Modern Slavery Act 2015 Committee Report

Lord McInnes of Kilwinning Excerpts

Friday 28th March 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord McInnes of Kilwinning (Con)]

My Lords, this thought-provoking, challenging and important debate has more than adequately answered the rhetorical question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, of why this subject matters.

I begin by paying tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady O’Grady of Upper Holloway, for her introduction and chairmanship of this important committee, to all noble Lords who served on the committee, and of course to the staff who have worked so hard to support them.

The report that this House has received is comprehensive but sobering. It examines and evaluates very adequately how we have gone from world leading in this area to identifying significant gaps over a period of time, not least because of the changes in legislative architecture outlined by the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss. The report has also identified other areas that need to be examined, such as carers, on which the noble Baroness, Lady Barker, and the noble Lord, Lord Watson, put specific emphasis.

The report highlights that the prosecution rate is far too low, which was echoed by the noble Baroness, Lady Goudie, and my noble friends Lord Kempsell and Lord Smith. A prosecution rate of 1.81%, in the context of a prosecution rate for all crime in the UK of 7%, is clearly far too low. In saying that, it is important to remember that officers investigating these cases are faced with significant challenge. Around a third of people referred to the national referral mechanism in 2023 reported that they were exploited overseas, and it is naturally difficult to stay in contact with a large number of foreign national victims who return to the country they came from while investigations are ongoing. That underlines the important point that the noble Baroness, Lady O’Grady, made about support for victims once they have made a complaint within the legal system.

However, while we acknowledge these challenges, it must be stressed that we on these Benches are very proud of the Modern Slavery Act 2015, and proud of the leadership of my noble friends Lord McColl, Lady May of Maidenhead and Lord Bates. But we recognise entirely that it was built on a consensus across all political parties, and that this issue is not to be used as a political football.

The Act can work to protect people only when the threat of repercussions is effective. Criminals will be deterred only if they are made to feel that they are at a genuine risk of being prosecuted and punished for the actions they are perpetrating. It is incumbent upon the Government to make clear their next steps in making these legal threats credible. I therefore ask the Minister—I welcome him to the Front Bench for the first time—what his Government intend to do to support law enforcement bodies in their work to bring perpetrators of modern slavery to justice. What do they intend to do to recognise the confused landscape that my noble friend Lord Kempsell referred to for victims in coming forward and seeing justice done? How will the Government send a clear message that a credible threat exists to those who choose to profit from this practice?

Another point raised by the committee’s report was around Section 54 of the Modern Slavery Act, which imposes a duty on UK-based businesses to make clear the action they have taken to ensure that their own businesses and, often even more importantly, their supply chains are free of modern slavery. This point was adequately raised today by the noble Lord, Lord Watson, and the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Bristol. Unfortunately, not all companies are Primark and, therefore, vigilance needs to continue as we go through. This cannot be a mere box-ticking exercise.

This provision is an important part of the Act, which places a burden on companies to take a deep dive into their own supply chains, beyond their immediate operations, to make sure that they are not inadvertently playing a role in funding the organised criminals who force people into modern slavery. I know that I am joined by many others in your Lordships’ House when I express, as my noble friend Lord Randall said, dismay that the Government whipped Members in the other place against supporting an amendment passed in your Lordships’ House on the Great British Energy Bill that would have compelled the Government to cease financial assistance if

“there exists credible evidence of modern slavery in the energy supply chain of any company designated Great British Energy”.

The Government need to show leadership in working to uncover and tackle the scourge of modern slavery. I therefore ask the Minister: if the Government are not prepared to commit their own bodies to review and act against modern slavery, how can they demand that other companies take the same action? We cannot send out mixed messages to those who wish to avoid this legislation.

I am aware that the Government announced at the beginning of the year that they are in the process of considering how they can strengthen the Section 54 regime, including penalties for non-compliance. In matters such as this, sunshine is the best disinfectant, and ensuring that companies are compelled to report their figures means that customers, investors and civil society can review these crucial facts. We can therefore avoid consumers such as my noble friend Lord Randall being worried about their complicity—worried that they may be taking part—when they buy products and cannot be sure where they came from.

As we approach the end of this debate, I assure the Minister that, on this side, we want to do all we can to ensure the effectiveness of the Modern Slavery Act 2015, and we will be right behind him in making sure that victims are supported through prosecution, to ensure that this terrible practice is discontinued.