| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Multiple Retailer (Publication and Display of Ethical Sourcing Policies)
3.31 pm
Mr. John Gummer (Suffolk, Coastal): I beg to move,
- That leave be given to bring in a Bill to require retailers with more than ten outlets to publish and display in each outlet a statement of their procurement policies in relation to child labour, slave labour and environmental protection.
We recently engaged in discussions about the purchase of pigmeat from welfare-friendly sources. Such issues are very proper concerns of British producers. Unfortunately, however, competitors often ignore such basic ethical considerations, and are therefore able to sell their products more cheaply.
The present situation will be complicated by the arrival on our shores of Wal-Mart, an American group which, over the years, has experienced considerable problems in explaining the sourcing of its products in both ethical and environmental terms. I want Wal-Mart to start in this country with a clean sheet: I want it to have to subscribe to the rules that I propose in the Bill. Those rules are very simple. I suggest that, in any chain with more than 10 outlets, the company's procurement policy in relation to ethical and environmental grounds should be displayed prominently. I also suggest that a detailed explanation of the way in which those general principles are implemented should be available to both customers and shareholders, and to head office.
That, surely, is not an unreasonable request. It will not give rise to extra red tape, because all decent companies could take such action tomorrow; what it will mean is that customers will know the price at which the low price that they pay has been bought. They will know that, if a company has undercut the general market, that is because the company is more efficient, not because it has done deals of which it should be ashamed.
This is especially important in view of the arrival of Wal-Mart. Throughout the United States are small towns whose high streets have been destroyed by the way in which that firm operates. As a Minister who sought to improve and to increase the viability of our high streets, I am concerned that we should not find that the incomer, Wal-Mart, does not meet the environmental standardsthat have increasingly been espoused by home-grown companies.
It is necessary to raise the matter for another reason. Of all the companies I know, Wal-Mart is the only one, before it had a single shop in Britain, to secure a special
meeting between the Prime Minister and its senior executive here. The fact that Hillary Clinton is a former director of the Arkansas-based business did not, I am sure, do it any harm. Whatever was said at the meeting, many must be concerned that the odd nod or wink suggested that planning permission that would not be available to other companies might be available to Wal-Mart.
Such a deal would fundamentally damage not only retail businesses with which Wal-Mart will compete, but the high streets that are so important to the rebuilding of the centres of our great cities and market towns alike. The House should be considerably concerned about the standards and values of great retailers. In taking on board ethical and environmental considerations, our retailers have set an example that is better than that of the average retailer in the world. I want to give them the opportunity to compete on a level playing field.
I do not want to exclude people who take different views. I want people to know what the price of "cut price" is. If they know that, and still buy products that are produced in the appalling conditions that have been revealed recently in islands in Asia, where people are corralled to work for a pittance and can only earn enough to get back to their home in that workplace, that will be up to consumers. Such conditions bring globalisation and the World Trade Organisation into disrepute.
It is of great importance that those of us who are committed to free trade should remind the House that it was here that Conservatives such as Wilberforce and Shaftesbury said that free trade should be within proper civilised parameters. Those include ensuring that slave labour and child labour are not the means of reducing prices, and that damaging the countryside shall not be the price of ensuring that we can undercut competitors.
All those issues should be raised now, before companies get into their stride. We have seen what their stride has meant to other people in other nations; that is why the Bill should become law. It is for that simple reason that I want Wal-Mart to begin afresh--without all the background and history that have so besmirched the company--at least learning here that free enterprise and trade bring responsibility. Companies have to behave properly not just in this country, but in all countries where the vulnerability of people is much greater than here.
It is for those people that we banned the slave trade. It is for those people that we should seek to ban the use of products of slave labour.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. John Gummer, Mrs. Gillian Shephard, Mr. Anthony Steen, Mr. Richard Spring, Mr. Peter Lilley, Sir David Madel, Mr. David Ruffley.
Mr. John Gummer accordingly presented a Bill to require retailers with more than ten outlets to publish and display in each outlet a statement of their procurement policies in relation to child labour, slave labour and environmental protection: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 5 November, and to be printed [Bill 160].
The Secretary of State for Social Security (Mr. Alistair Darling):
I beg to move,
3.40 pm
That the Order of the House of 20th May 1999 be supplemented as follows--
3 Nov 1999 : Column 298
1. Proceedings on Consideration of Lords Amendments shall be completed at today's sitting and, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at midnight.
