sign in sign up
<<
Home , Debt bondage, Human trafficking, Involuntary servitude, Sexual slavery in China, Slavery in Australia

INTRODUCTION:

Abuse of power, injustice, and exploitation do not happen by accident. Nor do they happen in a vacuum.

When workers can organise together and support each other we are stronger. But when we are isolated, and when businesses, governments, officials or others hold unchecked power over us, we can be placed in a precarious position and can become vulnerable to exploitative practices. This is especially the case when institution, organisations or individuals find they are able to evade being held accountable for their actions.

The Modern Slavery Act would exacerbate and worsen existing systems and factors which leave individuals vulnerable to exploitative practices in Australia, and which see individuals left without accessible and adequate recourse to seek justice and fair working conditions.

There are gaps in Australia’s current legislations regarding support for victims of slavery, trafficking and exploitation. But the UK Modern Slavery Act does not address these gaps, and in many ways, threatens to make conditions worse. For example victims of trafficking or slavery do not currently have access to unconditional support. Individuals currently risk deportation when reporting crimes committed against them. Access to support and the right to stay in Australia are conditional- based on an individual’s ability to testify and provide evidence leading to a successful prosecution.

There have been successive failures to adequately protect the industrial and of all people by governments since the invasion and colonisation of Australia. Governments should take action to address injustices which continue to affect Australia today- starting with the lack of treaties with Sovereign Aboriginal and Islander Nations. From here, policy makers should look to take evidence based, rights based approaches to ensure effective outcomes both in terms of prevention of exploitative practices and support to those subject to exploitative conditions.

1. The nature and extent of modern slavery (including slavery, and exploitation, , bondage, , and other slavery-like exploitation) both in Australia and globally;

The is important in understanding factors leading to modern slavery, as well as how to address modern slavery. The history of slavery is often misunderstood or misleadingly conveyed by mainstream sources. Nation states such as Britain, as well as businesses conducted in Britain and its colonies were able to extract huge profits from slavery over hundreds of years. The economic and racial injustices upon which slavery was built and perpetuated are often overlooked in dominant narratives which focus on redemption and grace, upon moral awakenings and the casting of white slaveholders as the saviours acting to end slavery. Such narratives fuel popular ideas around slavery being caused by “evil” and requiring greater police and powers to end- and in doing so - obscure the more complex reality and the way in which government policies and unchecked powers of state officials can foster exploitative practices and induce reliance on exploitative third parties in order to avoid the greater evil: corrupt official authorities and the unmetered powers of state authorities to commit the acts they are given powers to prevent. (That is the powers to forcibly transport people without their , and the powers to extort or leave individuals in positions where they are in debt, lacking adequate resources or forced/coerced into labouring under exploitative conditions such as in prison.)

When slavery officially ended in the US Civil War, it was slave holders who were paid out after incurring “losses” associated with end of slavery; not those who were subject to slavery themselves. This same period of time is when Britain looked further afield- and acted- invading Gadigal sovereign land to establish the colony of , and later invading other sovereign nations around the continent of Australia. Former slave holders who had run their businesses in the US using slave labour looked to these new colonies as places to continue their former habits, and several made the move to colonies that would later federate to become Australia. Flush with their payouts, they established businesses in Australia, reliant on more “modern” forms of slavery: convict (prison) labour, state sanctioned “stolen ”, “black birding" indentured labour, and other exploitative practices. The existence of these “newer” systems of slavery again relied on similar methods- systems of discrimination, dehumanisation and prejudice accompanied by unequal human rights protections, with legislation and policies which allowed individuals, the state and corporations to force or coerce some people into carrying out labour in exploitative conditions, while denying such individuals mechanisms to organise and advocate systemic change. There was a lack of mechanisms for individuals to access justice or fairly negotiate with those who were denying them fair working conditions. In addition there was a lack of other options available to individuals who faced exploitative working conditions. In many ways, very little has changed since then. Governments have played a key role in enabling slavery; governments have a critical role to play in ensuring slavery is prevented and addressed. The legislative and policy approaches of governments to a wide array of issues all impact on the prevention of slavery and exploitation, as well as the support accessible to victims of slavery. Government approaches to many policy areas, including migration, labour rights and justice have also historically and currently enabled business owners and individuals to exploit the vulnerability of workers left with inadequate rights protections or recourse for justice. There are gaps that should be addressed in Australia’s current approach, to ensure better support for victims of slavery, and to ensure more effective response- in terms of rights based prevention. However, the proposed modern slavery act would not meaningfully towards these goals or address the areas needing action in any appropriate or effective way.

The role state and federal governments have played in directly legislating the slavery of people in Australia needs to be recognised, and is a gap in the current terms of reference. Furthermore, the role played by governments in facilitating the existence of slavery and the reliance of institutions, businesses and organisations on slavery and exploitative coercive labour conditions needs to be acknowledged and addressed.

