Child Trafficking (Cocoa Industry)
The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-01042, in the name of Jim Eadie, on child trafficking in the chocolate industry, 10 years on from Harkin-Engel. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament acknowledges the 10th anniversary of the signing of the Harkin-Engel Protocol on 19 September 2011, signifying the chocolate industry’s apparent commitment to abolishing the trafficking of workers in West Africa into deplorable conditions; condemns the industry’s apparent failure to take the appropriate action as pledged in the protocol, thereby perpetuating some of the worst forms of child labour in the cocoa sector of Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana; understands from a report on the protocol by Tulane University that none of the six articles calling for action has been fully implemented and that the required industry-wide reform in the cocoa sector has not taken place; commends the 10 Campaign run by civil society groups across the world, including the International Labor Rights Forum, World Vision and Stop the Traffik, and would welcome widespread support for the petition to end the trafficking of children in the cocoa industry.
12:35
I open the debate to mark the 10th anniversary of the Harkin-Engel protocol, which was signed on 19 September 2001. I thank colleagues in the Labour Party and the Scottish Green Party and my Scottish National Party colleagues for their support in bringing the debate to the Parliament.
Under international pressure 10 years ago, chocolate companies signed up to a voluntary non-binding document that set out concrete steps to eliminate the worst forms of child labour and forced labour from all cocoa farms by July 2005. As the report by Tulane University sets out, 10 years on, the industry has singularly failed to meet that deadline and to implement the protocol.
The protocol grew out of the concern expressed in 2001 about reports of human trafficking and physical abuse in west African cocoa farming in Ghana and Ivory Coast. It is named after US Representative Eliot Engel and US Senator Tom Harkin. The protocol is about growing and processing cocoa beans and their derivative products in a manner that complies with International Labour Organization convention 182.
I pay tribute to the organisations that have campaigned against the widespread use of child labour and child trafficking on cocoa farms in Ivory Coast and Ghana. In particular, I commend the 10 campaign, which is run by civil society groups around the world, including the International Labor Rights Forum, World Vision and Stop the Traffik. I also pay tribute to members of the media. Good investigative journalism in the public interest serves our society well, and I have nothing but praise for the BBC’s sterling work in that regard.
West Africa is the largest supplier of cocoa in the world—it accounts for 70 per cent of global cultivation. The US Department of State estimates that more than 109,000 children in Ivory Coast’s cocoa industry work under the worst forms of child labour and that 10,000 or more are victims of human trafficking or enslavement. Such cocoa production is characterised by deplorable conditions, including child trafficking, the worst forms of child labour, labour-intensive production and harvest, poor health and safety measures, low incomes for cocoa farmers and the use of pesticides and fertilisers with damaging effects on public health and the environment.
Cocoa is traded through a local and international supply chain. Ivory Coast and Ghana are the two largest cocoa-producing countries. By 2012, it is estimated that global chocolate consumption will have increased by 15 per cent since 2006.
A handful of companies dominate the international cocoa trade and in some countries, such as the USA, that concentration is even greater. Three companies dominate grinding capacity in the cocoa chain and have 40 per cent of global cocoa processing. A further six companies dominate the chocolate market—they are the household names Cadbury, Nestlé, Mars, Ferrero, Hershey and Kraft Foods. This is big business: cocoa imports to the US are valued at $4.3 billion.
There is a role for national Governments and the consumer, but the primary responsibility lies with the companies. Such global companies could and should meet their global corporate and social responsibilities, and their moral responsibility, but they have singularly failed to do so, despite signing up to the Harkin-Engel protocol.
The protocol was meant to address child trafficking and the worst forms of child labour in the industry in west Africa. Its signatories were to develop and implement a
“Key Action Plan and Steps to Eliminate the Worst Forms of Child Labor”,
which would include a
“Public Statement of Need for and Terms of an Action Plan”.
The protocol states:
“Industry has publicly acknowledged the problem of forced child labor in West Africa and will continue to commit significant resources to address it.”
