COMMITTEE ON RIGHTS OF CHILD CONSIDERS REPORT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
The Committee on the Rights of the Child this morning completed its review, begun yesterday morning, of the second periodic report of the United Kingdom on how that country is implementing the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Tom Jeffery, Director General for Children and Families in the Department for Children Schools and Families of the United Kingdom, introducing the report, said it reflected the four-nations approach to the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in the United Kingdom, set within the context of devolution. The precise nature of the arrangements varied – reflecting long-standing settlements. However, all four nations in the United Kingdom had developed – and had been implementing – far-reaching, long-term strategies to deliver improved outcomes. The Children’s Plan for England, published at the end of 2007, had built on the extensive reforms undertaken to improve children’s outcomes through the Every Child Matters programme and was explicitly aligned with the articles of the Convention. Similar plans had been developed in the devolved administrations. Other accomplishments included the creation of a Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, the first such Cabinet-level appointment, with similar arrangements put into place in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, and the recent development of the Children’s Commissioners.
In preliminary concluding observations, Lucy Smith, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of the United Kingdom, outlined positive developments including the withdrawal of the United Kingdom’s reservations to the Convention; the 2004 Children’s Act; the Children’s Plan; and the equality and human rights commissions. Among remaining areas of concern were the dissemination of the Convention; services for mental health and adolescent health; juvenile justice, in particular regarding the age of criminal responsibility; and the need to prohibit corporal punishment, which was necessary to respect the dignity and vulnerability of the child.
In additional preliminary concluding remarks, Kamel Filali, the Committee Expert serving as co-Rapporteur for the report, said he felt that there was a real commitment and engagement on the part of the United Kingdom to move forward using the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and to remove obstacles which hindered its implementation.
Questions raised by Committee Experts included among others, the fact that the Convention was not incorporated into national legislation; the need to include children’s rights into the proposed Bill of Rights; the issue of Traveller children living in Wales and Northern Ireland, and specifically the poor living conditions they faced; a serious problem of poverty and equality faced by children living in the United Kingdom; the negative portrayal of teenagers in the media; measures to safeguard or avoid the invasion of children’s privacy; the ability of the Children’s Commissioners to investigate complaints on behalf of children; the legal judicial guarantees for children prosecuted under the Anti-Social Behaviour Order; and pain punishment or physical restraint techniques used on children in detention centres.
The Committee will release its formal, written concluding observations and recommendations on the periodic report of the United Kingdom to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which it reviewed over the course of three meetings, towards the end of its three-week session which will conclude on Friday, 3 October.
The United Kingdom’s delegation, which presented the report, included representatives from the Ministry of Justice; the Ministry of Defence; the Department for Children Schools and Families; the Foreign Office; the Commonwealth Office; the Border Agency; and the Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom to the United Nations Office at Geneva. It also included numerous representatives from the Scottish Executive; the Welsh Assembly Government; and the Northern Ireland Office.
As one of the 193 States parties to the Convention, the United Kingdom is obliged to present periodic reports to the Committee on its efforts to comply with the provisions of the treaty.
Following the completion of its review of the United Kingdom under the Convention, the Committee immediately began consideration of the report of the United Kingdom on the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict (CRC/C/OPAC/GBR/1), which it will conclude this morning.
When the Committee next reconvenes in public, on Monday, 29 September at 10 a.m., it will begin consideration of the initial reports of Tanzania under the Optional Protocols on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, and on the involvement of children in armed conflict (CRC/C/OPSC/TZA/1 and CRC/C/OPAC/TZA/1).
Report of the United Kingdom
Concerted action to improve the position of children in the United Kingdom has led to concrete examples of progress. For example over 600,000 children have been lifted out of relative poverty since 1998-99, a faster fall in child poverty in the United Kingdom than in any other European Union country over the same period, notes the third and fourth consolidated periodic reports of the United Kingdom (CRC/C/GBR/4). In addition, England has seen a narrowing of the gaps in the achievement of minority ethnic pupils, with the proportion of both Black Caribbean and Bangladeshi pupils achieving 5 or more A to C grades at General Certificate of Secondary Education and equivalent in 2006 – up 10 percentage points since 2003, compared to a national increase of 6 percentage points for all pupils – and participation among 16 year olds has increased to its highest-ever level, with 89 per cent in some form of learning in 2005-06. In England, the Every Child Matters reforms have been given legal force by the Children Act 2004, designed to enable families, local communities and services to work together to improve the lives of all 0 to 19 year olds and narrow the gap between those who do well and those who do not. Every Child Matters measures progress in improving the lives of children and young people in five broad areas: health; safety; achievement and enjoyment; making a positive contribution; and achieving economic well-being.