Many forms of slavery and exploitation such as coercive prison labour, work for the dole and unpaid stolen wages appear to be outside the scope of the current inquiry as well as the scope of the UK Modern Slavery Act. When it comes to the extent of slavery that would be within the scope of the UK Modern Slavery Act- it is hard to make a meaningful statement. This is not an argument for greater enforcement powers or greater raid and enter powers however. To the contrary- the best course of action would to shift towards a more holistic preventative response- which enables a more transparent labour force, and enables transparent safer migration pathways. This would mean people are not forced underground, and that people are instead supported to negotiate on their own terms, without being made vulnerable by limited support and rights protections. Taking such an approach would not only be more effective in preventing slavery and supporting victims of exploitation, it would also allow a more accurate gauging of the extent and nature of exploitation- while best supporting the system to operate more transparently. Furthermore, if victims of slavery - had access to a wider range of options to address their conditions- a more nuanced understanding could be obtained as to exactly what issues are being faced and how best to remedy such situations.

2. The prevalence of modern slavery in the domestic and global supply chains of companies, businesses and organisations operating in Australia;

Without greater rights based support of victims, and without a preventative approach that enables a range of mechanisms including civil avenues where appropriate to be utilised, the prevalence of modern slavery is similarly hard to accurately ascertain in supply chains of companies, businesses and organisations operating in Australia. This is in part due to the fact that under the current system, individuals may risk deportation when trying to report an incident of exploitation- and may only have support extended to them if they are able to contribute evidence and testify in a case leading to the successful prosecution of another person on slavery or trafficking charges.

The prevalence of modern slavery can be understood more clearly in specific areas where more accurate, precise figures are recorded. These tend to be in government sanctioned practices such as the reliance on coercive exploitative labour conditions like work for the dole by companies, businesses and organisations in Australia.

In considering the prevalence of modern slavery in the supply chain of companies, businesses and organisations, the historical presence of slavery in supply chains in a range of industries, including (farm work), domestic work (Magdelene Laundries, girls homes, domestic work on farms by workers who wages were stolen) as well as religious institutions (such as Salvation Army Boys and Girls Homes) should be recognised and investigated.

Historical Slavery: Unpaid Wages need to be paid by governments in a fair manner; treaties with First Nations need to be entered into The foundation exploitative working conditions (which have created an environment that has enabled slavery to take place) with unjust policy and legal structures, which have failed many groups of people since the 1788 invasion and colonisation of Australia. It's critical to note that Australia is not one nation, but rather a continent which is made up of several hundred different nations- with distinct , languages and cultural practices between different nations.1 None of these nations have ceded sovereignty, and the lack of treaty is in contradiction with basic respectful practice, the laws and practices of these sovereign First Nations as well as British and International laws. The impacts of war, attempts at genocide and the successive assimilationist policies on labour conditions and rights need to be considered alongside the lack of other meaningful protections offered for First Nations people's since colonisation. Treaties with sovereign nations would be a meaningful first step in addressing injustices inflicted upon First Nations

1 https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/politics/constitutional-recognition-of-aboriginal-people#axzz4eI8z5CJT Communities over the last two centuries.2 With regards to preventing labour exploitation- negotiating treaties with the First Nations across Australia would be an obvious and ethical first step to demonstrate commitment to self determination and rights of First Nations peoples, and therefore towards a better future that does not repeat the horrors of past and present policy approaches.

The UK modern slavery Act does not adequately address unresolved and urgent issues relating to slavery, unpaid stolen wages and labour exploitation in Australia’s past or present. This history of state sanctioned slavery is still within living memory – not only are many individuals still fighting for lifetimes worth of unpaid appropriated wages, communities are also facing newer forms of state sanctioned exploitative conditions- which many argue amount to slavery conditions.

“Stolen Wages” Historians such as Dr Rosalind Kidd and Dr Thalia Anthony have documented the lives of Aboriginal people between 1860-1970 who were forcibly sent under government schemes to work on sheep and cattle across Australia. The conditions people were subjected to were often horrific: 16-hour days, floggings and forced removal from families. They were either unpaid or received only a few shillings of “pocket money.” In other words- they were not paid even close to adequate or fair amounts for their labour, and were subject to extraordinary controls over many aspects of their lives. At the time, individuals were assured that their wages were placed in state government trusts, but most people have not been paid at all, the few who have received some compensation have been short-changed an incredulous amount. For example, WA only offers $2,000 compensation for a life time of stolen wages. It’s clear Australia does have some serious issues to urgently address regarding slavery and fair compensation. However the Modern Slavery Act will not provide this- it instead provides an easy way for the government to further absolve itself from responsibility in these cases. 3

Convict Labour in colonial Australia It should also not be forgotten that Australia was invaded and colonised with the prime purpose of sending convicts from England-to serve sentences of forced labour for petty crimes. The conditions of convicts would also surely meet the Slavery Act- except that again it was ordered by the government of the day, so it is exempt. Similarly the ships used for transporting convicts, arranged by private companies (looking for work after the end of the trans Atlantic slave ) would likely escape charges in that they were only following government orders and fulfilling contracts of the British government at the time.