It goes on to say that
“the occurrence of the worst forms of child labor in the growing and processing of cocoa beans and their derivative products is simply unacceptable.”
It remains unacceptable, but the promise to commit significant resources has not been realised.
We were promised action on
“the formulation of appropriate remedies”
for children who were removed from child labour, but little progress has been made. There was meant to be action to identify “positive developmental alternatives” for the children removed from the industry, but that too has failed to materialise.
There was meant to be
“a binding memorandum of cooperation among the major stakeholders that establishes a joint action program of research, information exchange, and action to enforce the internationally-recognised and mutually-agreed upon standards to eliminate the worst forms of child labor”
in the sector, and
“independent means of monitoring and public reporting on compliance with those standards.”
That is probably the biggest failure of the industry 10 years on from the protocol. There was also meant to be a not-for-profit foundation with significant resources committed to it in order to help
“to eliminate the worst forms of child labor.”
The fact that a few companies dominate the market gives them enormous purchasing and selling power, but it also gives them the opportunity to work to bring about a sustainable cocoa economy, as Oxfam and others have said.
Where there should have been action, there has been inaction. Where there should have been specific, detailed, concrete action to remove and protect children from the worst forms of child labour, there has been a distinct lack of good faith and a lack of will to make good on the pledges that were solemnly and publicly entered into in 2001.
What is the reality for children as a result of that inaction? The BBC’s journalist Humphrey Hawksley, reporting from the Ivory Coast earlier this year, told us first hand about the plight of those children. He stated:
“I found a group walking along a muddy path towards trees where bright yellow cocoa pods hung ready for harvest. Silently the children squatted down and started work. They wore torn and grubby shorts and t-shirts. There was no laughter or play. On their legs were scars from machete injuries. There was no first aid kit around or any protective clothing.”
That is life for those children, and such stories shame humanity.
The industry’s direct connection to child labour, human trafficking and slavery is indisputable. It is, as the industry has itself stated, “unacceptable”, and yet it continues. The situation is an affront to human rights and to standards of decency and the fact that such a manifest injustice can be perpetrated with apparent impunity in the 21st century is truly shameful.
Nelson Mandela said that to value our children is to value our future. The chocolate industry has shown by its failure to implement the Harkin-Engel protocol that it does not value the children of west Africa. That must change, and there are some signs—prompted by the media coverage to which I have referred—that that may at long last be beginning to happen, with the announcement by Nestlé that child labour will in future have no part to play in the supply chain.
Scotland as a nation can be a force for justice in the world. Let our collective voice ring out from the Parliament today on behalf of those children who have no voice, and let us demand justice on behalf of enslaved children and all children who are the victims of the worst forms of child labour.
12:43
I congratulate Jim Eadie on bringing the debate to the chamber, and on giving the Parliament the opportunity to shine a light on some of the worst industrial practices in the world.
As we have heard, 10 years ago two American politicians, Eliot Engel and Tom Harkin, thought that the work that they had done to highlight the human rights abuses in the chocolate industry had finally had a result when the heads of eight major chocolate companies, two US senators and a member of Congress, together with the ambassador from the Ivory Coast, the director of the international programme on the elimination of child labour and other trade bodies and trade unionists witnessed the signing of a protocol bearing their names. It sought to establish a voluntary way to certify chocolate as being free from
“the worst forms of child labor”,
and to confirm that the companies were not contravening ILO convention 182.
In 2009, global sales of chocolate totalled approximately $100 million. Most of it comes from west Africa, as we heard from Jim Eadie, and particularly from Ghana and the Ivory Coast, as the cocoa tree grows only within 10 degrees of the equator.
Unfortunately, the report from Tulane University that Jim Eadie’s motion mentions suggested that those companies, which make large profits, have not adhered to the protocol and that children are still being used to work in the industry. Indeed, it is suggested that the number of children under 12 who work in the cocoa industry would not fit into the stadiums of Manchester United, Manchester City, Arsenal, Liverpool and Tottenham Hotspur combined. The children work in dangerous conditions that involve them in the use of chemicals and sharp knives.
