Ethics girl was a little dismayed to have rushed home to watch The Devil Wears Primark on Channel 4 last night, only to find the show had been pulled.
Channel 4 say the decision was taken at the last moment, because the show wasn't quite ready. When pressed over whether the complications were due to having named and shamed uber-retailer Primark in the title of a show about sweatshops and fast fashion, 4 admitted it is a "complicated show".
The show is fronted by Alexa Chung and promises to lift the lid on who really suffers in the making of your £2 t-shirts. A bit slow off the mark, perhaps, given the BBC screened their own version, Blood, Sweat and T-Shirts (watch it here on i-Player) back in April.
Nonetheless, these issues don't seem to get through to the consumer until they've been hammered into them a few times, so I welcome the new show, though there is no broadcast date for it as yet. In 2005, Ethical Consumer magazine rated Primark the least ethical clothes shop, something which rather irked the store, though it still managed to post massive profit hikes earlier this year.
Lots of consumers simply don't know where and how their favourite things have been produced, but telling them does have an impact - Naomi Klein's excoriation of Nike's grotesque supply chain antics in her 2000 book No Logo had a massive impact on the company's ethical behaviour (NB: Nike is still a long, long way from cleaning up properly though - beware - Neil Boorman's psychological wrangles with Nike products makes fun reading).
As usual the issue is more complex (no yawns please!) than just boycotting products or buying less. Cheap high street clothes are stitched by people in developing countries with few other employment prospects. Suddenly removing their jobs is not the answer: enforcing strict regulations on working conditions is.
Where does that leave you? Credit crunch style does entail spending less on clothes and accessories. Winning out sartorially though, does not mean reverting to spending less on a dress than you do on lunch. It means mending, recycling and going for mid-range pieces with a bit more staying power than three delicate cycles in your washer. The Independent's fashion experts have come up with some great econo-chic options, too.
So keep one eye on the schedule for The Devil Wears Primark, should it ever air, and the other on the ethics of whichever store you're buying your summer wardrobe from this year.
Also, go for durability. And charity shops!
Posted by: Mark D | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 03:43 PM
I go on holiday to Thailand and have visited various ''tailors'' and they are not all sweat shops. They work because if they have no work they STARVE..We do purchase from them to help them live. We pay a small amount but £5.00 e.g. is a fortune to them, turn the money to their currency not ours.. put ourselves in their shoes then try to live on their money..But do not with draw their income.
Posted by: Janet Pearce | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 04:11 PM
I personally think its a load of crap anyway.
It may appear that people who work and make the clothes for Primark work in bad conditions, this is down to the fact that the people who watch it and make it are comparing the standards to that of the western world!!
You cannot compare the working conditions of India to England..
Posted by: Kit | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 04:37 PM
Kit, I'd just like to say that you show the typical 'I'll make excuses because I can't face the truth' refusing to accept the truth Western World view. Yeah, fine you can't compare the working conditions and yes you can say they're used to them, but at the end of the day, THEY ARE PEOPLE. They get diseases just like us, they starve like anyone would and they work harder than me or you and yet the point is these people get nothing for it. You should feel ashamed; if you got dragged between cramped, gloomy streets with everything from poo to dead dogs on the floor then entered a tiny room - with, again, rubbish on the floor and the roof falling off, with the smell of rotten sewage lingering and told you had to work there for the rest of your life, what would you say? Not only that, but told you get paid the equivalent of about 10p per item you sew, and expected to make at least 8 pairs of jeans a day or be sacked, I bet you would refuse. If the workers in these conditions refuse they starve. No-one can help them. Why? Because this is the case for the majority of people working to make our 'bargains', simply surviving on a basic wage from day to day with no prospects of anything better or being able to better themselves. This is the reality, and the saddest part is that people like you refuse to believe it. Don't believe me? Watch the BBCs 'Blood Sweat & T-Shirts' and find out the truth.
Posted by: Looby | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 05:21 PM
I would like to say that I do object to the likes of Nike using sweat shops considering the high price they charge their customers. However, for me Primark are different. The hard working families in Britain who are struggling to pay their mortgage and other bills are able to dress their kids and themselves at a reasonable cost. If Primark are showing high profits it’s certainly not because they are selling high quality clothing but because the majority of Britons are worse off now than they have ever been.
