Theresa May, anti-slavery crusader? Her craven quest for trade deals suggests not | Aidan McQuade

Theresa May has used the 2017 UN general assembly to renew her campaign against slavery, and marked this with the publication of a call to action that has so far been endorsed by 37 nations.

While focusing principally on the criminal justice response, May’s plan to end forced labour, modern slavery and human trafficking contains some important new departures for the UK government. It recognises the need for governments to act proactively, in partnership with business, to exclude slavery and forced labour from national economies and promote decent work. It acknowledges the importance of better protection for groups that suffer discrimination and migrants. And it underlines the value of proper engagement in the struggle by humanitarian and development workers.

These elements echo the charter published by Anti-Slavery International in July and endorsed by leading civil society and trade union campaigners, including the UN special rapporteur on slavery, Urmila Bhoola.

It is a considerable achievement for the UK to have obtained so many endorsements. For many governments the issues raised are contentious. For example, one signatory, Qatar, persists with kafala, a system of tied visas that effectively empowers unscrupulous employers to enslave tens of thousands of migrant south Asian construction and domestic workers, most notoriously perhaps those involved in the needlessly bloody preparations for the 2022 World Cup.

The UK’s own overseas domestic worker visa similarly endangers migrants to Britain, yet May has remained obdurate in the face of proposals for reform, not least the recommendations of an independent review established by her department when she was home secretary.

It seems a lacuna in May’s thinking that her own policies could create the risks of enslavement to which many fall victim. It is doubly unfortunate because the risks are not limited to domestic workers.

In spite of May’s exhortation to identify and protect trafficking victims, introducing the offence of illegal working in the 2016 Immigration Act renders them more vulnerable to prosecution and deportation. The pending lunacy of Brexit, and May’s bizarre insistence on not being subject to the jurisdiction of the European court of justice, poses a threat to security and law enforcement cooperation across Europe, including anti-trafficking policing. And May’s antipathy to the European court of human rights, one of the towering British achievements of the post-second world war period, sends a deeply unhelpful message to countries that have subjected themselves to the scrutiny of international courts and have had to strengthen their anti-slavery efforts as a result.

May’s favoured approach to modern slavery is rescue by means of law enforcement. This is important component, but we cannot prosecute our way out of an issue so deeply embedded in so much of the international political economy. There is an urgent need to empower those vulnerable to slavery and focus on protecting the most basic human rights.

Overseas workers in the UK, Qatar and Saudi Arabia must be protected from physical or sexual assault, and be able to leave their jobs, without risk of homelessness and destitution. Construction workers in Qatar and the rest of the Middle East must have the right to form democratic unions to obtain and keep decent work. Children, particularly girls, must have access to appropriate, high-quality education that empowers them and diminishes the risk of enslavement. Dalits in Asia must have the full protections of rule of law.

From brick kilns to garment factories, no industry should turn a blind eye to the slavery and exploitation that have become endemic. Forced marriage must be repudiated as a fundamental assault on the most basic rights of women and girls and the bedrock of the misogynistic depredations of the likes of Saudi Arabia, Islamic State and Boko Haram.

Leadership in this struggle demands that the fundamental causes of slavery are confronted. Many touch profoundly upon the way nations choose to organise their societies. Some countries seem to have built their competitive economic advantage on the enslavement of migrant workers or despised groups within their own citizenry.

The UK’s call to action could be an important beginning in the struggle against slavery. But it could also be a false dawn, because it is difficult to see how the UK can continue to provide leadership in the struggle against slavery when, rather than challenge other nations on fundamental anti-slavery reform, Brexit renders Britain an abject supplicant in a craven search for trade deals with some of the worst offenders.