On May 1st 2019, UK Parliament approved a motion to declare a climate emergency . Now, not long after, we have a response from the Government when it comes to the fashion industry’s crucial role in it. This response clarifies the Government’s position on different key recommendations from the Environmental Audit Committee, including those of which I covered in my most recent post covering the inquiry.
In line with my opinions in that post, I’m going to run through each response from the Government and explain what is actually being done to make the fashion industry more sustainable in the UK.
However, it’s important to note (not only with fashion-based climate-related issues), that in the UK, we export a huge amount of our manufacturing overseas . This means that our contribution to pollution, carbon emissions and social issues can often look like they are reduced (or are reducing) due to the fact that statistics and numbers, often refer to those contributions made solely in the UK, rather than what we contribute to elsewhere, globally.
Work in progress.
In response to evidence suggesting that garment workers based in the UK directly are not receiving the National Minimum Wage, the Government states that with increased budgets, more is being done to ensure the minimum wage is being enforced , and that it’s recommended that textile retailers sign up to the likes of the Global Framework Agreement.
The Global Framework Agreement is in place to protect the interests of workers across multinational companies, ensuring the best standards of ‘trade union rights, health, safety and environmental practices, and quality of work principles across a company’s global operations’.
No recommendations adopted.
In the response, it’s said that the Transparency in Supply Chains (TISC) provision in the Modern Slavery Act has led to thousands of businesses publishing statements in regards to how they are addressing slavery in their global supply chains.
The Government “agrees that greater transparency is essential to tackle modern slavery” and that they are “committed to improving business compliance with the Act”, however, this recommendation will not be adopted.
Recommendation rejected.
Although the Government agrees that recycling and reusing unsold stock should be prioritised, it doesn’t believe that placing a ban on incineration or landfill is the way to move forward , despite the financial and environmental impacts and the imbalanced proportion of energy produced when unsold stock is incinerated.
In my own personal opinion, I am unsure as to why this has been rejected and isn’t being explored further. The Government say they want to focus on ‘positive approaches’ yet I see nothing negative in this recommended ban.
GIF originally featured in a post about embroidery for #MAKESMTHNG Week
There is scope.
This section of the Government’s response focuses on the current curriculum and how there is already room for these topics to be approached within schools, whether it be in Key Stage 3 (age 11-14) geography that “covers how human and physical processes interact to influence and change landscapes, environments and the climate” or whether it be in the design and technology curriculum.