2.--(1) The Lords Amendments shall be considered in the following order, namely:
Nos. 42 to 46, 1 to 41 and 47 to 191.
(2) Each part of the proceedings shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at the time specified in the second column of the Table.
Lords amendments Time for conclusion of proceedings
Nos. 42 to 46 7.00 p.m.
Nos. 1 to 34 10.00 p.m.
Nos. 35 to 41, 47 to 191 Midnight.
3.--(1) This paragraph applies for the purpose of bringing proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2.
(2) The Speaker shall--
(a) put forthwith any Question which has been proposed from the Chair and has not been decided and, if that Question is for the amendment of a Lords Amendment, the Question on any further Amendment of the Lords Amendment moved by a Minister of the Crown and on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown, That this House agrees or disagrees with the Lords in the Lords Amendment or, as the case may be, in the Lords Amendment as amended,
(b) put forthwith the Question on any Amendment moved by a Minister of the Crown to a Lords Amendment followed by the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown, That this House agrees or disagrees with the Lords in their Amendment or, as the case may be, in their Amendment as amended,
(c) put forthwith the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown, That this House disagrees with the Lords in a Lords Amendment, and
(d) put forthwith the Question, That this House agrees with the Lords in all the remaining Lords Amendments.
(3) As soon as the House has agreed or disagreed with the Lords in any of their Amendments the Speaker shall put forthwith a single Question on any Amendments moved by a Minister of the Crown relevant to the Lords Amendment.
4. The Speaker shall put forthwith the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown for the consideration forthwith of any further Message from the Lords on the Bill.
5. The proceedings on any further Message from the Lords shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement.
6. For the purpose of bringing those proceedings to a conclusion the Speaker shall--
(a) put forthwith any Question which has been proposed from the Chair and has not been decided, and the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown which is related to the Question already proposed from the Chair,
(b) put forthwith the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown on or relevant to any of the remaining items in the Lords Message, and
I suspect that most hon. Members will want to debate the substance of the Bill and the amendments, rather than the timetable motion. However, the Government have tabled a timetable motion to allow proper consideration of all those parts of the Bill, especially those parts in which hon. Members have expressed special interest--particularly the provisions on incapacity benefit, which we have arranged to debate first, so that they will be debated in prime time and proper consideration is given to them.
(c) put forthwith the Question, That this House agrees with the Lords in all the remaining Lords Proposals.
7. The Speaker shall put forthwith the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown for the appointment, nomination and quorum of a Committee to draw up Reasons and the appointment of its Chairman.
8.--(1) A Committee appointed to draw up Reasons shall report before the conclusion of the sitting at which it is appointed.
(2) Proceedings in the Committee shall, if not previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion 30 minutes after their commencement.
(3) For the purpose of bringing any proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with sub-paragraph (2) the Chairman shall--
(a) first put forthwith any Question which has already been proposed from the Chair and has not yet been decided; and
(b) then put forthwith successively Questions on motions which may be made by a Minister of the Crown for assigning a Reason for disagreeing with the Lords in one of their Amendments.
(4) The proceedings of the Committee shall be reported without any further Question being put.
9. This paragraph applies to--
(a) proceedings on Consideration of Lords Amendments,
(b) proceedings on any further Message from the Lords, and
(c) proceedings of the kind mentioned in paragraph 7.
10. Standing Order No. 15(1) (Exempted business) shall apply to proceedings to which paragraph 9 applies.
11. Proceedings to which paragraph 9 applies shall not be interrupted under any Standing Order relating to the sittings of the House.
12. No dilatory Motion with respect to, or in the course of, proceedings to which paragraph 9 applies shall be made except by a Minister of the Crown; and the Question on any such Motion shall be put forthwith.
13. Where proceedings on a Motion for the Adjournment of the House would, by virtue of Standing Order No. 24 (Urgent matters), commence at a time when proceedings to which paragraph 9 applies are in progress, the proceedings on the Motion shall be postponed to the conclusion of the proceedings to which paragraph 9 applies.
14. If the House is adjourned, or the sitting is suspended, before the conclusion of any proceedings to which paragraph 9 applies, no notice shall be required of a Motion made at the next sitting by a Minister of the Crown for varying or supplementing the provisions of this Order.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |