Indian/Nepali/South Asians- The value of our lives?

Just came back from the common room after catching a bit of the Doha debate where the motion was- 'This House believes Dubai is a bad idea.'
The debate was interesting and I personally felt that with such a specific wording of the motion, the opposition were bound to score a victory which they did with 62 percent of the votes. they discussed finance, education, Arab culture, Emirati rights, discrimination, propaganda etc and lofty grandiose words like how Dubai is a beacon to the world.
All of this was good and interesting, but what really shook me was the lack of apathy and concern for the real builders of Dubai- the migrant workers, most of them from South Asia, working on less than 2 dollars a day in squalid conditions and with so many violations of their rights that it might be worthless to even attempt to count.
Against claims of abuse, the simple answers given were downright degrading.
Numbers were used to show how the few workers might have been exploited but most of the population of Dubai was benefiting from it. to be precise numbers of 1,60,000 against some 4.8 million was used.
No matter what the number, you cannot allow the violation of such rights. if you do, then Dubai is not a beacon to be followed. There are no two ways about it, it is SLAVE labour.
But then another argument comes up. they came out of their own free will and where they come from , they get less than 2 dollars a day.
Yes, we are poor and that forces us to go to Dubai, to work, to provide something for our families. Does that give the companies the rights to exploit these people to the hilt? They are humans too, right? And true they might have come out of their own will, but are they allowed to go back on the same terms? Are they given the benefits as mentioned in their contracts? is a contract even signed?
To use the idea of a free will and abstain from its own responsibilities does show that Dubai is a bad idea for the rest of the Arab world to follow; to be built on slave labour.

Another argument used was the lack of ability of any governments worldwide to enforce all of its laws and all they could do was try. Thus, it was the companies and not the government of Dubai, who bore responsibility for these workers.
What??? The government has no responsibility and it can only try? So, does that mean that if the companies decide to flout other laws, which are detrimental to the vision of Dubai, the architechtural glory, they won't be punished using the same logic?

The debate clearly showed that the value of the life of these migrant workers means nothing to the Sheikhs of Dubai, perhaps it is a reflection of the value of our citizenship.
perhaps, it is power politics and how the relative economic, military clout of one's State reflects in one's treatment.
However, the audience in the debate proved me wrong. There were quite a few Indians and Pakistanis who thought Dubai was a good idea and who were clearly treated well by Dubai. That for me, kicked citizenship out of the issue. Its more about the money.
When you have Burj Khalifa to build, who cares about those poor exploited South Asian labourers? Surely, they dont even matter, right? I wish they had been in the audience and then we would have seen, "Is Dubai really a good idea?"