The UK Government in June 2008 announced its intention to legislate to place a specific statutory child safeguarding duty on the Border and Immigration Agency. The UK and the devolved administrations have put in place a substantial body of legislation since 2002 which has served further to enshrine in law the well being of children. This legislation encompasses the principles of the Convention and creates an effective national framework to support positive outcomes for children. Expenditure on education for under 18’s has risen from around £33 billion in 2000-01 to over £50 billion in 2005-06, representing an increase from 3.4 per cent of Gross Domestic Product to 4.1 per cent. In England there has also been record investment in the National Health Service, rising from £33 billion in 1996-97 to £92.2 billion in 2007-08. Expenditure on child benefit also rose from £8.6 billion in 2000-01 to £9.6 billion in 2004-05, and expenditure on children’s services in England doubled between 1997 and 2006 from £3.35 billion to £7.46 billion.
Presentation of Report
TOM JEFFERY, Director General for Children and Families in the Department for Children Schools and Families of the United Kingdom, introducing the report, said it reflected the four-nations approach to the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in the United Kingdom, set within the context of devolution. The precise nature of the arrangements varied – reflecting long-standing settlements. Broadly, the United Kingdom Government in Westminster was responsible for defence, macroeconomic policy and foreign affairs. The devolved administrations were responsible for education, health and social policy, with Scotland also having responsibility for justice. The United Kingdom Government raised taxes and distributed the revenue to the administrators who, according to their powers, decided how they were to be used.
It followed that the United Kingdom Government was the State party so far as the Convention was concerned, but the devolved administrators made their own contribution to the realization of children’s rights in their respective territories, according to their jurisdictions, Mr. Jeffrey noted. Inevitably, that entailed different emphases, not least as the democratically elected administrators comprised different political parties. All four administrations had been committed to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. As for the British Overseas Territories, they had their own constitutions and laws. Implementation of human rights in the Territories was devolved to Territory Governments.
Children were at the heart of the agenda in each of the United Kingdom’s four administrations. The United Kingdom was committed to securing the health and wellbeing of every child and young person; attaining world class education standards so that all children and young people were able to participate and achieve; and driving forward the reform of children’s services to provide an integrated and responsive service that met the needs of children and young people, in particular, those who were vulnerable, Mr. Jeffery underscored.
Mr. Jeffery said the United Kingdom had taken significant steps towards these ends since the last dialogue with the Committee, yet more remained to be done to realize ambitions for the United Kingdom’s children and young people. All four nations in the United Kingdom had developed – and had been implementing – far-reaching, long-term strategies to deliver improved outcomes. The Children’s Plan for England, published at the end of 2007, had built on the extensive reforms undertaken to improve children’s outcomes through the Every Child Matters programme. The Children’s Plan was underpinned by the principles of and explicitly aligned with the articles of the Convention. Similar plans had been developed in the devolved administrations. In Scotland, Ministers closely engaged in implementation of the Convention and, in Northern Ireland, Ministers oversaw their rights-based strategy for children and young people. In Wales, all Government policies and programmes for children and young people had been based on the Convention, which was formally adopted by the National Assembly in 2001.
The United Kingdom now had the structures in place to deliver the vision of the Government for children and young people across the country, Mr. Jeffery noted. In England, the creation of the Department for Children, Schools and Families in June 2007 had brought a strong unifying focus to all policy affecting young people from birth to 19 years old. Where policies linked with those of other departments there was a shared responsibility, for instance on child poverty, youth justice, children’s health, play and sport.
The creation of a Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families was the first such Cabinet level appointment. Similar arrangements had been put into place in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. The recent development of the Children’s Commissioners was highlighted. Mr. Jeffery also noted that children and young people across the country had contributed to the reporting process, and would continue to play a role in this vein.
Mr. Jeffery said that the United Kingdom planned to formally withdraw reservations against article 22 (protective measures for asylum-seeking children) and 37c (children in detention) of the Convention. In addition, the Government intended to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography before the end of 2008, subject to the will of Parliament.