The end/continuation of slavery? The British Government paid slave owners in the US large compensation amounts when slavery was “officially” ended - for their “loss of ” (those who had been subjected to slavery were never compensated) collectively, they received 16% of Britain's entire GDP in one year.4 Research has shown many of them moved to Australia, where they were able to continue their old “lifestyles” () and find themselves in prominent positions in Australia's early colonial banks, businesses and politicians. 5

Blackbirding Convict labour became harder to source by the mid 1800s, but QLD sugar owners had been established on their preferred business model-slavery. So plantation owners set out to capture and forcibly transport people from South Pacific Islands to QLD, where they were then forced to work in conditions equal to those of slavery. Tens of thousands of South Pacific Islanders were subjected to so called “” and many died in the inhumane conditions on boats to Australia. The foundations of what is now a $2 billion/annual Sugar Cane export industry were built by these labourers, who were never paid adequate amounts, or at all. 6 As Emelda Davis, a second generation descendant of who were blackbirded, explains, after 1901 when slavery was outlawed, and South Sea Islanders were deported en masse: “the wages of 15,000 deceased Islanders were used for this deportation and the low and hard-earned wages of the Islanders were used to pay part of their fare to return to the islands that in some cases had seen their entire male population kidnapped.” Imelda Miller said on the 150th Anniversary in 2013, "I think it's been a painful past and and some painful histories involved with this story but…we’re encouraging people to talk about it and share stories so that this hidden history doesn't continue in the wider community but also within our own community."

Pearling Industry and Slavery

2 http://indigenousx.com.au/treaty-vs-recognition-the-importance-of-self-determination/ 3 http://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/2016/12/01/10-things-you-should-know-about-slavery-australia 4 https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/11/australias-secret-history-as-a-white-utopia/ 5 http://articles.latimes.com/1991-10-13/news/mn-745 1 south-sea-islanders 6 http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2013/08/17/south-sea-islanders-mark-sugar-slave-days Malay, Indonesian, Micronesian and First Nations Aboriginal people were captured and “sold” into slavery in the late 1800s in Broome, where they were forced to work in The pearling industry- also in notably brutal conditions. 7

What creates conditions for Modern Slavery to exist in 21st century Australia? Prison labour in the UK Prison labour is exempt under the UK Modern Slavery Act. It remains unexplained, and highly hypocritical for the state to be exempt from enabling and enacting powers over individuals to hold them indefinitely without fair hearing or process. For example why is it okay to hold people in indefinite mandatory detention in offshore camps for seeking asylum? Why is the state and private businesses are able to profit from exploitative labour conditions and slavery? To allow such conditions under the Modern Slavery Act does disservice to the name of the Act and to its supposed stated intentions. There shouldn't be such large loopholes for governments to hold people in slavery and enable slavery- while at the same time rendering the consent of individuals in other situations to be irrelevant to the case. In other words, its highly hypocritical to hold others to a standard the state does not even hold itself to.

Prison labour in modern Australia & the conflict of presented by prison privatisation It should also be notes that privatisation of correctional facilities creates an incentive for more inmates and longer jail time; the more who go in, the more money they can make. A 2004 NSW parliament paper said Australia has the “highest proportion of inmates in private prisons of any nation at around 17%”. Companies like and the — which runs several prisons in Australia as well as holding contractions in detention centres- stands to financially gain from the introduction of the Modern Slavery Act. As do large corporations who may be able to exploit the labour of those who are incarcerated and thus not protected by the Modern Slavery Act.

As Sisters Inside note8, prison labour in Australia is being used in coercive ways that punish those who do not take on “voluntary ” It is also pertinent to note that incarceration rates of Aboriginal people are hugely disproportionate, speaking to the extent to which First a nations people face severe discrimination, over policing and policy approaches which routinely seek to deny rights to self determination for communities.

“Although slavery has been abolished in most of the world, it is an almost universal practice that governments are free to confiscate the labour of prisoners and, with few exceptions, leave this compulsory labour unpaid or grossly underpaid. This worldwide penitentiary practice is viewed as normal and rarely attracts the interest of human rights organisations. Only the most excessive forms of forced prison labour such as American chain gangs or Chinese “reform through labour” camps attract international protest.9

The Criminal Justice Commission report on corruption risks in prison industries notes that prisons are in some cases responsible for prisoners doing labour to private sector e.g. incarcerated people finding their labour being used in joint enterprises including picking of produce or cleaning up commercial farms.”10

As Sisters Inside note in their report:

“The weekly maximum that prisoners may earn is $57.54. The rate is paid to prisoners on remand because these prisoners are not able to work. Theoretically they are not ‘compelled’ to work but can work if they choose and if there is a position available. However, there are never any positions available. The unemployment rate is also paid to those who are medically unfit to work or for whom no is available. Incentive bonuses are payable only in commercial activities and not to service workers. The incentive bonus is payable on achievement of deadlines, additional productivity and conscientious attitude. They are paid at the discretion of the General Manager. Men receive bonuses of 100%, women receive only 60%. It would appear that gender inequity and discrimination resides comfortably in Queensland prisons.

Further incentives to prison labour are found in the early release scheme. Prisoners may access early release if they have been of "good conduct and industry". One of the factors considered in deciding if a prisoner has been of "good conduct and industry" is whether the prisoner has participated in approved activities or programs to the best of the prisoner’s ability.