Posted by: ep | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 05:47 PM
i work in primark and got a huge book on how they sell their clothes so cheap etc, they DO NOT exploit their workers in anyway, so at least research into things before you believe everything the media (and people like ALEXA CHUNG) say, because as you should be well aware by now it's nearly always wrong.
primark clothes are made in exactly the same place that new look, monsoon etc are made but they are only focusing on primark because of the quality in which primark is and how much they sell their items for, because primark sell them for the price they are bought, whereas other companies sell their products in exactly the same conditions for nearly three times as more.
and to be honest, some people just cannot afford to shop in these other places because of the ridiculous prices.
only 5% of primarks clothes are made by so called "sweat shops" and half the people who work there CHOOSE to, because they know it is the best deal they are going to get.
and looby, you should feel ashamed as you clearly know nothing about the fact and choose to base your "knowledge on another programme.
Posted by: bex | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 05:51 PM
It's so easy to sit in the western world and justify the life of others in far away places. If some had a better grasp of economic history they would understand many of the worlds sweatshops were former colonies and are still trying to break out of the disastrous circumstances they were left in when finally liberated, and throw in a couple of Western backed coups when these newly independent governments wanted no outside interference . Western globalization ties there hands and makes non-private reform virtually impossible. Indeed private reform rarely comes in the shape of home grown industry. It's the Nike's and the Primark's who offer investment and are ever furthering their grip on poorer nations domestic labour. This is nothing new. Here in the West we live a cushy lifestyle thanks to stepping and having stepped on the backs of others for centuries. And for those who moan 'well at least they have jobs' - try to further understand why the scope is so limited. No doubt people working in sweatshops would not want to work for 10p, the fact is they have little choice because all the terms and conditions that come from the richer part of the world refuse basic civil rights....such as trade unions for example allowing people to argue for a better wage. If sweatshop labour cost more it would mean miss teen 18 would have to pay more on our highstreets, thus loosing business for the big businesses in question.
Posted by: s patterson | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 06:02 PM
@Kit and Janet Pierce...
You two knocked the nail on he head right there. I agree totally with the conversion to their currency and the fact that we cannot compare to the modern western world.
These people work to survive and who's fault is that? Their governments fault. Their infrastructure cannot support them and it is the fault of the governments (who by chance live in big houses and drive nice cars).
I say let these people work for a living and look after themselves. I expect most would tell you they have some sense of pride for being able to provide for their families.
Posted by: Chris Owen | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 06:05 PM
however Primark et al get are able to sell their clothes so cheaply "if something sounds too good to be true - it probably is" and the prices charged sound too good to be true its all legal but is it moral?
Should be buy or not to help the workers
Posted by: Margaret Horricks | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 06:38 PM
so is the show ever going to be broadcasted?
Posted by: mia | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 06:38 PM
@Kit, Janet, Chris and those with their view:
The old argument is that we're giving them work, that it helps them earn something to buy food and not starve.
How patronising. We, the rich gods of the West deign to buy their particular brand of clothes so that the peasants can have some pittance to live on.
There are other consumer choices: buy only fairly traded or otherwise ethically produced clothes and you will increase the market demand for it, and reduce demand for sweatshop-made stuff; that will effectively shift the money to people that take care of their workers, even if only to get the fair trade premium.
From a moral standpoint, why do we have any more right to live a comfortable, rich lifestyle than they? Because we have money and they don't? We have it because our parents did, not because we've worked any harder or displayed any greater skill than those in the developing world. Don't just swallow the illusion that there is anything fundamentally *better* about you or me or this country.
Re the argument that poor British families need to put food on the table: Do you think that Primark is really helping? If they raised the price for the producer by 50p an item it would make a huge difference to them and little to us. Anyway, what gives us the right to use our cash to push hardship on them instead of us? Why can't we look after our own poor, rather than asking their poor to shoulder the burden?
There is a huge element of hypocrisy, and I'm sure I'm also guilty of it - after all, I still live here and haven't given my money away. But the first step is to admit that you just aren't willing to let things get worse here even to let things get better there.
Not in my back yard? Difficult moral issues? Complex economics? No, just old-fashioned, basic, simple, selfishness.