Oral Questions raised by the Special Rapporteur and Experts
LUCY SMITH, the Committee Expert serving as co-Rapporteur for the report of the United Kingdom, said that the report and written replies were comprehensive and there was no information lacking. Among a number of welcome new developments was the information about the withdrawal of reservations and the ratification of the Optional Protocol. In addition, the new legislation requiring authorities to tackle inequalities among young people was also welcomed. It was also good news that children had their own cabinet minister. In addition, the Committee appreciated the United Kingdom’s Children’s Plan and the Implementation Pact.
Among concerns, the Convention was not incorporated into the national law in the United Kingdom, and that remained a recommendation, Ms. Smith said. Was there a possibility that the Government had possibly considered reversing that decision? It was the opinion of the Committee that areas remained in which the Convention had not been fully implemented, and it was felt that incorporating it into national law would help to address those areas.
Regarding the proposed bill of rights, how would children’s rights be included into a future bill of rights, and how would children be consulted in this process, Ms. Smith asked?
On dissemination and awareness-raising, Ms. Smith noted that the national curriculum did not include education about the Convention. How then was the Convention promoted?
With respect to travellers in Wales and Northern Ireland, what measures were planned by the Government to address the poor conditions in which travellers lived? Poverty and equality was a serious problem in the United Kingdom, Ms. Smith noted with concern. Given plans of the United Kingdom to cut poverty in half by 2010, and to eradicate poverty by 2020, she asked for further details about the plan and whether its timetable was realizable and whether priority would be given to children most at risk under the plan.
On media in the country, the Committee noted that the press had demonized teens in the country, and as a result the public had a distorted and negative picture of teenagers. The Committee also noted that several ministers in the Government had criticized the media coverage of teenagers. However, despite that, little had changed. Was it the case that the Government’s removal of reporting restrictions in criminal cases contributed to the negative image young people in the country had? Furthermore, how was the Government contributing to safeguard or avoid the invasion of children’s privacy once the Contact Point database came into practice? Another concern was the invasion of children’s privacy as a result of reality television shows, such as Super Nanny, which showed children behaving terribly and portrayed them in a terrible light.
KAMEL FILALI, the Committee Expert serving as country co-Rapporteur for the report of the United Kingdom, also began by welcoming a number of decisions and actions taken by the United Kingdom Government for children, including the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the involvement of children in armed conflict, in 2003, and other international instruments for the protection of children. However, much remained to be done to ensure the that children in the United Kingdom were able to fully enjoy all their rights. In that regard, it was regrettable that the Committee’s recommendations regarding the dissemination of the Convention and the Committee’s concluding observations had not been implemented. Also, while the Convention had been ratified by the United Kingdom, it had not been transposed into national legislation. Moreover, national institutions, civil society and the judiciary had not been informed of the Convention’s provisions.
Was the Plan for Children adopted in 2007 equivalent to a national plan of action for children, Mr. Filali asked? Also, while the creation of new Children’s Commissioners was welcomed, it was noted that they did not fufil the Paris Principles criteria for independent national human rights institutions (only the Scottish Commissioner was responsible directly to Parliament, while the other three Children’s Commissioners reported to the executive branch of government). Moreover, he would appreciate hearing details on the budget and funding for the Commissioners.
Of particular concern was the issue of education for disabled children in the United Kingdom, and obstacles to their access to schools.
Committee Experts then raised concerns and asked for further information on a number of topics, including concrete examples of how the administrators considered the best interest of the child under the Convention in the adoption and development of policies; the fact that the Children’s Commissioners did not have the ability to investigate complaints on behalf of children; and independent funding for the Children’s Commissioners.
On juvenile justice issues, a number of concerns were raised linked to the participation of children in criminal proceedings, and protections for them. . In particular, the Anti-Social Behaviour Order, which had penal consequences, was a matter of concern for Committee members. What were the legal judicial guarantees for children in this regard? Did children have the right to express their opinions when an Anti-Social Behaviour Order was read out? Another concern was that, in England and Wales, the use of ultrasound devices to disperse groups of children (the devices emitted high pitched sounds that only children could hear), and this had been left to police discretion, which further infringed on children’s right to freedom of association. An Expert was concerned that the Anti-Social Behaviour Orders were an overly punitive regulation and out of proportion with the situation it sought to address.