With the carrots come the sticks. Convicted prisoners who refuse to work or who are dismissed from a position are not

7 http://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/2016/12/01/10-things-you-should-know-about-slavery-australia 8 http://www.sistersinside.com.au/media/prisonlabour.pdf 9 Angela Davis reported at the Women in Prison Conference in in November 2001 that American working prisoners are paid market wages; cited in http://www.sistersinside.com.au/media/prisonlabour.pdf 10 Criminal Justice Commission Queensland Prison Industries: A Review of Corruption Risks Brisbane, August 2000 entitled to the unemployment rate of $6.30/wk. Early release opportunities are damaged by refusal to work and within the prison is affected. Convicted women prisoners who refuse to work are transferred from residential to secure units. Convicted women prisoners who refuse to work have their weekly "buy-up" (toiletries, coffee, cigarettes) limited to $20 which would buy about one packet of rolling .”11

Of further note: The NT Branch of the Union, United Voice, has labelled a program where prisoners to work at a central Australian salt mine “akin to slave labour.”12

Prison labour: the pathway for legally paying 6% of the to labourers in UK As the UK Modern Slavery Act was introduced, plans were announced for 9 new prisons to be built in the UK- with a focus on workshops- enabling businesses to employee incarcerated individuals and legally pay just 6% of the normal minimum wage. It should also be noted that in the UK, prison labour has increasingly been coercively extracted from those who are incarcerated- to the detriment of working conditions and rights of all citizens. In one recent UK case, call centre staff were fired, and then replaced by those held in prison who could be legally paid just 40p per hour- that is- 6% the normal legal minimum wage. 13 With barely any time passing since the was introduced in the UK, the government announced plans to build 9 new prisons14. These new prisons have a specific new focus on ‘rehabilitation’ - which in reality appears to mean designing spaces for workshops and businesses. “At the centre of the design for the new prison in North Wales are two workshops allowing 800 prisoners to be employed by companies exploiting their labour.”15

Also worth noting is the 2015 decision by the British government is to introduce new plans forcing prisoners to manufacture equipment for the Army.16 While there were claims made this is in order to teach inmates “the value of hard work” and save the government money “during times of austerity” the reality is prisoners will be forced to make training tools for soldiers, including sandbags, fence posts and other non-lethal equipment. In the , the government has awarded contracts to the Federal Prison Industries company – worth nearly $20 million – to build body armour for US soldiers.17 Many have spoken out about these practices- highlighting that they are a return to the workhouses of Victorian era England, and that they are not about justice or providing meaningful training- but about propelling the nation’s unsustainable and unethical investments in warfare- rather than addressing core issues such as housing and unemployment. 18

The private prison industry in the US has enabled private prison companies to make large profits- and they have in turn, often ‘invested’ these profits in lobbying state legislators to make sure they get states to approve laws which enable further crackdowns or increase sentencing numbers and sentence periods to ensure further “growth” can be achieved.192021 Again, the prison industry- especially when run by private companies for profit- is not about rehabilitating prisoners, reducing crime or improving “services”.22 It is about keeping jails full. Keeping a steady flow of prisoners is essential to the profits of multi-national companies like - who aim to profit from private prison system in the US, as well as existing privatised outsourced security and prison contracts in Australia (such as off-shore detention centres) 24 While they may have historically turned profits from these unethical ventures, public tide is showing signs of turning, and a number of factors demonstrate considerable threat to future sustainability of profit in this “sector”25

Australia should not move towards enabling the further privatisation of any detention centres, whether of prisoners, or migrants- as it will be to the detriment of the human rights of all, and will allow profit of multinational corporations to be placed before the of our society - especially those who are already vulnerable to injustices in our current society.

The human rights of all citizens should be protected, and nobody should be subjected to slavery- regardless of who sees it

11 http://www.sistersinside.com.au/media/prisonlabour.pdf 12 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-12/union-says-prisoners-working-at-nt-salt-mine-27like-slave-labo/4952642 13 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/aug/08/prisoners-call-centre-fired-staff 14 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-34763339 15 http://incarceratedworkers.noflag.org.uk/prison-expansion/ 16 https://www.rt.com/uk/228607-moj-prisons-army-gear/ 17 https://www.rt.com/uk/228607-moj-prisons-army-gear/ 18 https://www.rt.com/uk/228607-moj-prisons-army-gear/ 19 http://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/locked-profits-u-s-prison-industry-numbers-n455976 20 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-yankovich/be-careful-private-prison b 8144860.html 21 http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-prison-industry-in-the-united-states-big-business-or-a-new-form-of-slavery/8289 22 us prison system slave labour

24 https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/private-prison-industry-spreads-its-tentacles 25 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/09/tide-turning-against-privatisation happen. Prison labour, or labour undertaken by those held in detention by the state should be considered under the scope and protections of Slavery Laws. Protection should be offered to ensure those who don't work are not punished for doing so, and to ensure that no one is coerced into working in conditions or that they do not consent to. The injustices of paying people $7.50 for six hours work should be recognised for what they are, not excused and exempt from prosecution and accountability because some individuals are seen as unworthy of their human rights, or because some institutions are exempt from being held accountable to the same laws and measures as the rest of society.