My my, since the days of slavery, haven't we come a long way.
Posted by: Phil H | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 07:05 PM
Rich mans greed over poor mans need equals exploitation. --- Always has, and always will do!!
Posted by: Norman Rigby | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 07:12 PM
Hi i think that people should not live like this they are people after all they should not have to work so hard and they only get 10p an hour just think if you had to live like that would you like it.
Posted by: pat Scarisbrick | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 07:12 PM
Primark have massive spending power which enables them to buy thousands of items which drives the price down. Their mark up is considerably less than other stores.Indeed I have been to a supplier myself who supplies Primark and another store and the label on the Primark garment was £5 and for the other store it was £20 for the exact same garment. It would be lovely if we could all buy ethical and fairtrade just the same as it would be lovely to buy organic and free range but this isn't an option for the majority of people in this or any country
Posted by: Bubble | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 07:26 PM
Well said Phil H.
Posted by: Phil B | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 07:29 PM
Hello, please sign the online petition to get The Devil Wears Primark screened on national television.
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/TDWP/
Posted by: James Findon | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 08:22 PM
Dear Bex the brainwashed Primark worker.....just a simple mathmatical fact for you to ponder - if Primark truly sold their goods for the price they paid for them, you wouldn't have a job.
Posted by: gill | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 08:25 PM
Well said Phil H.
As Bubble says, Primark may well sell items for a pittance but in many cases these are the same items, the same suppliers, the same sweatshops. We should not be under the illusion that expensive clothes = better welfare for the people who made them; primark merely adds on less of a profit margin than other high street stores. For example Nike, Topshop etc, who can sell at over 5x the price.
If there was no "fashion" and the irresponsible status that comes with it; buying new clothes every week seems to make one "look" or "feel" better- we wouldn't need to spend so much on cheap tacky clothes which last only 3 washes. We could afford to buy sensible, lasting clothes, perhaps with an extra 50p which actually goes to the producers.
Posted by: Sam | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 08:30 PM
I don't know where Sophie Morris shops but I found the piece patronising. How do you think any of the goods and services you use are produced? The conditions that 'sweatshop' workers endure are replicated over here - just ask anyone who works, can't afford much of a house or holiday and sees their freedoms being eroded. They may even shop at Primark.
Of course these things are relative and we enjoy a better standard of living than many but things are hard even in these better times.
If it's the process under which we labour then fine but we'd be better addressing that here and leave far away workers to determine their own futures. If we had something positive to say then they may even jump aboard but complaining on their behalf or offering solutions that would hit the poorest here and there is no solution.
Posted by: Mark Harrop | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 08:36 PM
At the end of the day, do you buy these clothes?
If you really want to make a statement either walk around naked or go to these countries and change the system yourselves.
You may get shot, but hey "Those who are not willing to die for freedom don't deserve it"
Easy to post here, why not demonstrate outside Primark's, YOU could always not buy the clothes. Oxfam et al do nice clothes.
Why not stand in the street and protest? Why not do a "PETA". Remember that protest against Fur? I do not advocate going to their lengths, but only visible and constant protests are going to get fairness in life.
I forgot it's raining wouldn't want to get our nice designer jeans wet?
Posted by: Howard | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 08:36 PM
I work at primark and have been trained on the ethical trading intiative and primarks supply chain etc.
Take a look at thier website http://primark.co.uk/suppliers/
Primark gets its clothes cheap because:
It does not use an external agent to source the clothes (who would take a cut of the money the store would pay for the clothes, hence less money for the factory. Primark has buyers that go directly to the factories and will only trade if they sign up to the suppliers code of conduct)
Only sells the most popular sizes (8,10,12,14,16 and 18)
No expensive advertising campaigns (eg marks and spencer spent about £1 million on advertising last year and the cost is recovered through the consumers by raising prices)
we buy in bulk
We only sell simple designs that are easy to produce.
And that is amongst many over cost cutting measures throught the company
...........
Primarks supplier code of conduct: http://primark.co.uk/suppliers.shtml
Primark is also currently working to improve and stricten the code of conduct. But as you will see if you read it, it does cover the issues of 3rd world manufacturing quite well although i agree it could be improved.