Other questions included concerns about discrimination and bullying faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender children, and measures to protect them; a formal mechanism to coordinate the four nations entities, among others, to provide a comprehensive overview of the implementation of the Convention and identify further action needed; and participation of civil society, including youth, children, parents and most vulnerable groups, in implementing and designing national policies and programmes.
Response by Delegation
Responding to oral questions by Committee Experts, the delegation agreed that the United Kingdom had not incorporated the Convention on the Rights of the Child into national legislation. The approach of the Government was to look at the wide-ranging existing laws and amend or build on them as necessary to support implementation of the Convention. Despite that, courts were able to use the provisions of the Convention to assist in the application of domestic laws in court proceedings. A very wide consultative process was part of the measures the Government took before any new legislation was introduced. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights also provided opportunities for public commentary on whether particular legislation related to the Convention. A key element in implementation of the Government was to build on policy reforms such as Every Child Matters to improve children’s experience and life chances.
The priority for Scottish ministers was to meet the needs of children, the delegation said, in particular, by working with non-governmental organizations to ensure improved outcomes for children. Ministers were committed to tackling inequalities in society and improving the chance for vulnerable groups to live a successful life. In working towards national outcome, a rights-based approach was used. Extended access to higher education for asylum-seekers was one achievement noted. In Scotland, national and local Government needed to work together to break negative cycles passed from one generation to another.
In Northern Ireland, the Government had established a bill of rights forum, made up of political and community representatives to help identify rights. Sufficient protection for the rights of children was of particular importance. In-depth dialogue on this issue was scheduled in 2009. The United Kingdom Government was awaiting advice from the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commissions on what the Bill of Rights might include, but one element that had been identified through discussion was the rights of children, said the delegation.
Since 1999, the Cabinet had been committed to make the Convention a basis for applying policy to children and young people. Since then, there had been progress in Wales, with non-governmental organizations, young people and Government representatives. Within the Government at the official level, cross-cultural teams that addressed the issue of children and young people had been created. Wales was the first of the four nations to have a Children’s Commissioner in which children had been participants in the process.
In terms of the implementation of the Convention at the local level, Wales had established a policy called Rights to Action in 2004, setting out the objective that children and young people were to be seen as citizens with a viable place in society as contributing members. At the local level, there were 22 multi-agency partnerships for children and young people. They worked locally to identify the needs of children and young people in Wales. The outcomes measured how effective those measures were. The Funky Dragon (the Children and Young People’s Assembly for Wales) report noted that only 8 per cent of children and young people in Wales knew about the Convention, and since then had put a plan forward to address this.
The Children’s Plan for England did not constitute a UK-wide plan of action for the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the delegation said. Each administration was responsible for dealing with issues relevant to their respective jurisdictions. One issue for the United Kingdom was to ensure ongoing communication with the other four nations so that the United Kingdom, as the State Party with regard to the Convention, was in a position to monitor and report on progress. As far as England was concerned, national priorities were set on, among other things, health, safety, education, poverty and participation of children. Of the 199 local indicators, 70 applied to children’s outcomes and collected from each 150 local authorities each year to be able to monitor progress.
It was clear at the national level that the importance and priority of the needs of young children was central, the delegation stressed. Education spending had increased 50 per cent from 1995 to 2005, and in addressing poverty the 2008 budget had allocated significant new investment to be used across the United Kingdom to tackle child poverty, rising to 950 million pounds by 2010/2011. One constraint for the Government was to see how the headline applications panned out at the local level, where responsible authorities allocated resources.
On the awareness of the Convention in the United Kingdom, the delegation said this was an area in which more needed to done. The way in which the Convention was embedded into the Children’s Plan was the single most high profile achievement in which the practical benefits of awareness had been identified. Within the United Kingdom, the UNICEF Rights Respecting School programme was supported by the Government and its impact evaluated. In addition, the Government commissioned curriculum materials for teachers to teach the Convention on the Rights of the Child. In particular, in England the Children’s Workforce Council had adopted the Convention to underpin its work, and planned a training programme for all children practitioners.
With regard to the knowledge of the Convention in the judiciary, the delegation said that it was the responsibility for all in the legal profession to keep themselves updated on new developments that impacted the national legislation. On workforce development, there was a lack of knowledge in Wales, and therefore a workforce development training programme would be put in force in late 2008 or early 2009, which included a segment on the provisions of the Convention.