Ten companies dominate the industry and, in Cameroon, it is estimated that three companies control 95 per cent of cocoa production. Those organisations are extremely powerful, while the farmers who work for them are impoverished and have little bargaining power. The lack of a stable government in the Ivory Coast in recent years has exacerbated the problem.
Companies do not use their power to avoid slavery, trafficking and child labour. That is demonstrated by the fact that only 5 per cent of chocolate can demonstrably be said to have been produced without recourse to such dreadful practices. Some of those companies originated in the UK, and some were originally established by members of the Quaker movement. They took enormous pride in establishing places in which their workers could work in safety and good health, where they could have a decent standard of living and they knew that their children would have an education. However, that was 150 years ago; today, we are seeing the exact reverse of that happening in the name of some of those companies, which are no longer in the hands of those Quaker families, and purely in the name of profit.
At a time of year when our thoughts turn to celebration and we rightly focus on the children in our families, it is entirely appropriate to pause and consider the children who produce the chocolate that we will no doubt consume over Christmas, and it is appropriate that we use our voice to put pressure on chocolate providers and suppliers to change those dreadful practices. Once again, I thank Jim Eadie for bringing the issue to the chamber.
12:47
As we all tuck in to our selection boxes during the Christmas period, we should give some thought to the producers of cocoa. This is a serious subject and I congratulate Jim Eadie on bringing it to Parliament’s attention.
However, the motion is somewhat unbalanced and the problem requires less instant condemnation and perhaps greater understanding of its complexities. Ghana and the Ivory Coast, or Côte d’Ivoire, together produce 60 per cent of the world’s cocoa. More than 10 million people depend on the industry for their livelihood. The US Department of State estimated that more than 109,000 children in the Ivory Coast’s industry work under the worst forms of child labour, and 10,000 are the victims of human trafficking and enslavement. That is clearly an unacceptable state of affairs so the initiative that was taken by Senator Harkin and Congressman Engel in the US Congress was commendable. It led to the establishment of the international cocoa initiative in 2002 that brings together Governments, non-governmental organisations, trade unions and the major corporations that are involved in the cocoa industry to work towards a resolution of the problem.
The motion refers to the report from Tulane University, but it does not say that the report commends the laudable efforts of the industry and recognises that more than 650,000 people have benefited as a result of the protocol and the initiatives and programmes that it has produced. The progress might be modest and it might not be as fast as we would like, but it is progress and, frankly, it is not helpful to characterise the failure to eliminate the problem as wholly the responsibility of the industry, given the many other factors that are at work.
There are many barriers to the implementation of the protocol and the elimination of the worst forms of child labour in cocoa farming, not least of which are the failures on the part of the Governments of the two principal countries concerned and the fact that a civil war is raging in one of those countries. All that is recognised in the Tulane University report but, regrettably, not in the motion.
The two major players in the United Kingdom chocolate industry are Cadbury and Rowntree’s, although both are now owned by US corporations, as we have heard. As Patricia Ferguson rightly highlighted, Cadbury and Rowntree’s have been distinguished by an approach to the welfare and wellbeing of their workforces that was truly revolutionary in its time. It might have been derived from the religious convictions of their Quaker founders rather than from a political ideology and, for some, it might smack too much of paternalism but, like Robert Owen and the co-operative movement, those companies were at the forefront of corporate social responsibility for more than 200 years and long before that term became part of the lexicon of modern business.
I dispute the assertion that those traditions have died. On the contrary, I believe that they are sustained in those companies, notwithstanding the change in ownership. For example, sales in the United Kingdom of fair trade chocolate confectionery grew from £18 million in 2005 to £343 million in 2010, which is by a factor of 19. A lot of the recent growth is a result of Cadbury’s Dairy Milk chocolate becoming the first mainstream confectionery brand to carry the Fairtrade mark. As a consequence, the amount of fair trade cocoa that comes out of Ghana has quadrupled.
