primark have been employing child labour...

[wannaBe]

without their knowledge of course

. Maybe it's just a case of when you buy any clothes you do so in the knowledge that someone will have been exploited to make them?

Before getting all in a flutter about this, would purchasing goods at a more expensive store mean that they didn't come from sweat shops - or simply that the mark up is more. I know the answer to that one and I am sure I am not alone.

Consider this, when there was a middle-class style panic in the US over children being used as labour to make rugs in Bangladesh, the factories closed. UNICEF then reported that thousands of children (can't remember the exact number but it was something like 8,000?) suddenly without jobs, began working for the sex trade. Sold into it by their families no longer recieving their wages.

I would rather work toward regulating the children working introducing education and fairtrade ideas, and therefore not having children seen as a liability by their families, than ending up in the sex trade. We have to remember the cultural differences, these parents aren't seeing their children as we do.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1567849/'Gap-sweatshop-children'-saved-in-India-raid.html

Public outcry has forced Gap to be much more transparent in it's dealings. Let's hope that Primark will take similar action.

I remember being told in a sociology lecture the great damage that can be caused when Western morals are projected on developing countries. Apparently westerners refused to buy carpets from a country that used child labour. The effect on the economy was drastic and forced children into prostitution.

Saymyname, that would be the same report I refered to, by UNICEF.

It is a fine line and we should be careful when moralising over other cultures.

to make poor people feel bad, Starlight.

that's really the only reason i can think of.

make poor people feel bad for using cars when they don't have any other viable choice, with exploding food and fuel prices to go along, tell them that if they expect pay rises above inflation they're fuelling the fire then make them feel bad about 'cheap' clothes, too.

Yes of course. How silly of me thinking child labour was bad...

NO ONE has said it isn't, devon.

But why Primark? Why not the clothing industry in general?

I used to work in the admin dept. for a very large department store (only for the summer I hasten to add, I was lucky enough to be waiting for another job to start so I could get out of there pronto.)

I've seen the mark up, and where the items originated from.

Primark aren't the only ones.

You have a point expat, we are constantly made to feel guilty because we can't afford to make those choices. As I said though, what choice is there, you simply pay more to a shop who has a higher profit margin. So those who only buy Fairtrade etc. can actually feel smug.

And devonblue, no one says child labour isn't anything but abhorrent, you have to think of the situation though and not cause another disaster like the whole rug/carpet thing.

Didn't really mean either of you... and I'm probably just feeling a bit niggly... I'm just not sure what is meant by the comments about children working in Britain until recently, that it's a 'fine line' and other probably quite reasoned arguments. I personally think they detract from the overall shock of the fact that children are illegally working in India.

By saying 'yes, but everyone else does it' it muddies the water a little. Yes, they probably do, but the very fast turnaround and low low prices of Primark make it almost impossible not to exploit the producers, and I really wouldn't be surprised if they aren't one of the worst offenders.

In any case, they've been made an example of, which is no bad thing.

In any case, don't know if you watched the program, but no-one need feel guilty - it just recommended that consumers should question retailers closely, and the cheaper the clothes, the more questions they needed to ask about pay and conditions.

Of course child labour is bad but unfortunately it is a fact of life for many poorer countries who, if it wasnt for the retail industry would be begging or even worse prosituted. They certainly wouldnt send them to school! The people who do this handwork are often from lower castes who don't even have the right to vote nevermind demand an education for their children. Unfortunately this issue goes far deeper than where we buy our clothes from and whether they know about how their clothes are made.

And this is a surprise why? How could anyone think otherwise given the ridiculous prices?

devonblue, my point was that the whole industry needs regulated, not just focussing on the cheaper shops. And the fine line has to do with putting Western values on other cultures, wading in without thinking of the consequences.

As I said, what would the families do if they couldn't farm their child out to make money in the factories. They would find another way.

What I can't understand is this obsession with a shop like Primark selling instantly available cut price "fashions" which are out of fashion again within weeks.

When I buy clothes they have to last for years, and I mean years. Otherwise they are a waste of money IMO. I can't imagine Primark clothes lasting years, or even months, TBH.

i've had plenty of clothes from Primark that are lasting very well.

Yes to an extent Devon, I am sure generally the cheaper the clothes the worse the social and ethical standards but I have been to factories and seen French Connection along side Walmart and sometimes exactly the same product is being made at the same factory in the same way but for a very different price.

That was my point Starlight, in my visits to factories in India I have seen FCUK products being made alongside Walmart, the same item but two very different price tags. I myself sell to retailers the same product at a similar price and when we receive the swing tickets its amazing to see the totally different mark ups. Its also about brand perception, if we put a cheap primark label on a garment it looks cheap but if we put a nice fabric sew in River Island label on it, it looks like it is of a higher quality.

Well I'm always willing to be proved wrong Expat. But my impression from this programme is that Primark's main objective is to meet current fashion whims. I wouldn't have thought that was conducive to taking any care with quality.

Having said that, I have clothes from Tesco that are lasting very well, and I accept that welfare standards there probably aren't much better. Needs must, however.

Dh and I watched the news item about this. When it was announced that Primark had terminated its contract with the relevant companies, dh turned to me and said "Those children will have nothing to eat now."

Dh comes from a very poor country, not a million miles away from where those children are. There is no welfare or benefit system. There is little in the way of education for the majority. It is a hand to mouth existance for most people. Begging on the streets is probably the only alternative.

It is not a simple or straightforward situation at all. Of course child labour with bad conditions and very poor pay is wrong. But Primark would have done better, IMO, to have said " OK, we will increase the prices of our clothes, we will invest the money into schooling and better working conditions, for those families, who, after all have no other livelihood."

I don't buy clothes from Primark. But I have been to the countries where the very upmarket expensive label clothes are made, and, guess what, it is the same stuff, made by very poorly paid workers, including their children. The profit made on those fashion labels doesn't go to the people who make them.

It is not so long since we were sending children up chimneys and down the mines in this country. It takes time, investment and education to change a culture.

Did I miss something? I caught 10 or 15 mins of the programme. The children looked to be in their teens, happy, well fed, exceptionally well dressed and loads of jewellery on, sitting in their living rooms - sewing. Didn't look like slave labour to me - unless that was in another part of the programme.