Since 1999, the United Kingdom Government and devolved administrations had made the participation of children and young people a priority, enabling policy development and delivery to be driven and informed by their views at all levels– nationally, locally and in schools – as well putting mechanisms in place which increased the involvement of vulnerable young people in the decisions that affected them, the delegation said. For example, the Children’s Act 2004 imposed a statutory requirement for all local authorities that, when working with young people and children in need, that their wishes and feelings needed to be ascertained and used to inform decision making. Similarly, there was a duty placed on local authorities under the Education Act, which required local authorities to ascertain the views of children and young people in this initiative. An online gateway brought together a network of people working with young people, which aimed to address the most effective measures taken to encourage the involvement and participation of young people.
On the involvement of children in Anti–Social Behaviour Order proceedings, the delegation said that before the proceeding a discussion with the child was engaged in order to identify the behaviour. It was designed to ensure that children were able to participate, that they were not intimidated, and that they understood what was happening. In Northern Ireland, for the first time there was a measure so that young people brought before the court had the opportunity to tell their experiences, and to engage as part of the discussion.
Further Oral Questions by Committee Experts
In a second round of questions, Experts asked a number of questions with respect to corporal punishment. Did the United Kingdom plan to fully prohibit all forms of corporal punishment? Another concern was that pain punishment techniques remained a practice in detention centres. In that connection it was asked if the age for criminal liability in the United Kingdom would be increased in line with international standards.
Experts were particularly concerned about the use of physical restraints on children held in juvenile centres and detention centres, mainly in England and Wales.
Other questions were asked on the issue of rules for asylum-seekers, and whether there was a difference between the national administration rules and those of the devolved departments; a need for data regarding children seeking asylum; whether juvenile justice was uniform throughout the four nations, and if not why not; and what programmes were in place to help children with special needs, black students and Roma children to overcome exclusion.
On the right to leisure and recreational sport, an Expert asked about the outcome of a number of programmes in local communities; and what opportunities existed for children with disabilities to access these play areas.
Concerning juvenile justice, questions were asked on procedural rules concerning pre-trial detention for minors, including time limits for such detentions and support provided while children were in custody; and discrepancies in the minimum age of criminal responsibility in the four nations, which might be considered discriminatory. An Expert was also concerned that a high number of children from the care system ended up in the criminal justice system, and wondered why that was so and what preventive measures were envisaged.
Regarding education, Experts asked about measures to ensure that schools were inclusive of children from different cultures; whether multiculturalism and tolerance were part of the curricula; and why, as noted in the report, children with special education needs were placed in schools were there were not enough places for them.
Among health concerns, Experts noted that the teenage pregnancy rate in the United Kingdom was the highest in Europe, which was related to child poverty. Had any steps been taken to find out which measures were effective and which were not in addressing this issue? A number of issues were raised related to children’s mental health, including to what extent the Government was prepared to fill the gaps in psychosocial rehabilitation programmes? In addition, it was noted that the rate of breastfeeding in the United Kingdom was low and that the number of unaccompanied home births was rising as a result of the lack of resources in hospitals.
Response by Delegation to Further Oral Questions
In response to questions raised on the independent role of the Children’s Commissioners, the delegation said the variations arose from the particular legislation that established the posts of each Commissioner. However, all administrations were clear that the Children’s Commissioners should act as independent champions of children’s rights. The ability of these Commissioners to consult children and to bring their experiences into the public domain was a powerful tool. Two of the Children’s Commissioners had a casework function and two did not. In England the absence of such a function was based on the sheer numbers of children, which meant that case work could swamp the work of the office. So England looks to case work being discharged through existing mechanisms subject to scrutiny by the Children’s Commissioner. It was open to the Commissioners discretion to use cases to inform policy initiatives.
With regard to the “best interests” of children, the delegation said that the language used in the United Kingdom in referring to the “well-being” of children was consistent with the Convention. The overarching principle in cases concerning the upbringing of children was that the welfare of the child was paramount and the terms “welfare” and “best interests” were synonymous. The Court cannot make an Order unless it is better for a child than not making an Order. Local authorities were responsible for ascertaining the needs of children “in need” in their area and to respond to them. In Northern Ireland the direction in language used leaned towards “child welfare”. That, however, should not impact on the needs of children and young people. Moreover, both welfare and rights-based indicators were currently being developed in Northern Ireland to assess measures taken.