Every year primark sends independant auditers to its suppliers who walk in unannounced and check that the factory is adhering to the code of conduct. If the factory is found to be breaking the code then primark will work with the factory until it has been resolved.
I think working with the suppliers to impove working standards is much better than to stop trading with them as in most factories the trade with primark is essential for the financial survival of the factory.
Also if primark stopped trading with a supplier then the factory is likely to go bust and hundreds of people will lose there jobs and with no government support for the unemployed (such as in the uk) many will live below the poverty line.
That surely would be completely un-ethical.
'Dear Bex the brainwashed Primark worker.....just a simple mathmatical fact for you to ponder - if Primark truly sold their goods for the price they paid for them, you wouldn't have a job.' exactly it is not possible for a company to sell items at cost price. Like any business primark has costs to cover.
I have heard the average markup on items is in the region of 70% but this may be in accurate as it was a couple of years ago. Obviously very low mark up compared to over fashion retailers who use the same suppliers like monsoon etc.
Another point is in primarks supplier code of conduct the factory must pay the same wage to every worker so this means a worker making clothes for new look and a worker making clothes for primark will be paid exactly the same wage.
Posted by: Peter | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 09:43 PM
Hello, please sign the online petition to get The Devil Wears Primark screened on national television.
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/TDWP/
Posted by: James Findon | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 09:45 PM
What a total nonsense.
The British empire was built on hard work by the working classes in 3rd world countries. Their working conditions today are far superior to back then. At least now we fight disease and help provide the basics to these people. The 3rd world of today is far better than that of 100 years ago! Go Primark, we are behind you!
Posted by: Mo Gregson | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 09:59 PM
Could someone explain why the focus is always on stores like Primark who sell cheap clothes and not global giants like Nike (or Levi's who were exposed for using Chinese prison labour)? Is it because Nike et al can afford better lawyers or are TV companies afraid of losing advertising revenue (after all when was the last time you saw a TV ad for Primark)?
Posted by: Al Smith | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 10:00 PM
At the end of the day. NO, I WILL NOT BUY THESE CLOTHES.
The reason is that I find it immoral to live off the back of people less fortunate than us, we should help if we can, with fair trade, and finding out the truth of the situation. Ending the power of market forces based on greed, the majority of these large companies make profits that are obscene.
This means that I do have some hard decisions about where to spend my money. I count myself very lucky that I have the luxury to think about these CHOICES!
Phil H has made the most sense so far.
It is a sad sign that this programme was pulled, Wonder who is running the world!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Kath Taylor | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 10:03 PM
Remember when we got cheap manufactured goods from sweatshops in Japan, Singapore and Malaysia? They have built themselves up in to wealthy countries with a lifestyle as rich as our own.
China has been the centre of low wage manufacturing for the last 10 years, now wages there are rising faster than anywhere in the world.
If you really want to help the poorest in the world, buy products made there. Indian call centres, Chinese electronics and cheap Indonesian T-Shirts make the world a better place.
Posted by: Richard | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 10:23 PM
Dear Mo Gregson,
What do you reckon life was like in the third world before they were "lucky" enough to be civilized by us?
I for one would like to appologise for the British Empire.
Posted by: Kath Taylor | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 10:28 PM
hello peter and other primark workers!
thanks for your info on primark's ethical codes of conduct etc... i have spent quite a while researching this topic (i based my uni dissertation on it), and yes primark and other retailers DO have codes of conduct to try and resolve a lot of the problems going on in apparrel factories... HOWEVER a couple interesting things i learnt-
In places like China, where there are actually strict laws about numbers of hours that can be worked in a week and about working conditions etc, there are MASSES of illegal factories, aka 'sweatshops'.
A retailer may well have a code of conduct for their suppliers which ticks all the boxes; but at the end of the day, if they are giving a factory an order which would be practically impossible to complete humainly in the timescale required, and the retailer/ manufacturer could easily take their order to another factory down the road, then more often than not a factory would take on that work and force their employees to work ridiculous hours (in probably awful conditions) to complete the order. This leaves a retailers code of conduct absolutely useless.
