KINGFISHER PLC modern slavery statement summary (2026)
Organisation address
1 Paddington Square,
London,
England,
W2 1GG
London,
England,
W2 1GG
We asked the organisation a series of questions about its modern slavery statement. Its answers are published on this page as a statement summary.
This statement provides information for all 6 recommended topics
What is a modern slavery statement?
UK law requires certain organisations to publish an annual modern slavery statement on their website, setting out the steps they are taking to address modern slavery risks in their operations and supply chains.
Read more in the government guidance on publishing modern slavery statements.
Link to full statement
Go to full modern slavery statement on organisation’s website
PDF version of the statement
Warning
The file has been uploaded directly by KINGFISHER PLC and has not been reviewed, assessed or moderated by the Home Office for suitability and accessibility.
If you need an accessible version of this PDF file, please contact KINGFISHER PLC for further assistance.
If you need an accessible version of this PDF file, please contact KINGFISHER PLC for further assistance.
Kingfisher plc - Modern Slavery Statement 2025-26.pdf
File uploaded: 01 July 2026 at 10:07am
PDF
| 4.77 MB
About this statement summary
All answers relate to the financial year covered by the statement. The organisation is responsible for all the information it provided. Some of our questions are optional, so organisations may not have answered all of them. The statement summary does not replace the full modern slavery statement – below we provide a link to the full statement on the organisation’s website.
Contents
- Organisations covered by the statement
- Legal requirement to publish
- Statement period and sign-off details
- Recommended topics covered by the statement
- The organisation’s sectors and turnover
- Number of years producing statements
- Policies
- Training
- Monitoring working conditions
- Modern slavery risks
- Finding indicators of modern slavery
- Demonstrating progress
Organisations covered by the statement
KINGFISHER PLC modern slavery statement for 2026 is a group statement covering 6 organisations. See the full list of organisations covered by this statement
Legal requirement to publish
KINGFISHER PLC has confirmed it is required to publish a 2026 statement by law.
Statement period and sign-off details
The statement covers the following period:
1 February 2025 to 31 January 2026
The statement was signed off by:
Thierry Garnier (Chief Executive Officer)
It was approved by the board (or equivalent management body) on:
25 June 2026
Recommended topics covered by the statement
Government guidance encourages organisations to cover a range of topics in their modern slavery statements, setting out the steps they’re taking to address modern slavery risks in their operations and supply chains. Read about the recommended topics in the statutory guidance.
We asked the organisation to tell us which topics its statement covers.
| Topics recommended by government guidance | Organisation’s response |
|---|---|
| The organisation’s structure, business and supply chains | Covered |
| Policies | Covered |
| Risk assessment | Covered |
| Due diligence (steps to address risk) | Covered |
| Training about modern slavery | Covered |
| Goals and key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure the effectiveness of the organisation's actions and progress over time | Covered |
The organisation’s sectors and turnover
Sectors
The organisation operates in the following sectors:
- Retail
Turnover
Its turnover in the financial accounting year of this statement was:
Over £500 million
If the organisation is a public body, this amount is based on the organisation’s budget for the year of the statement.
What does 'turnover' refer to in group statements?
If this is a group statement, this includes the total turnover for all the organisations covered by the statement.
Number of years producing statements
The organisation has been producing modern slavery statements for the following number of years:
More than 5 years
How does this work for group statements?
If the statement is for a group of organisations, this answer applies to the organisation with the longest history of producing statements.
Policies (optional)
We asked the organisation whether its policies include the following provisions in relation to its domestic and international supply chains, as well as its own operations.
| Policy provisions we asked about | Organisation’s response |
|---|---|
| Freedom of workers to terminate employment | Included |
| Freedom of movement | Included |
| Freedom of association | Included |
| Prohibits any threat of violence, harassment and intimidation | Included |
| Prohibits the use of worker-paid recruitment fees | Included |
| Prohibits compulsory overtime | Included |
| Prohibits child labour | Included |
| Prohibits discrimination | Included |
| Prohibits confiscation of workers' original identification documents | Included |
| Provides access to remedy, compensation and justice for victims of modern slavery | Included |
| Other |
Universal Rights covering UN Guiding Principles (UNGP)
|
Training (optional)
We asked the organisation whether it provided training on modern slavery, and who it was for.
What counts as training?
We explained that by ‘training’ we meant anything designed to increase knowledge and skills around identifying, addressing or preventing modern slavery risks.
This could range from formal training courses to broader awareness-raising activities such as workshops or webinars.
| We asked who the training was for | Organisation’s response |
|---|---|
| Your whole organisation | Yes |
| Your front line staff | Yes |
| Human resources | No |
| Executive-level staff | No |
| Procurement staff | Yes |
| Your suppliers | Yes |
| The wider community | No |
| Other |
Buying teams
|
Monitoring working conditions (optional)
Engaging with others
We asked the organisation to tell us who it engaged with to help monitor working conditions across its operations and supply chains.
| We asked who the organisation engaged with | Organisation’s response |
|---|---|
| Your suppliers | Yes |
| Trade unions or worker representative groups | No |
| Civil society organisations | No |
| Professional auditors | No |
| Workers within your organisation | Yes |
| Workers within your supply chain | Yes |
| Central or local government | No |
| Law enforcement, such as police, GLAA and other local labour market inspectorates | No |
| Businesses in your industry or sector | No |
Social audits
We asked the organisation to tell us about any social audits it used to look for signs of modern slavery.
What are social audits?
A social audit is a review of an organisation’s working practices from the point of view of social responsibility, and should include an evaluation of working conditions in the organisation’s operations and supply chains.