Australia is a signature to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention “Abolition of ”

Article 1 of this ILO convention states that: ‘Each Member of the International Labour Organisation which ratifies this Convention undertakes to suppress and not to make use of any form of forced or compulsory labour.’ The article specifically refers to using forced labour as a means of political coercion, education or punishment; as a labour force for the purposes of economic development; as a means of labour discipline and as a means of racial, social, national or religious discrimination.

Beate Andrews, as Head of the Special Action Program to Combat Forced Labour at ILO, has made clear that forced labour relates not only to bonded labour or circumstances by which people may have been victims of human trafficking and held in contemporary forms of slavery; it also applies to state imposed labour. This describes the conditions endured by detainees of English prisons and some existing Australian prisons- where individuals are forced to labour for both the economic development of the state and for the purposes of reform and political education.

“All able bodied prisoners are expected to perform [6 hours] work per week day. In return for this they receive ‘earnings’ of around [$7.50] per day. This activity is a major part of their time in prison. It is also profoundly important in giving the capacity to obtain minor of luxuries and accrue the most basic level of savings while incarcerated. Within Corrections Victoria, however, the Commercial Prison Industries are a minor part of the Department’s operations.

“Most of the ‘jobs’, however, are very limited. In reality they are neither ‘work’ nor undertaken in ‘commercially’ viable settings. They are performed in a highly constrained and resource limited environments. As noted earlier their prime feature is that they are a distraction from idleness and are best understood as providing a systematic way of ‘burning time’.”26

Work for the Dole Exploitation of First Nations people’s labour is still ongoing in 2017, due to continued colonisation, lack of treaties & lack of recognition of sovereignty, widespread discrimination, undermining of rights including to housing and land, and of self determination through legislative and policy approaches.27 “Today, there are some Indigenous people in Australia who are required to work a minimum 46 weeks a year for the Government with no leave entitlements and no superannuation, and are paid a significant portion of their wages on a card that can only be spent in certain stores and on certain wages.”28

One man told the Guardian his story – where a job network agency ordered him to be at a work for the dole site, 35km from where he lives, at 7.30am every day. Feehan said he was told that if he didn’t get there, he would lose his dole. “I’ve got to leave at midnight to get there at 7.30am. And then I finish at 12.30pm, and I don’t get back home until 7.30pm that night. Then I’ve got to eat dinner and go to bed and wake up at midnight to go there the next day.”29

3. Identifying international best practice employed by governments, companies, businesses and organisations to prevent modern slavery in domestic and global supply chains, with a view to strengthening Australian legislation;

Best practice is informed by those it is meant to benefit, or protect the rights of. Throughout history, those responsible for the largest human rights violations, and of the largest scale cases of trafficking or slavery have been governments and/or large corporations. To look towards the UK- a state founded on wealth extracted and stolen from colonies it established and maintained via the use of slave labour is a perplexing to say the least.

Best practice approaches involve clear understandings of what labour exploitation is, and how it is best prevented and combatted.

Too often, anti-slavery approaches have actually impeded upon the rights of migrant workers, and increase the vulnerability of some individuals to trafficking or slavery like conditions. An effective approach needs to be rights based,

26 https://assets.justice.vic.gov.au/corrections/resources/4bb7ce50-502f-4959-9f56-85eed2791055/from_labour_to_work.pdf 27 http://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/2016/12/01/10-things-you-should-know-about-slavery-australia 28 http://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/2016/12/01/10-things-you-should-know-about-slavery-australia 29 https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/mar/24/walk-for-the-dole-indigenous-man-says-payment-hinges-on-35km-daily-trek and support individuals to negotiate their work conditions without abusive or exploitative employers being able to use anything against prospective employees (for example visas)

As Maynard, writing about the Canadian context, warns, “Even if well meaning, the oversimplification of rights obscures government complicity in the specific historical and contemporary political realities that have enabled such abuse in the first place. The term “trafficking” itself distracts from distinct, though sometimes overlapping, processes of systemic marginalization, institutional , lack of protection, and labour exploitation—in short, disenfranchisement. While Canada’s Conservative government appeared to be combating trafficking, it was, in fact, largely responsible for creating so-called trafficking victims by advancing a political agenda that was hostile to migrants, sex workers, and Indigenous peoples.”30

Australia’s response must be evidence based and rights based- and support the rights of all workers.

Note: As a sex worker in Australia, I will mostly comment about the best practice approaches to support the prevention of slavery and exploitation in the industry I work in. I have worked as a street based sex worker, in peep shows, as a stripper (sub-contractor), as a private independent worker and in as a sex worker in various states and territories of Australia. I have also worked for short periods in New Zealand and Sweden.

Sex workers have often been subjected to disproportionate levels of surveillance, and disproportionately frequent raids by immigration officials- seemingly based on stereotypes and rumours propagated by media and rescue organisations, rather than being backed up by any solid facts or evidence. This kind of approach has not revealed trafficking to be a widespread phenomenon in the . In cases where trafficking or exploitation has taken place- there is a need for individuals to have a range of options to remedy their situation and to seek support. This support should not be contingent on an individual testifying and providing evidence towards a successful prosecution of someone else for trafficking or an associated crime. Individuals should be able to seek and access support without fear of being deported, without fear that they will be penalised, and they should have their rights upheld from the beginning- so that they are not left vulnerable to businesses or practices which exploit gaps where they do not have full human rights protections.