And yes there are external auditors which check on factories, but often a lot of factories are prepared for auditors at the fear of being closed down. They may have 'double records', one with the real set of hours worked by employees (which they keep hidden for their own use), and another with the fake, legal amount of hours 'worked' by employees (the one that external auditors will see). So where primark may be seen to be 'doing their bit' to prevent poor working conditions/ unreasonable hours- they may not be trying hard enough to uncover what factories may hide from them in order to keep Primark's custom. Yes it does seem to be the actual factory owners which are responsible for forcing unreasonable working conditions on employees, but remember- the reason for this is often because of an unreasonable demand- most probably coming from the retailer and the consumer.
I'm not trying to place blame on any one individual/ group, but i do think that as consumers we need to take responsibility for how we get our clothes! It may not feel like it but we do have a LOT of power as consumers. Remember- EVERYTHING that a retailer does if for US, for OUR custom; which means that what happens in sweatshops across the other side of the world is for our benefit.
So I guess it's up to us what we do with that.
Posted by: pip | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 11:03 PM
What a load of old tosh! I am sick of being lectured to by these goody goodys, I often shop at Primark (as well as loads of other places) and am grateful for their cheap prices as no doubt are lots of other people. With everything going up, like fuel and food, a lot of people in this country will be glad to be able to buy their kids a few bits in places like Primark. And I agree that you can't just take the work away from the people that work in the so-called 'sweat shops' as that is probably what is keeping them going. Most of the problems of these Third World countries are due to the mismanagement of their governments anyway.
Posted by: Marina | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 11:15 PM
I am backing primark all the way!! Alexa chen or wot ever her name is only scrutanising primark because she has the money to shop in expensive shops but the rest of the 'normal' people have to make do. I would prefeer to buy 5 tops in primark than 1 top form a more expensive high street retailer. GO PRIMARK!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Stephanie | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 11:15 PM
As much as it pains me to offer even the vaguest notion of support to a shop like Primark, Ethical Consumer magazine clearly states that in 2006 primark joined the Ethical Trading Initiative and did markedly improve their ethical standards (although ECRA does say they needed pushing: "It is likely that the role that The Independent and Ethical Consumer played in highlighting Primark’s poor record contributed to its decision to join the ETI"). However they are far from saints and still treat workers appallingly, along with most other high-street fashion retailers. For more info see ECRA's report 'Lets Clean Up Fashion' http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/magazine/news/news103.htm
Comments made about needing to turn it to 'their' currency and not 'ours' (because 'they' are so different from 'us', apparently) are easily squashed. In Bangladesh for example, a living wage equates to 30pounds a month, yet most garment workers receive 7. Hardly a living wage.
In reponse to the comment: "The hard working families in Britain who are struggling to pay their mortgage and other bills are able to dress their kids and themselves at a reasonable cost" - you do realise that there are enough items of clothing in the UK to give everyone on the planet 2 each?? Does our island really need 12 billion sets of clothing?? Give me charity shops, freecycling, clothes swap-shops and diy any day.
Posted by: carly | Monday, 02 June 2008 at 11:44 PM
As the cost of living rises, more and more people will have little choice but to shop in bargain shops like Primark. It's all a matter of affordability.
In any case, shouldn't the governments in the countries where the tragedy of child labour exists, do something to stop this abuse?
Don't they care about their own kids?
Posted by: Dilip Dhokia | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 07:54 AM
A few years ago my daughter was a buyer for a well known international company. One of her trips was to India to source denim jeans. At the factory that she visited, inside the same room, on one line bog standard "market stall" jeans were being manufactured and on the adjoining lines the same quality jeans were being made for top fasion houses and even the UK's most famous chain store (no names, no pack drill but it,s just as famous for it's food department). So if you want to be ethical it seems like nudity is the way forward!
Posted by: George | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 09:15 AM
surely if the clothes are cheap why does it matter where they came from? as long as you look good just allow
Posted by: sag | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 11:14 AM
you're all such invalids.
seriously, i bet half of you have bough something from nike, nestle and starbucks which are a million times worse than primark.
if all this stuff about primark was THAT bad it would of came out years ago, primark has been around for so long someone would of fount out.
Posted by: ddddd | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 02:28 PM
People shouldn't be shocked that other high street retailers, with more expensive clothes, also use 'sweatshops.' The show could just as easily have been called 'The Devil Wears Topshop/Monsoon/Ted Baker' etc.
