Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to make a contribution on this important bill before the House, the Modern Slavery Bill 2018, and to support amendments moved by the member for Hotham in this regard. The idea that slavery is some kind of shameful artefact from our deep historical past, of less civilised times, is something that is very prevalent in popular imagination. It is thought that slavery is something that was left behind us long ago. But the reality is that there are now more slaves today than at any other time in human history. That is a very sobering thought.

It is estimated that there are 45.8 million people who are living in slavery or slave-like conditions around the world. Our region is amongst the worst. It is critical that this parliament steps up to show a leadership role in this regard because modern slavery, as I said, is so prevalent in our region. It is estimated that two-thirds of people living in the Asia-Pacific are impacted. That is a terrifying thought. According to the Global Slavery Index of 2018, an estimated 15,000 are right here in Australia. This is not something that belongs to other foreign lands. This is not someone else's problem. We have a very deep, profound issue in our own nation that needs to be addressed. It has spread its exploitive tentacles throughout our society. The people who care for your children, clean your office, make your clothes or serve your food could all be victims of modern slavery, hidden in plain sight. That is indeed a point that was made again and again during the parliamentary inquiry which I was very privileged to be a part of.

Places like the UK, France, California and the EU have already introduced legislation to protect people from these appalling practices, and it's now time for us in Australia to take strong action ourselves. The shocking truth is that Australia currently has no formal mechanism that directly targets modern slavery in business operations or supply chains. We cannot go on in that way. This is why Labor has a modern slavery policy which includes supply chain reporting requirements and penalties for noncompliance. That is an essential part of any successful Modern Slavery Act, and that is an issue I will return to. Something that bothers me and my colleagues on this side of the House enormously is the lack of penalties for breaches in the current legislation. If we have learnt anything from the UK model, which much of this was based on, we should have been very alive to the fact that the absence of penalties is profoundly problematic.

On this side of the House, as I said, we are very committed to forcing the business community to investigate risk in their supply chains. Another very critical component that is sadly lacking in this bill is the establishment of an Australian independent antislavery commissioner. Again, I'll come to some points as to why that is so essential. The fact is that there are two gaping holes in this legislation: the lack of penalties and the lack of an independent antislavery commissioner. These are very problematic components of this bill. It will take a Labor government to improve this bill, and exactly that will be our intention, should we get to serve on the government benches.

The bill before the House today—I don't wish to take away from the government—is an important first step; it's just not going far enough. The reasons why you would insist upon an independent antislavery commissioner, for example, is that the business engagement unit that the government proposes in this legislation is really going to have a very strong focus on the business community and the assistance that can be provided there, whereas the role of an independent antislavery commissioner is a much broader role than just liaising with the business community. We would regard that commissioner as having very important functions to support victims of these modern slavery practices. The commissioner's role will be very much to work with civil society to help prevent and detect slavery as it occurs in Australia.

That's important because there are practices of it here. I see my colleague the member for Lingiari is here in the chamber. He and I have taken evidence in another unrelated inquiry that exposes practices that should absolutely come under the umbrella of this modern slavery act, but they will not. Without an independent commissioner, there is no pathway for those people to go on to talk about the shocking arrangements that are taking place. Some Indigenous artists in Australia are being asked to practice in a manner that, by any measure, would be regarded as extremely exploitative if not part of what we would now deem to be modern-day slavery. This is an example, without going into the detail of those cases, where people, either against their will or without informed consent, are being asked to participate in a work situation that is nothing short of a sweatshop in order to paint their way out of debt. That is right here in our country today. This legislation, as it currently is drafted, will not help those people.

That is an example of why we need to move these amendments and why I'm here strongly supporting the amendments moved by Labor. This bill needs to be improved, and it should be improved. I would love the government to accept the amendments, and perhaps this is an opportunity for them to have a change of heart and think: 'This is a good first step, but we can make this bill better. Let's work with Labor to do that.' I would love to hear the minister come back in and put that to the House. That's because, in its current form, the bill is disappointing.

There was a lot of concern about responses and reactions from the big business community towards this new kind of reporting regime. I take that on board, but we should be providing the necessary supports there for businesses to be able to report in open and transparent ways around the way they do business and, indeed, the way they do business across their entire supply chains. Yes, let's help guide and nurture businesses through those new reporting regimes, but let's also be very explicit in the provision of support and backing for people who find themselves firmly embedded in modern slavery practices both here in Australia and abroad.

The absence of penalties, as I said, really should have been dealt with before this legislation came to this House. The need for penalties has absolutely been one of the key lessons we should learn from the UK experience. But we've squibbed it. The government has squibbed it. I would argue that the absence of the penalties in this legislation means that in the three years since the act's enactment—sorry, back in the UK this was the lesson that we learnt: only half of the 9,000 to 11,000 organisations that the UK government estimates are required to report have actually produced a slavery and human trafficking statement. You're getting about 50 per cent compliance when you have no penalties in place. If they don't comply, you've got no mechanisms there to ensure that you reach your target. You're aiming for 100 per cent compliance here, but in the absence of these penalties you're getting approximately 50 per cent of people even being prepared to undertake the reporting process, which they are completely obliged to do. Without the penalties, that's what happens, so I will predict that that's exactly what you will see in Australia as well. That really is, in my view, squibbing the issue. It's going soft in the area of human rights, which, given the intent of this bill, should be front and centre of our reckoning and ensuring that peoples' human rights are being observed, being protected and being nurtured. That's why Labor has moved its amendment to introduce penalties, so as to ensure that this legislation's got the teeth it needs to do its job, frankly.

As I said earlier, I sat on the committee that did a lot of the work examining what a modern slavery act might look like. We heard from a lot of stakeholders giving evidence during that period, and the vast, vast majority of people who gave evidence in that inquiry called for strong enforcement compliance mechanisms. They were very much in favour of penalties if people weren't complying in meeting their obligations. Oxfam told the committee that without the penalties in place:

… there is a real risk that companies will not report under the Act. This would severely undermine the effectiveness of the Act and the goal to help eliminate modern slavery in supply chains.

That kind of evidence was repeated time and time again. The Ethnic Communities Council of Victoria made similar observations, and argued that the competition for funding and support alone won't give profit-driven businesses the incentive that they would need in a competitive market to investigate and disclose their supply chain. They are real concerns about the capacity for this legislation to live up to expectations. I think the government have very real expectations here, but they think everybody's going to play nice and, without penalties in place, they will get everybody on board and doing the right thing. History would suggest otherwise. Indeed, the experience in the UK is a very, very clear demonstration of why you need those penalties in place.

The need for an independent antislavery commissioner is also a lesson we should have learnt from others. Victims of slavery in Australia absolutely deserve more than just a business engagement unit. That is not good enough. They deserve somebody who can monitor and scrutinise progress, work with victims, civil society and international organisations to prevent, detect and respond to slavery. That's what Labor proposes: someone who is independent, who can stand up for human rights violations in this country and who can give voice to the voiceless. If a modern slavery act cannot do that, then it fails its first test. That is why I stand to support Labor's amendment and strongly urge the government to support it as well.

See this speech in context