New Zealand is advancing the Modern Slavery Bill, which passed its first reading in the House of Representatives on April 29, 2026. The legislation follows a global trend of mandatory reporting, though critics of similar frameworks in Australia argue that reporting requirements alone fail to eliminate forced labor in corporate supply chains.
The New Zealand Parliament introduced the Modern Slavery Bill on February 10, 2026, marking the latest effort to codify corporate accountability for human rights abuses. After clearing its first reading in April, the bill moved to the Education and Workforce Select Committee. It is scheduled to return to the House on August 31, 2026.
If the bill receives royal assent, it will take effect six months later.
The Australian Precedent: Reporting vs. Action
As New Zealand moves toward its own framework, the results of Australia’s 2018 Modern Slavery Act provide a cautionary tale. A coalition of academics and rights groups, including the UK-based Business and Human Rights Resource Centre and the Australian Human Rights Institute, found that Australian businesses are still failing to address forced labor risks nearly four years after their laws took effect.
The findings, detailed in a report titled Broken Promises: Two years of corporate reporting under Australia’s Modern Slavery Act, analyzed statements from 92 companies sourcing from high-risk sectors. These include fresh produce in Australia, seafood in Thailand, rubber gloves in Malaysia, and garments in China.
The data suggests a systemic gap between public disclosure and actual operational change: two out of three companies failed to comply with legally required reporting, and more than half did not follow through on commitments to improve anti-slavery efforts.
“Too many companies are still failing to identify obvious risks or are simply making vague promises that are not being fulfilled,”
Justine Nolan, director of the Australian Human Rights Institute at the University of New South Wales
Structural Weaknesses in the $100m Revenue Threshold
A primary point of contention for labor unions and activists is the scope of the Australian law. Critics argue the legislation is weak because it only covers firms with annual revenue of more than $100m and lacks financial penalties for non-compliance.
This creates a “paper-driven” environment where companies satisfy a checklist without altering their supply chain dynamics. According to Justine Nolan, while the Modern Slavery Act has generated increased business awareness of the risks of modern slavery, this has not yet translated into effective practices to remediate and eliminate it.
To address these failures, the coalition of rights groups and academics recommended that the law be strengthened to:
Mandating that firms undertake active due diligence on supply chains.
Introducing strict penalties for companies that fail to comply.
Establishing an independent anti-slavery commissioner to oversee enforcement.
The Shift Toward Regulatory Enforcement
“This report reveals an urgency to strengthen the law to require action not just reporting, as well as to equip and resource a regulator to provide greater oversight and enforcement of the Act.”
National and Labour team up for Modern Slavery Bill | Now You Know | The Spinoff
Justine Nolan, director of the Australian Human Rights Institute at the University of New South Wales
The goal, as Nolan describes it, is to move the corporate response from a “paper-driven” response toward effective action.