“Conditions for trafficking are created by Australia’s discriminatory immigration policies, which favour specific ‘skilled’ migration from industrialised countries, disadvantage workers from low-income countries, and create a lack of opportunities for sex workers to migrate legally; by Australia’s refusal to afford migrant sex workers equitable access to industrial rights mechanisms, refusal to provide victim support that is not conditional on police assistance, and a lack of avenues to access statutory compensation. Australia is behind international standards in providing human rights for migrant workers. Government should immediately ratify the Migrant Workers Convention and adopt the provisions into domestic law.”

Criminalising any aspect of , including via the Nordic Model, would undermine anti trafficking and anti slavery responses, and violate human rights.

Introducing further special criminal sanctions targeting any part of sex workers lives and work (including the Swedish or Nordic Model) should not be considered in terms of this inquiry, or any inquiry which seeks to support human rights and combat slavery.

Forcing anyone to do something against their consent is already a crime. Legislation already exists criminalising , , violence and other non-consenting acts. Sex workers who experience crimes such as exploitation, abuse, violence, assault or rape should have access to broader existing laws. This was discussed in the UK in developing the act, and ultimately the evidence supported no further criminalisation being enacted, and that criminalising any aspect of sex workers’ work leads to harm and leaves sex workers more vulnerable to stigma, discrimination and ill-treatment.

UK Reverend Andrew Dotchin, a founding member of the Safety First Coalition explained “I strongly oppose clauses on in the Modern Slavery Bill, which would make the purchase of sex illegal. Criminalising clients does not stop prostitution, nor does it stop the criminalisation of women. It drives prostitution further underground, making it more dangerous and stigmatising for women.” The amendment was subsequently dropped.

Decriminalisation of sex work, along with safer migration pathways and resourced peer organisations are all key to preventing exploitative conditions and slavery, ensuring support to victims of slavery, and upholding human rights.

Niki Adams, from the English Collective of Prostitutes explained the importance of policies being informed and driven

30 http://journals.msvu.ca/index.php/atlantis/article/viewFile/3041/pdf_38 by sex workers, to ensure best practice and protection: “Without taking sex workers’ experience into account there can be no protection, only repression. The raids on Soho flats last year, done in the name of freeing victims of trafficking, are one example. Two hundred and fifty police broke down doors and dragged handcuffed immigrant women in their underwear onto the streets. Women describe daily , and threats: “The police wait outside my house to catch me when I leave … they jeer at me, and make sexually explicit jokes. I’m strip-searched and they sometimes leave the door open so the male officers can see in.” Is it feminist to ignore the views and experiences of the women most affected by any legislation you propose?”31

4. The implications for Australia’s visa regime, and conformity with the Palermo Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children regarding federal compensation for victims of modern slavery;

The Palermo Protocol,: recognises that all people can be trafficked, not just women and children. Any effective trafficking prevention should allow individuals needs to be met, rather than prescribing a narrow or weighted focus that may result in exclusion of other individuals facing exploitation from protections and compensation.

Likewise it's important to note that the Palermo Protocol recognises trafficking can occur into all labour sectors. On this note- it's also relevant to consider the evidence which demonstrates how a disproportionate focus on raiding and surveilling the sex industry- in particular migrant Asian sex workers, has been detrimental in several regards.

As the Migration Project explain, “Sex workers are most likely to turn to friends for information and support. Research and anecdotal evidence supports this fact. demonstrates the value of peer support and information sharingIn an environment where police and immigration regularly raid our workplaces and harass us - allegedly to “rescue” us from supposed acts of “trafficking”; and many states and territories in Australia still criminalise sex work- it is no surprise that migrant sex workers do not trust anyone who is not a sex worker when accessing support. “ 32

Secondly, industries facing higher levels of exploitative conditions have been overlooked. (Such as agriculture)

Lastly, the protocol represented shift away from framing of criminals who illegally cross borders or other laws- and instead took view of victims of trafficking. Unfortunately, both of these framings still place an unjust level of focus or on the individual experiencing trafficking, instead of the government for creating the conditions and social categories which allow for exploitation to happen.

As Maynard argues, “Their vulnerability and designation as “at-risk” seem to exist in a vacuum, as if these groups place themselves at-risk, rather than being systemically disenfranchised and made vulnerable to state and economic violence and abuse. Additionally, this victimizing discourse is infantilizing, in that it equates racialized, Indigenous, and sex working women with children, negating their resourcefulness and resilience and their ability to negotiate complex situations.”33

However it is still an important principle that must be considered in the scope of this inquiry- that people should not be labelled as criminals for crossing borders. Unfortunately, again, the UK Modern Slavery Act fails to include sufficient protections for trafficking victims- and as such- it appears that trafficking victims would risk being charged or seen as criminals in far too many situations- and in doing so, the Act further undermines trafficking victims ability to report such situations to authorities. When there is any kind of justified fear of deportation linked with reporting exploitative working conditions- it is not an effective anti slavery or trafficking policy. This policy fails on this count- and thus will be bound to fail many victims of slavery.