This does not make shopping at Primark acceptable. ALL high street retailers, unless they provide you with information otherwise, will have something to cover up about their retailing practices. When Topshop launched fairtrade cotton t-shirts (sadly still presumably manufactured in the same conditions as other garments), in my local store there were signs in the windows, a special area of the shop dedicated to it and about 3 tags on the actual tshirt reminding me it was fairtrade. They wanted to publicise the fact as much as possible.
In other words, if they don't TELL you about the ethics of their products, there won't BE any.
Does this make it ok to shop on the high street? Because they're all up to it? There's no alternative? Unlikely.
There are hundreds of fair trade clothing companies - just google it. And for those who complain about price - not all of us can afford ethical clothing etc -
People tree sell vest tops for £10, and tshirts for £15. Similar to Topshop prices, if i'm not mistaken, but a transparent supply chain and loads of information about the benefits of the fairtrade practices used to make the clothes.
In my opinion £10 is a reasonable price to pay for a t shirt and a clear conscience.
Also, obviously, in Britain we have a fanstastic selection of charity shops, vintage, second-hand.....
Stephanie points out that she would rather have 5 cheap tops than 1 expensive one ... from a high street retailer. I hope i am not the only one who would rather have one ETHICAL, if more expensive, product than 5 cheap unethical ones.
I think the aim of this programme is to expose the horrors of sweatshops used by ALL high street retailers; Primark has been targetted simply because of its high turnover.
Finally, for people who genuinely feel they are hard up enough to NEED to shop at Primark, or other high street shops, rather than more ethical alternatives (usually online)... don't think this is enough of an excuse.
If you continue to shop on the high street....
ASK the retailers about their policies.
WRITE to them!
EMAIL them!
ASK in store....
You don't have to march on the streets screaming! (Though that would be good).
Simply keeping up the public pressure can do a lot. If there wasn't any questioning by the public, shows like this wouldn't even be being made. I was so happy when I saw the show was being screened on Channel 4 - the more publicity this kind of problem gets, the more retailers will address it.
Posted by: Grace | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 03:24 PM
well...
I can not afford to buy clothes from anywhere else other that Primark unless I go to charity shops and in my case my kids would be bullied and picked on for wearing charity clothes.
I work full time and support my children on minimum wage (which is very little in our culture)
I am sick of people going on about 3rd world countries and how we should help them when really in UK we have very high rates of poverty. I am not comparing our relative poverty to their absolute poverty but I feel that sometimes charity needs to start at home.
TV programs are not made to show how disgusting and awful my cleaning job is and how after a 16 hour shift on minimum wageof practically slave labour and nasty comments from high up "professionals" I still have to pay my taxes. Sometimes I'll come out 50 quid for that shift.
So YES I WILL CONTINUALLY SHOP IN PRIMARK because if that's what it takes to make sure me and my children look half decent then that's what it takes. Its all very well you people getting on your high horse to say u'll buy fair trade etc but how many of you actually live in the real world and how many of you actually have the luxury of being able to afford to do that?????
Posted by: Nicola | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 04:34 PM
If you watch Blood Sweat & T Shirts, then you will see that the clothes Primark manufacture in some of the factories are alongside Calvin Klein and many other brands - all using the same workers in the same conditions.
It is simple snobbery that makes people focus on Primark. Primark can sell these clothes more cheaply simply due to the tremendous amount they buy (everything is cheaper when bought in bulk), the fact that the designs are incredibly simple and that the sizes are limited.
They also don't run any expensive advertising campaigns WHATSOEVER which means that they can afford to sell things more cheaply.
Above all, it is not our government which creates the problems India faces, it is their own.
Also, if people actually took the time to look at Primark clothes they would see that the majority are manufactured in MADRID, in spain, where conditions are much better.
It is easy to blame the cheapest shop without taking into consideration the fact that 90% of british clothes are manufactured abroad, many of which in the same factories and using the same materials.