On the negative perceptions in the media of youth in the United Kingdom, the delegation said that the Government shared the frustrations of the Committee in that regard. The Ten Year Youth Strategy aimed to rebalance the public attitude towards youth, and the Youth Media Fund was specifically targeted to disadvantaged youth to support the participation and encourage the voice of youth in that aim. In addition, a lot of research had been done on the negative perceptions of the youth in the media, and the information obtained was shared with third sector organizations in an effort to help try and reverse these negative perceptions.
ContactPoint (http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/deliveringservices/contactpoint/) was an online directory for England containing basic information about children and young people, contact details for their parents and practitioners providing services to them, which would help practitioners deliver more coordinated support, the delegation said. The directory supported young people up till their eighteenth birthday and it provided a quick way to find out who else was working with a child, making it easier to deliver more coordinated support. ContactPoint would not hold any assessment or case information about a child, in order to safeguard children’s privacy. Training for users was to be provided in the safe and secure use of ContactPoint and good information sharing practice.
In terms of the Anti-Social Behaviour Orders, the emphasis was on the prevention of such behaviour. Measures used to prevent the use of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders included the Safer Schools Partnerships, programmes involving parents, and youth inclusion programmes to help tackle this behaviour at an early stage. There had been a 34 per cent drop in the use of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders in the last 12 months, and there had been a 70 per cent increase in the use of other tools to address this issue, such as identifying the potential for these behaviours early on. A total of two thirds of the cases where Anti-Social Behaviour Orders had been issued had followed a criminal offence, the delegation underscored, which had been backed up by research conducted in 2004.
On the juvenile justice system and the use of restraints, the delegation said that in dealing with children in juvenile custody it was necessary to intervene to protect those children and others around them at times. Restraints were only to be used following a risk assessment and as a means of last resort. There were measures for the monitoring of the use of restraints, through a board and panel which reviewed such techniques and provided recommendations. The distraction technique and the double basket hold had been suspended as a technique as a result of those reviews and recommendations.
In terms of the imprisonment or fining of parents whose child was not attending school, the delegation said that if a parent failed to fulfil the duty of ensuring that their children attended school they were either fined or imprisoned. However, that was a means of last resort. With respect to criticisms that the curriculum in England was dominated by tests, children underwent three tests before they took an external examination at the age of 16. Literacy, numeracy and science were the focus of such tests, and children were tested at the ages of 7, 11 and 14. England’s position was that three tests were not too much. The test results showed teachers the formative learning of a child. The tests did not determine what schools children went on to. A different approach was used in Wales.
The delegation said that in Scotland a new curriculum was being developed based on outcomes with a focus on skills for learning, life and work. Young people were involved in the process of redesigning qualifications and the curriculum and the amount of testing was to be limited. When a child was excluded from a class he/she was not to be excluded from education. The school leaving age was not being raised above 16; however a positive offer to continue education would be made well before the school leaving age was reached. In Northern Ireland, there was a particular emphasis for 14 to 19 year olds on entitlement to new pathways in education. The level and standards for the experience of youth in education was being raised. In addition, examining the balance between external and teacher-based assessment was currently under way.
With regard to exclusions specifically with respect to children from the most vulnerable groups, the delegation said that they wanted to bring down those figures. The total in one year was under 9,000 children. The permanent exclusions were only used for serious persistent offences. Fixed term exclusions were used as a disciplinary measure, and had increased by 4 per cent in 2006-07. Conversely, the number of permanent exclusions had gone down. Approaches and materials were used to help schools deal with such cases, which had been rolled out across local authorities in England. The schools were also monitored in this regard to assess progress. A very high portion of children who had been permanently excluded had special needs, with a total of 70 per cent who had special needs of some kind. These children were not excluded from education; local authorities had a responsibility to ensure that these children had access to education on the sixth day of exclusion and were eventually reintegrated into mainstream schools. However, that was not often the case for older children, aged 15 years and up, and more likely the case for younger children.
Alternative education placements for excluded children provided the children with an education plan designed by the student and the teacher that catered to their needs specifically, the delegation added. Action was being taken in Scotland to promote the inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender young people in schools, and to prevent bullying of those groups.
The Traveller community occupied a special place in the overall community, and were recognized as a racial group in Northern Ireland the delegation said. There were very high levels of prejudice against the Traveller communities. The challenges faced by Travellers, such as the lack of good data, undereducation, and the attitudes towards this community, had all been taken into account by the Department of Education as part of the process initiated to put further efforts to support this community. The Department of Education would also address how to improve the outcomes on those issues, and was looking at the issue of integration and segregation of Traveller children, with a perspective to educate traveller children in a safe environment. Measures taken in Wales, among others, included a booklet on best practices on the education of Travellers, which had been distributed to all schools this year. Assembly funding had made it possible to disseminate widely a video on the Traveller community, with an aim to promote and better educate the community on their needs.