5. Provisions in the United Kingdom’s legislation which have proven effective in addressing modern slavery, and whether similar or improved measures should be introduced in Australia;

The Modern Slavery Act fails to provide sufficient support for victims of trafficking and slavery The Modern Slavery Act has been widely criticised for its failure to focus on meeting the needs of victims of trafficking and slavery.34 Instead it focuses on to the detriment of victim support. It was described as ”very poor on victim protection” by Parosha Chandran, a human rights barrister and expert on trafficking.

Liberty UK notes that Modern slavery victims have also been hit hard by civil legal aid cuts, meaning even limited help in immigration and employment matters is unavailable. Discriminatory means tests for non-residences means that many

31 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/06/sex-workers-decriminalisation-amendment-modern-slavery-bill 32 http://www.crossbordersydney.org/#poster6 33 http://journals.msvu.ca/index.php/atlantis/article/viewFile/3041/pdf 38 34 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/government-s-modern-slavery-bill-will-fail-victims-and-spare-criminals-9005211.html of those who require legal assistance most may lack access to legal aid in the UK. 35This presents concerns when considering the unstable resourcing and funding environment in Australia around community legal support. It’s important to stress that a holistic, preventative approach would not only see more effective results, it would also be much more cost effective as less money would be required for enforcement and prosecutions- while cases would be prevented or able to be remedied through civil means.

A Holistic Approach is needed to prevent modern slavery The best way to prevent the creating of markets which allow trafficking and exploitative practices to occur is to take a holistic approach to policy and laws – focusing on equitable access for all to civil mechanisms to redress exploitative conditions as well as resourced community support organisations, social support structures. This must include an overhaul to migration policy in Australia- to address the current unjust discriminatory policies and practices, as well as reform regarding visa options and access. Visas shouldn’t be able to be used as a tool to blackmail or exploit workers. Visas should not force migrants to be reliant on employers to stay in the country, and all workers- whether migrant or non - migrant need to have equitable access to safe working conditions as well as mechanisms for seeking recourse if this is not the case. When people are able to access support and are aware of their rights and how to exercise their rights, exploitative conditions are able to be identified and addressed (to a much greater extent) by workers themselves due to the transparency of the system. This is a much more effective approach that supports safer and just working conditions for all, and means that slavery and exploitative conditions can be prevented in the first place.

The UK modern slavery act does not fill any legislative gaps in Australia's anti trafficking approach. It does not work to improve the rights of migrant workers or the labour protections of workers in Australia generally. Introducing the UK modern slavery act would increase the powers for state authorities to act with greater impunity in making arbitrary discretionary rulings - especially over those lacking equitable access to challenging their rulings – namely migrants and other marginalised community members,

A Modern Slavery Act should be about effective prevention of slavery! And it should ensure those who face slavery or exploitation are able to access support and justice, as well as compensation when relevant. Justice should not be contingent on providing evidence for successful prosecutions, and visas should not be dangled around as a potential threat or punishment depending on how “useful” Australia deems an individual to its own purposes of prosecutions or vindication of policy approaches. Human rights means that each human should be afforded rights based on the fact we are all human, not on the whim of discretionary decisions made by authorities or any body.

6. Whether a Modern Slavery Act should be introduced in Australia; and No, it would be a waste of time and resources and a monumental cause for concern if this act was introduced. It offers no new meaningful protections for victims of slavery, nor does it provide measures that would contribute to effective prevention of conditions that create slavery.

It does however, create ways for large companies to outsource their responsibilities onto consumers- by shifting the focus towards self assessments and reports by companies.

Slavery and trafficking are serious crimes, and should be treated as such. Australia should take its role seriously in this matter, and commit to evidence based approaches which see laws and policies that support and uphold rights and access to justice mechanisms and safer migration pathways.

Slavery is not something that can or will be addressed by and writing a glossy report on their website.

Responses must take into account the various factors that must be addressed in combatting exploitative conditions and slavery. Such approaches are built on the understanding that one size does not fit all, that the situations and needs of individuals in different situations can vary. For these reasons, policy and law approaches are able to have the best outcomes when diverse experiences and expertise are considered at all stages of policy development.

It's critical that policy makers also consider how to build systems of equity into policy making processes as well as the policy itself. That is-when it comes to seeking redress, support and compensation for persons subject to exploitative conditions- what structural differences exist or impact on individuals access to these avenues? Understanding how systemic issues such as discriminatory migration pathways or lack of multilingual resources and peer support workers can result in inequitable outcomes forms an important step in the process of developing a best practice anti slavery policy. The understanding of structural issues, the impacts they have, and how they are best address would need to come from a diverse range of communities – and of course the lived experiences of individuals would form the necessary basis of this section of policy development. Specific communities who face inequitable access to labour rights protections and

35 https://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/news/blog/modern-slavery-bill-must-go-further preventative measures under current legislations would be of highest priority in terms of seeking measures accountable to each relevant community to ensure rights protections be introduced Policing, surveillance and draconian immigration controls should be understood as what they really are –a frequent hindrance to identifying exploitative practices and a contributing source of many exploitative practices.