Those are just a few illustrations of the progress that has been made. The motion highlights a major and serious problem, but I hope that we can recognise that it is a problem that has been recognised and is being tackled and that progress has been made. Therefore, the Parliament’s approach should be to encourage and support the good work that is being done.
12:52
I support Jim Eadie’s motion and congratulate him on securing the debate. One of the great things about the Parliament is that we debate serious humanitarian issues.
What is trafficking? Stop the Traffik, of which I am a supporter, says that it is
“to be deceived or taken against your will, bought, sold and transported into slavery for sexual exploitation, sweat shops, child brides, circuses, sacrificial worship, forced begging, sale of human organs, farm labour, domestic servitude.”
In trafficking,
“victims usually suffer repeated physical abuse, fear, torture and threats to families to break their spirits and turn them into saleable commodities. A person can be sold and trafficked many times”—
sometimes for as little as $20.
Over the past few years, Stop the Traffik campaigners have put pressure on the big chocolate manufacturers around the world to eradicate the worst forms of child labour in the cocoa farms of Ivory Coast in west Africa, where thousands of young children are trafficked, enslaved and abused to harvest the cocoa that makes more than a third of the world’s chocolate.
Stop the Traffik tells us that, from January last year, four-finger Kit Kats have been fair trade, but Nestlé refuses to budge on its two-finger biscuits. Steve Chalke, the founder of Stop the Traffik and the United Nations special adviser on community action against human trafficking, recently said:
“We welcome the Nestlé announcement. We are relieved for the cocoa farmers and children in Ivory Coast. The surrender of Nestlé demonstrates that by making a simple consumer choice ordinary people can hold multi-nationals to account. Though we understand that it is hard to make all products ethical overnight, we want to see that this is more than a token gesture. So, we intend to keep the pressure on Nestlé until their commitment is global and product wide, like their competitor Mars. No chocolate should have the bitter aftertaste of slavery. Therefore our campaign continues.”
I remain committed to that campaign. Maybe we should give two-finger Kit Kats a miss until Nestlé makes them fair trade.
The Ivory Coast is the top supplier of the world’s cocoa and, as we have heard, the centre of chocolate slavery. Slave traders traffick boys between the ages of nine and 16 from their homes, which are mostly in Mali, but also in Burkina Faso, Ghana and Togo.
Some countries are transport points, while others receive and supply children. The main destination is the cocoa farms in Ivory Coast, where boys are lured by the promise of a salary for their hard work. Once they arrive, they are forced to work from 6 am to 6 pm or later without pay. They have to carry back-breaking sacks of cocoa and are often starved, beaten and locked up at night without toilet facilities.
Sometimes human stories are the best way to illustrate a situation. I will tell the story of Aly Diabate:
“When I was 11 years old, I was taken by a slave trader and sold to a farmer in the Ivory Coast. For 4 years, I worked 80-100 hours per week. I was beaten. At night we were locked into a windowless shed—18 boys in a 20’ x 25’ room. We had a bucket to use instead of a toilet. We were let out only to work.”
Aly Diabate was promised a bicycle and $150 for his family in exchange for his work on a farm in Ivory Coast. Once he arrived at the cocoa farm of Le Gros—the big man—life was not as he had expected. He and the other children were forced to work in the fields for 12 and a half hours every day. He was forced to carry bags of cocoa that were taller than his 4ft frame. The others would help to hoist the heavy bag on to his head and when he fell down, the boss would beat him with a bicycle chain until he stood back up and lifted the bag again.
I ask members to think very carefully before munching into their chocolate Santa or their selection box this Christmas. I ask them to think about where it came from and whether children such as Aly were involved in its production. Were they abused to provide that chocolate Santa?
12:56
I welcome Jim Eadie’s motion and congratulate him on securing the debate. One of the virtues of members’ business debates is their capacity to highlight issues that might not otherwise get the political attention that they deserve, particularly in a Parliament in which powers over international issues are not part and parcel of the powers that we have.
