Following the news stories last week and speculation in the Ethical Trading community, the BBC is set to show its investigation into the ethical standards of Primark’s supply chain this Monday at 9pm. A potentially controversial trailer is available on YouTube:

The footage shows outsourced finishing in the backstreet slums of India and child labour in Tamil refugee camps usually closed to outsiders. The programme uncovers organised middlemen running off-the-record order books for a factory supplying Primark and distributing finishing work amongst slum-workers.

The documentary raises important questions about low-cost fashion and how it is produced; but we wonder whether it is just low-cost fashion retailers who are vulnerable to these practices. This depiction is reminiscent of the Gap exposé last October which revealed child labour in unknown subcontracted factories. As we commented last year, if Gap could be caught in a situation like that, after developing arguably one of the most comprehensive ethical trading programmes in the industry, any company sourcing from India could be caught out. Clearly controlling supply chains is well-nigh impossible.  We at Impactt think that it is time for another approach.  The need is to identify these informal supply chains, which after all provide some income for very poor people, to develop ways to keep adults in the supply chain, but working under better conditions and to support working children back to school, whilst maintaining the family’s income.

Primark’s response to the allegations has been to drop three suppliers for using undeclared subcontractors. Primark have a point here, since the suppliers are in breach of their agreement – however, walking away is never going to solve the problem.  This type of action will leave adults without jobs and the children caught in the media glare in an even more vulnerable position.  To be fair, Primark has announced its intention to establish the ‘Primark Better Lives Foundation’, which will provide financial assistance to organisations devoted to improving the lives of young people; whether or not this will address the needs of the children found in their subcontracted factories remains to be seen.

Like ‘Blood Sweat and T-Shirts’ the shows concerns the working conditions of Indian workers making clothes for Britain’s low cost fashion industry. These include poor health and safety, low wages, excessive overtime, discrimination, physical abuse and even child labour.

The format is expected to be similar to the BBC3 show. The programme makers use undercover footage from factories which are allegedly producing for Primark, combined with interviews with workers and former workers. In a new twist on the ‘reality sweatshop’ theme, the programme will show host Alexa Chung’s sweatshop which was set up in London’s West End staffed by 15 volunteer members of the public.

With the increasing downward pressure on prices of clothing, Primark is an easy target for criticism. In December 2006 the War on Want report ‘Fashion Victims‘ found workers making clothes for Primark working eighty-hour weeks for 5p an hour, forced overtime and potentially deadly working conditions in Bangladesh. A 2007 update with Labour behind the Label found very little improvement. Primark is the leading low-cost fashion retailer and as such has become synonymous with the argument that low cost at the point of purchase means poor wages in the factory. There is some evidence that Primark are moving to improve this image, joining the Ethical Trading Initiative in 2006 and developing a new strategy for ethical trade.

On balance we thought that the Blood Sweat and T-shirts programme, whilst including a large dose of ‘reality TV’ drama, raised some relevant issues, and dealt with them sensitively. We eagerly await the results of Channel 4′s effort.