Posted by: LeedsGirl | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 04:50 PM
I'm almost concerned about adding my comments to this heated debate. I would never criticise anyone for shopping at Primark because their products are so cheap, I appreciate that ethics and principles are expensive and that kids have pride and want to avoid standing out (About A Boy has truth in it). But I guess I hope that those who can afford more expensive shops would look at ethical purchases, those who have the luxury of choice would chose wisely and that as a society we would become more accepting of charity shops. I've used charity shops a fair amount, and I'm the first to admit that I can't always find what I need or want, but I have found some amazing bargains too.
Ok, so I don't have a big statement or a black and white view, but I wanted to contribute.
Posted by: Gobby | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 05:39 PM
There are some very good comments left from ppl like MIA, Al Smith, Howard.
Personally I cannot bring myself to shop on the highstreet any longer. Not only are the quality of the clothes rubbish, the fashions the same just rehashed year after year but I can't stand the thought of my hard earned cash going into the pocket of people like Sir Phillip Green.
As for people not being able to afford clothes and having to shop in Primark, that's rubbish. I'm a student at the moment, I have a part time wage. I save my money and buy good quality clothing rather then spending less and buying more of the tat places like Primark produce. People have become far too used to disposable fashion and it has to change.
I'd love to see more independant boutiques, more reusing and reshaping what others don't want. There's a whole wealth of clothing on ebay, and lots of swapping websites now. The high street has become saturated with boring cr*p .
Because of all this 'disposable' fashion, seconds hand shops are having a terrible time with clothing they can't do anything with. Take a look at this article from the sunday time style mag a cpl of weeks back. An interesting read;
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3985803.ece
Whatever anyone thinks, I personally for my own piece of mind choose not to shop in high street stores, especially Topshop and Primark. I'm pleased to know there are other people who share my opinion. It's just a shame there are so many selfish people out there!
Posted by: Becca | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 08:03 PM
The argument that during this credit crunch ppl in this country can only afford primark is bullsh*t. I put it 2 u that ppl who shop in primark spend the same amount of money as they would in a mid range high st shop - they just buy more stuff! When i see shoppers coming out of primark they don't have A bag they're carrying 2, 3 or 4 jumbo sized bags. You can hardly argue that its just the essentials. If u are poor then don't buy so many clothes, simple as that. Alternatively if u are poor and a fashion addict like me then shop in charity shops and boot markets and get real original clothes.
Undeniably primark have got some great looking clothes. But i would never ever shop there. Often i will see a dress on a friend and comment on how lovely it is but as soon as they tell me it's primark or asda i lose all respect not only because of the human rights issues but because they r looking like they've bought a gem of a vintage dress but in reality they r just wearing a mass produced piece and they're look is 100% dictated by a mass market machine. And everyone who has been in primark will know it aswell. I realise that's a bit snobby by the way. The point is I look down on people who think that looking good is more important than the welfare of our fellow human beings, in fact it sickens me.
Posted by: Summer Makepeace | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 08:25 PM
I used to work for Primark and personally i believe the so called 'ETI' is the biggest pile of shit i have ever heard!
However even if the clothes are being made in so called sweat shops, the many people of Britain will not care due to the fact they are more concerned about the fact they have saved money over whether someone else is out of pocket.
Therefore making this whole debate of whether it does or not quite pointless.
Posted by: Laura | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 09:26 PM
I was disappointed to see the programme pulled- so much for free speech and being able to expose injustice. The problem lies in the conditions for the workers as much as anything else, but also of course the wages. I would be much more comfortable if companies such as Primark and others were to garuntee a fair minimum wage for their workers (not our minimum wage, but definitely a fair price for the work they do and enough to maintain a quality of life). I tend to charity shop because I feel that I don't want to support morally dubious trading (and you can't always be sure who is and isn't using sweat shops)- and by shopping in a charity shop the money goes to a good cause anyway, and its great because its something which is unwanted by someone else, so recycling too!
