are a lot of feelings and not so many things relating to actual facts.”

Locals say bauxite, lead and aluminium pollution have turned the region’s rivers red. A study from the Evandro Chagas Institute, a Brazilian public health body, found in 2018 that the region’s waters were so polluted with industrial waste from the Norsk Hydro facilities that they “cannot be used for recreation, fishing, or human consumption”.

Like many Amazonian communities, much of the Barcarena township depends heavily on fishing and farming for survival, work that they now say is impossible.

“I invite these Norwegians to come and bathe in our waters. I challenge them. They have good water there in Norway. Our wealth just goes there,” said Socorro, who heads Cainquiama, a group representing mainly indigenous people and quilombolas — the descendants of runaway slaves.

Nearly all of the claimants in the suit have complained about chronic pain, hair loss and skin conditions. The suit also contains claims in relation to birth defects, such as those that have affected Socorro’s grandson, who was born with gastroschisis — a hole in the abdominal wall.

A pipe belonging to alumina refinery Alnorte, which is owned by Norsk Hydro, in Barcarena © Ricardo Moraes/Reuters

“Studies around the world have shown the effects [of toxic metals] on pregnant women, foetuses and children at birth,” said Marcelo de Oliveira Lima, a public health researcher at the Chagas institute. “But our studies so far did not go deep enough to show the [connection]. Other studies are still being done.”

The case is a sensitive one for Norwegian investors and the government, which owns a 34 per cent stake in Norsk Hydro. Oslo has long attempted to hold Brasília to account for the environmental destruction of the Amazon, even publishing its own data on deforestation in the world’s largest rainforest.

“There seem to be quite some dispute about the facts in this case and in particular about the actual harm of the spill to local environment and whether the company is somehow to blame by neglecting important safety measures,” said Jeanett Bergan, head of responsible investments at the KLP pension fund, Norway’s largest pension provider.

“We know Norsk Hydro as a responsible corporate actor when doing businesses abroad. I do not think [this case] will damage the credibility of Norwegian actors.”

Climate Capital

Where climate change meets business, markets and politics. Explore the FT’s coverage here 

Martins, the lawyer leading the group action, said they brought the case in the Netherlands because of the inertia of the Brazilian court system. He believes the case can reach a verdict in 18 or 24 months.

Brazil is no stranger to environmental disasters. This month, miner Vale agreed to a $7bn settlement with authorities over a dam breach in 2019 in the Brumadinho township that killed hundreds of people and polluted vast tracts of lands with industrial sludge.

BHP was sued in a British court over a dam failure in Brazil’s Mariana township in 2015 that left 19 dead. The case was thrown out because parallel proceedings were taking place in Brazil.

“The Hydro case draws attention for having caused significant environmental damage,” said Luiz Eduardo Rielli, director of sustainability consultancy Novi. “After three years, what I care most about is: What lessons have been learned? How can we ensure that new damages do not occur?”

Additional reporting by Richard Milne in Oslo and Carolina Pulice in São Paulo



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending