Toil free

Sir — Primark, the low-price fashion chain in Britain, deserves to be commended for hitting back at its three Indian suppliers who did not stop subcontracting work to garment manufacturers employing child labour (“British stick for child labour”, June 18). This is the right way of dealing with this brigade of unscrupulous businessmen who only seem to come round when clients hit them where it hurts most — the pocket. Unethical practices such as child labour flourish in countries like India, where the needy have limited options to choose from — either they work for low wages or no wages at all. If the children forced to work are stopped from earning their wages, they will have to starve. This is the typical response that goes in favour of contractors, allowing them to get away with their dubious deals. It is high time that such people, and the organizations they supply their orders to, are forced to observe ethical norms or else be penalized with loss of contracts.

Yours faithfully,
Noah S. Roychowdhury, London

Sir — There is a greater smear of shame on India than on the three suppliers from Tirupur who were shown the door by the UK-based fashion chain, Primark. This incident has brought into focus three significant facts. First, it reveals the greed that provokes contractors to exploit children in order to cut costs and maximize profits. Second, it establishes the truth that despite strict legislation on child labour, the enforcement machinery remains incompetent. Finally, it shows how the government plays the helpless onlooker as poverty rages in different parts of India. It is time that civil society becomes sensitive to the exploitation of children in the private sector, and instead of just brushing aside the name-and-shame campaign of the British firm, starts supporting the greater cause of fighting child labour. The sad part of the story is that very few Indian business houses can stand up and do what has been done by a British department store.

Yours faithfully,
Surajit Das, Calcutta

Sir — Many Indian and international organizations have raised their voice against child labour. Countless measures or resolutions have been taken to prevent children from working, particularly in the textiles industry. These jobs are generally of a repetitive nature, and involve sustained and painstaking work. Moreover, children are paid just a pittance for their toil compared to the amount stipulated by the government to be paid to a wage-earner. Yet, it is also true that without this work, many of the children would not get even one square meal a day. And this makes it easy for employers to invest little in these children and rake in huge profits. If this nefarious cycle cannot be broken, no amount of activism is going to bring an end to child labour.

Yours faithfully,
Pranab Hazra, Asansol

Health wise

Sir — The editorial, “Family wealth” (June 17), rightly underscores the importance of nutrition in improving the quality of India’s human resources. India can lay claim to being the malnutrition capital of the world, accounting for 40 per cent of the world’s population of malnourished children under five years. While trends in infant mortality have shown improvement, the nutritional status of Indian women and children, particularly the poor and uneducated ones, either shows no change or is worse than before.

Two sets of action are necessary. First, breast-feeding needs to be more aggressively promoted than it has been. Second, we need to increase government intervention, through the Integrated Child Development Services programme, for example. However, evidence suggests that because of poor targetting, weak delivery and system leakages, government programmes have not performed, especially in states that need nutritional improvement. Perhaps non-governmental organizations, particularly private, profit-minded companies, would be more effective. Not charity or corporate social responsibility, but profit should draw in the private sector.

The opportunity here lies in addressing the need for nutritious, low-cost food that low-income mothers can use to ‘top-up’ breastfeeding for children between 6-24 months. Data show that this age-group is most vulnerable to malnutrition and would benefit immediately from nutritional inputs. A low-margin, high-volume market is waiting to be tapped here. The barriers so far have been outmoded laws — the promotion of any food meant for the 6-24 month age group is banned in India — and ideologically driven NGOs who see commercial food as inherently bad. Large companies that can produce, price and deliver nutritious products to low-income groups are too comfortable chasing profits today from the top of the pyramid to bother looking further below. While the poorest will still have to rely on the government, those who are poor but willing to pay for value deserve at least some investment from the private sector.

Yours faithfully,
Pradeep Kakkar, Calcutta