:)
Posted by: Stef | Tuesday, 03 June 2008 at 10:46 PM
In the late 1970's..OK thirty years ago but...a T shirt in Jigsaw was £1.99......we are now paying £40 - £60 for exactly the same thing. I think PRIMARK is very good as it puts things in perspective here for the consumer market. The market is swamped with Indian clothes now too - mostly selling in places like Whistles...£200 for a skirt? cost to make = £4 or less. I think we as British consumers now that we are being ripped off left right and centre have to not think about the slave market but about hiw British retailers are ripping people off in this country. The Phillip Greens of this world are buying clothes for nothing and paying minimum wages in their shops across UK and charging loads of money for rubbish clothes. People in the east are being used to make these people's excess wealth and we ar ebeing used too. A designer piece is no different - it is a total rip off - £10.000 for a piece of cloth for example? When people are dying of starvation? It is evil. Bravo for Primark
Posted by: Brigitta | Wednesday, 04 June 2008 at 08:36 AM
Well, I believe at the end of the day, the only way that the status quo can change for the conditions in less developed countries is if us (the consumers) voice more concern about free trade and their availibility. Because currently there's no where near a enough products on the market. Call me a pessimist, but if consumers in the wealthy western societies keep buying their cheap products as opposed to spending slightly more on fair trade products then I don't ever see the status quo changing. However, as we can't force the consumers to buy fair trade products, the only thing we can do is at least educate them via shows like blood, sweat and t-shirts and the devil wears primark so they can make an informed decision about what products to buy instead of just conforming to the rest of society.
Posted by: Oliver hall | Wednesday, 04 June 2008 at 11:25 AM
i work in primark and there Ethical trainning is a joke, pure contridiction, they admit to buying clothes from deprived areas and factories that have children or bad condition, and that they stop buying clothes from them but in the next line of there trainning it says we cant stop buying clothes from these factories because it would but millions out of a job. Primark operates on greed, bully and skimming to how they treat the workers in the shops in uk, your obligated to work every bank holiday and get paid a massive one £1.60 for the whole day and no lued days, and mayority of there staff are part time or class as weekend staff, most of people i work with dont pay tax because are hours are so low (11 a week) and only 15 or 20 pay tax in the primark i work in out of 200 staff corrupt, and they will bully you out of job and bully you in the job day in and day out. On the tv programme what was suppose to be aired we was told it was cancealed beause they filmed people without knowing in primark stores and asked them question what the employee's answered wrong and (whoever it is there gonna sack manager said), and this is against the law, thats what we was told why its cancealed
Posted by: sm | Wednesday, 04 June 2008 at 12:51 PM
http://www.primark.co.uk/suppliers.shtml
primark codes and conduct
Posted by: sm | Wednesday, 04 June 2008 at 01:01 PM
If this is all OK and the working conditions of the people who make these clothes is acceptable, why not bring them all over to the UK and place them into small onclaves with the exact same working and living conditions. Would that be acceptable?
No of course not, it would be the most appauling spectical we had ever seen, well since the slave trader days anyway. But it is OK as long as we in the west dont have to look at it.
I think stores like Primark, Monsoon et all should give serious consideration to my above suggestion, at least they would save on the transportation costs and the environmental damage that causes and they would be able to sell the clothes even cheaper... Oh and they would be able to send their "Ethical Inspectors" to the sweat shops on a much more regular basis.
Slavery is not dead, it just moved.
Posted by: Graham | Wednesday, 04 June 2008 at 04:22 PM
I don't want to comment on the ethics of the sweatshops and the conditions that people work in the third world. The opinion on that seems to be pretty much the same - as it should be.
Why are we focusing on Primark? Surely we should be asking why shops like Monsoon and Topshop charge us so much more than Primark when they pay exactly the same for their garments. Perhaps their prices would be justified if they payed the manufactuers more. However, they don't. I think Primark made a mistake taking legal action against the airing of the programme.
As previously mentioned, the public's unlikely to change its shopping habits - so what are they worried about?!
Posted by: Becky | Wednesday, 04 June 2008 at 05:34 PM
"As for people not being able to afford clothes and having to shop in Primark, that's rubbish. I'm a student at the moment, I have a part time wage. I save my money and buy good quality clothing rather then spending less and buying more of the tat places like Primark produce. People have become far too used to disposable fashion and it has to change."
what the hell???
you're a student, exactly. you're not a full time mum with children to feed, children to dress and trying to keep a roof over their head.
what's wrong with shopping at primark? what makes shopping at charity shops so much better?
ridiculous, seriously.
Posted by: fil | Wednesday, 04 June 2008 at 05:45 PM