The Modern Slavery Act includes broad exclusions which undermine its alleged purpose Under section 1:36 “1)No one shall be held in slavery or servitude. 2)No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour.” But as soon as this is established, it is contradicted: 37

3)For the purpose of this Article the term “forced or compulsory labour” shall not include: a)any work required to be done in the ordinary course of detention imposed according to the provisions of Article 5 of this Convention or during conditional release from such detention; b)any service of a military character or, in case of conscientious objectors in countries where they are recognised, service exacted instead of compulsory military service; c)any service exacted in case of an emergency or calamity threatening the life or well-being of the community; d)any work or service which forms part of normal civic obligations.38

Thus, a vast majority of the known forced or compulsory labour cases are automatically excluded from protection- for example- exploitative prison labour.

As MIlivojevic and Pickering write, “...’as long as the border regime and the of the nation state drive responses to trafficking, efforts to address trafficking in persons will continue to have limited, if any, impact in working towards the eradication of all forms of cross-border exploitation’ A new regulatory dawn requires an understanding of the complexities of global migrations and gender relations, abandoning the harmful aspects of the global anti-trafficking framework and shifting the intervention towards enabling transnational mobility and labour options for both women and men on the other side of the border.”39

7. Any other related matters.

If Australia wants to truely challenge slavery it needs to take the side of workers and workers rights, not large corporate interests.

An inquiry into should investigate areas which would actually contribute to a holistic, effective preventative approach to combatting slavery: -ensuring access to safer migration pathways- without discriminatory clauses. -ensuring documents and information relating to a range of topics are accessible in a range of languages on a range of relevant topics, not limited to workplace rights and responsibilities, health and migration. -legislate to protect the rights of workers; including support of unionisation that includes migrant workers as well as peer support. -implement rights based, evidence based approaches to prevent slavery and labour exploitation, informed by the needs and experiences of workers and peer run organisations -Enabling environments for workers rights, that ensure a transparent labour market, where migrant workers are not limited from accessing their rights or justice. -ratify the migrant workers convention -end policies which directly contradict human rights conventions Australia is a signatory to (ie end work for the dole, cease the detention of refugees and asylum seekers, cease the privatisation of prisons) -ensure avenues are not made available for either the state or private companies to profit from their labour while denying individuals labour rights. Nor should individuals be punished for not working while being incarcerated.

The best way to effectively ensure slavery is prevented and combatted is to empower workers - by ensuring no one is left behind when it comes to comprehensive industrial rights and labour protections. These rights and protections must extend to all workers- including migrant workers- as wherever there is inadequate protection of rights, people will be left vulnerable to conditions where they may be subject to slavery and left without sufficient recourse to justice and support.

Ensuring a rights based approach would mean that workers and consumers alike could be most confident that businesses are engaging in best practice approaches to prevent labour exploitation and slavery in their business and in their supply chains.

36 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/30/section/3 37 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/30/section/3 38 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/30/section/3 39 Sanja Milibojevic and Sharon Pickering, “Discourse and the Rise of the ‘Global Trafficking Complex’” (2013- 2014) 25 Current Issues Crim. Just 585 at 598. The Modern Slavery Act works to undermine people’s rights, and in doing so, increases vulnerabilities to exploitative practices and slavery. One way it does this is by legislating greater powers of immigration and state authorities to make decisions regarding individuals lives, including when and where they travel, and who they associate with. There is little to no legislating of transparent and fair trial or justice processes to accompany the increased sweeping powers to state officials- including powers to seize valuable goods and belongings via arbitrary decisions- with little recourse for fair appeals. The terms under which decisions can be made are alarmingly vague and leave huge room for interpretation. This opens the door to and corruption. Instead of building mechanisms of natural justice and accountability into the structure, the Modern Slavery Act provides the complete scaffolding around positions perfectly poised to enable a culture of corruption to operate and dominate -including arbitrary non-transparent decision making informed by conflicts of interest.

The Modern Slavery Act asks very large companies to self report their own findings to customers when it comes to preventing slavery in their business, and in their supply chains. There is no agreed upon indicators, no requirements when it comes to minimum standards, no guise of standardised basic best practices that should be met. Besides that the report should be produced by large businesses over a certain size, and that the report be in English and displayed on a prominent part of their website. The Modern Slavery Act is essentially encouraging a facade. It is pushing companies to fuel an already emerging ‘trend’ of ‘awareness raising’ as if it is a meaningful way to combat slavery and labour exploitation. It is building upon the unproven and dangerous idea that the market can meaningfully address issues of labour exploitation. Businesses cannot be held accountable when it is only businesses themselves holding themselves to account. This is especially the case when workers are not supported, when workers are denied equal grounding and when workers face compromised conditions. Combatting slavery should never be about ‘empowering consumers’ - it must be about empowering humans, all people, with basic rights. When all workers have their rights as workers protected and upheld, when workers can self organise and represent, then it follows that consumers or customers can feel more ‘empowered’ or satisfied that they are consuming products and services not reliant on exploitative practices and slavery. But as long as anyone in our society is denied any aspect of their human rights, as long as any injustice is not addressed- then we can not be satisfied that our government, and all of us, are complicit in the exploitation and abuse of others.