By their nature, audits of supplier workplaces represent a snapshot in time.
| Social audits we asked about | Organisation’s response |
|---|---|
| Audit conducted by your staff | Yes |
| Third party audit arranged by your organisation | Yes |
| Audit conducted by your supplier’s staff | No |
| Third party audit arranged by your supplier | No |
| Announced audit | Yes |
| Unannounced audit | No |
Grievance mechanisms
We asked the organisation how workers in its operations or supply chains could raise concerns or make complaints.
| We asked if workers could raise concerns this way | Organisation’s response |
|---|---|
| Using anonymous whistleblowing services, such as a helpline or mobile phone app | Yes |
| Through trade unions or other worker representative groups | No |
Other ways of monitoring working conditions
We asked the organisation whether it had any other ways of monitoring working conditions across its operations and supply chains:
Roll out of app enabling colleagues to upload photos and feedback from factory visits. Enabling insight into conditions and potential issues outside of the audit process.
Modern slavery risks (optional)
Warning
Identifying modern slavery risks is a vital step towards eradicating it.
The government encourages organisations to be as open and transparent as possible, to improve understanding, collaboration and best practice around tackling this worldwide problem.
We asked the organisation to describe up to 3 priority risks it focused on during the period of the statement, including details of the affected workers, the activity involved, and the location.
Priority risks for this organisation (1 of 3)
An audit in India found overcrowded, unsuitable worker housing and inconsistent attendance records, preventing verification of working hours, overtime, and wage payments.
| Questions we asked about this risk | Organisation’s response |
|---|---|
| Where it was most likely to occur |
Organisation’s response:
Within your supply chains.
|
| Who was it most likely to affect |
Organisation’s response:
|
| In which country | Organisation’s response: India |
| Actions or plans to address this risk | Organisation’s response: The factory demolished the existing accommodation and allocated new accommodation for their workforce. Their computerised system for recording attendance, overtime and wages, which had been temporarily disconnected, was reinstated and evidence of record-keeping was shared with us ahead of the follow-up audit. The Ethical Compliance Team held monthly meetings with the factory to review the corrective action plan and monitor improvements and upgrades. All non-compliances closed. |
Priority risks for this organisation (2 of 3)
A third-party audit and worker interviews identified that one supervisor at a site in Malaysia required workers to fill in a logbook whenever they wished to use the toilet.
| Questions we asked about this risk | Organisation’s response |
|---|---|
| Where it was most likely to occur |
Organisation’s response:
Within your supply chains.
|
| Who was it most likely to affect |
Organisation’s response:
|
| In which country | Organisation’s response: Malaysia |
| Actions or plans to address this risk | Organisation’s response: The supervisor was instructed to discontinue use of the logbook. Workers were informed that use of the logbook had been discontinued. The factory has confirmed that this practice has been discontinued. A follow-up audit will be conducted in 2026 to confirm implementation of the corrective action, including worker interviews |
Priority risks for this organisation (3 of 3)
An audit in China found excessive working hours and delayed overtime payments due to a non-compliant banking hours system, causing workers to wait extended periods for overtime pay.
| Questions we asked about this risk | Organisation’s response |
|---|---|
| Where it was most likely to occur |
Organisation’s response:
Within your supply chains.
|
| Who was it most likely to affect |
Organisation’s response:
|
| In which country | Organisation’s response: China |
| Actions or plans to address this risk | Organisation’s response: Overtime wages are now paid at the end of each month, in compliance with the law. The factory implemented additional controls to monitor working hours and prevent excessive overtime. The supplier has made changes to its ethical sourcing practices to better align with the Kingfisher Human Rights Policy. A third-party follow-up audit verified that the corrective actions had been implemented. Worker interviews confirmed that overtime wages are now paid in line with local law. |
Indicators of forced labour (optional)
We asked the organisation whether its statement refers to finding any International Labour Organization (ILO) indicators of forced labour.
What are ILO indicators of forced labour?
The International Labour Organization (ILO) has produced a list of the most common signs of forced labour.
They’re based on the definition of forced labour as ‘all work or service which is extracted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily.’
More details and guidance are available on the ILO website, and in their publication ILO indicators of forced labour
| ILO indicators we asked about | Organisation’s response |
|---|---|
| Abuse of vulnerability | No |
| Deception | No |
| Restriction of movement | No |
| Isolation | No |
| Physical and sexual violence | No |
| Intimidation and threats | No |
| Retention of identity documents | No |
| Withholding of wages | Yes |
| Debt bondage | No |
| Abusive working and living conditions | No |
| Excessive overtime | Yes |
| Other |
-
|
Actions taken in response to finding ILO indicators
We asked the organisation to tell us whether its statement refers to any actions it took after finding indicators of forced labour
| Actions we asked about | Organisation’s response |
|---|---|
| Financial remediation, including repayment of recruitment fees | Yes |
| Change in policy | No |
| Change in training | No |
| Referring potential victims to government services | No |
| Supporting victims via NGO | No |
| Supporting investigations by relevant authorities | No |
| Other |
Change in process at site
|
Demonstrating progress (optional)
We asked the organisation how its statement demonstrates progress over time in addressing modern slavery risks.
They provided the following answer:
All goods for resale production sites supplying us with finished goods
are required to hold an active membership with one of our nominated ethical audit platforms such as Sedex and amfori BSCI.
— 84% of suppliers complied (2024: 82%).
— For OEB suppliers, the figure was 95% (2024: 95%) and 82% for non OEB (2024: 79%).
Goods not for resale suppliers accounting for 76% of in-scope spend had been EcoVadis assessed in 2025. 82% of those who re-assessed either improved or maintained their score.