Jim Eadie has spoken eloquently, as have all the members who have participated, about the conditions that are experienced by children in the chocolate industry. We have seen the awful stories that the BBC journalist Humphrey Hawksley has recently recounted of the treatment of those children. The passion that we have heard today highlights the issues that lie behind the stories and shows the Scottish Parliament at its best.
As has been indicated, the Harkin-Engel protocol is not an agreement between states; it is a framework of ethical practice that the chocolate industry has voluntarily adopted. For that reason, we should welcome the inspiration that lay behind it, the good intentions that brought so many companies together and the self-recognition that those companies have a corporate responsibility to ensure that such exploitation of children is eliminated from their industry.
In addition, it is fair that we recognise what the protocol has achieved. Through the actions of industry, states have been spurred into action, and the Governments of Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire now have national agencies that are dedicated to addressing the worst forms of child labour.
However, inspiration and good intentions are not enough if they are not made real by action, and the report by Tulane University raises questions that we have an international duty to address. According to that report, more than 1.8 million children are estimated to be working in the cocoa industry in those two countries. How many of those children have the machete scars on their legs that we saw on the BBC reports? How many will be like the Aly whom Christina McKelvie spoke about?
We can all appreciate the challenges that are involved in combating child trafficking against the background of civil war and unrest that countries such as Côte d’Ivoire are experiencing but, ultimately, that cannot be an excuse. It is clear that the exploitation of children remains rife in the cocoa industry in those countries.
Although I welcome the recent statement from Nestlé that it will work with the Fair Labor Association to examine Nestlé’s practices, like Christina McKelvie I think that we should all be careful about falling into further complacency, locally or internationally. That includes complacency about the notion of the abolition of slavery, on which we can be inclined to congratulate ourselves. The reality of life in many parts of our world today suggests that slavery is still very much with us.
It is ironic that we are having this debate at a time of year when our children will be particularly enjoying chocolate, perhaps rather more than we might wish. However, we cannot ignore the children involved in its making. Each of us can go back to our homes and look at what is in the stockings and the selection boxes and consider what it took to get those products to us.
The African countries that we are talking about may seem far removed from us. While to some—although not to people here—the issues may seem an oddly distant matter to concern the Scottish people, it is a mark of our approach to engaging with the world that we continue to focus on exactly these concerns.
I add a personal note. We as consumers have individual responsibility—it is not just about the companies or countries. David McLetchie is right to acknowledge and remind us about the successes of the fair trade movement and the growth in sales of fair trade chocolate. Ultimately, that growth will hit the unethical companies where it hurts most. Sadly, our ethical arguments with them may in their eyes be far less important than their bottom line. It is important that we continue to support the fair trade movement.
Would the minister agree, however, that the growth in the sales of fair trade chocolate and indeed fair trade products generally has been due not to any fantastic idea from manufacturers but to public pressure on manufacturers from people who have said that such conditions are not good enough?
Absolutely, which is why each of us continues to have an individual responsibility. Although our own purchases may seem small, taken against the backdrop of the purchases that are made throughout the country, we have an enormous amount of power to wield to bring about change in industry.
At the heart of Scotland’s international development policy is a deeply held, deeply Scottish sense of moral responsibility for tackling global issues. The purpose that the Scottish Government has set for itself is to create a more successful country, with opportunities for all to flourish, through increasing sustainable economic growth. We would not want any less for other countries, nor for the children of those countries.
Policies on child trafficking and child poverty are the cornerstone policies that we are pursuing in Scotland. Our work on child trafficking is grounded in our commitment to work together with partners at local and United Kingdom level to eliminate a terrible crime. That commitment should have no boundaries. The Scottish values that define our policies at home define how we work globally. For those reasons, we support the work to end child trafficking and other unacceptable forms of child labour in the cocoa industry—indeed in any industry—in Ghana, in Côte d’Ivoire and in any country where such abuses take place.
13:03
Meeting suspended.
14:15
On resuming—