On the placement of children with special needs and disabilities in education, the delegation said that the position was to avoid wherever possible placing children away from the family home. Aiming High for Disabled Children was a programme that involved consultations with children and families in an aim to provide the services needed without separating the family. It also aimed to support parents in the process. As a last resort, local authorities were to maintain regular contact with children who had been sent to educational institutions away from home and where necessary take them into public care.
Each year social workers brought cases to the Special Needs and Disabilities Tribunal. The delegation agreed that the right for children to take such cases on their own behalf was an issue for the Government. The Government planned for an educational review of special needs, and on how the current arrangements were working in the interest of the child in 2009. In response to data on disabled children, the Aiming High for Disabled Children programme included a significant investment in transition arrangements, to ensure effective transitions; however, data was lacking, among other things, due to the variability of needs of these children and there was therefore a strand of work to improve data.
Schools had a legal duty not to discriminate against pupils on grounds of their sexual orientation, the delegation said. School inspectors were required to follow-up on such cases when conducting school visits.
On the prohibition of corporal punishment, the delegation said that section 58 Children’s Act 2004 had changed the law on violence against children. There was no intention to outlaw smacking as it would criminalize decent parents. A recent survey showed that 68 per cent of parents were against banning it outright, but it also showed that the use of smacking had decreased. The priority of the Government was to ensure that the law ensured protection for children without criminalizing parents. The Government did not approve of smacking, and welcomed the reduction in the use of smacking as indicated by the recent survey results received. Further, the Government supported positive parenting policies to assist parents who were of need.
In connection to concerns raised on the youth justice system, specifically on the minimum age of criminal responsibility in the United Kingdom, the delegation said that there was no commonly accepted age of criminal responsibility. In England, it was considered that a child at the age of 10 had the ability to identify bad behaviour, and should take responsibility for such behaviours. Where it was necessary for action to be taken, the aim was to rehabilitate and provide support rather than punish. A number of measures, such as the new out-of-court disposal, called the Youth Restorative Disposal, enabling children to apologize for their behaviour at a young age. In addition, the Youth Conditional Caution was a means of dealing with bad behaviour short of bringing children into criminal proceedings, as part of a holistic and supportive approach. There were no plans to raise the age of criminal responsibility.
Regarding awareness-raising, Funky Dragon (the Children and Young People’s Assembly for Wales) was undertaking an “Our Rights, Our Story” project, involving over 8,000 young people aged 11 to 18 and over 2,000 7 to 10 year-olds. Welsh Ministers had received an external evaluation and in light of the significant contribution which Funky Dragon made, the Welsh Assembly Government would be looking to identify sustainable long-term approaches to securing its future.
On measures to eradicate child poverty, the delegation said that it was a key priority across the country, and the Prime Minister had announced yesterday his intention to introduce legislation to embed in law the Government’s commitment to eradicate poverty by 2020. A total of 600,000 children had been taken out of relative poverty since 1998, though the last two years data showed a disappointing, although not statistically significant rise. However numbers of children in absolute poverty had halved while child poverty as measured by a basket of material depravation measures showed a steadily decreasing trend. A sustainable approach was the basis for tackling poverty, and looking at both the causes and symptoms was central to the method taken by the Government. Key elements of the Government strategy were to improve employment for parents and skills to help them progress in work. Alongside that, it was important that the benefit system assisted parents who were unable to work, which was currently being looked at. In addition, work on housing and homelessness had been done.
Looking at how to improve children’s chances, and to end the cycle of poverty was important, and additional measures to invest in the early years of development and to increase the quality of education had been made. The Child Poverty Unit was working across Government and with the devolved administrations on a road map to eradicate child poverty by 2020 based on the 2008 working document, “Ending Child Poverty: Everyone’s Business”. Furthermore, consultations with everyone in the delivery system, such as local Government and local managers played a key role in ensuring the proper development of the strategy. In Scotland, under the current devolution framework, the administration had made headway in tackling child poverty, and planned to publish an anti-poverty framework in late 2008. In Wales, the imposition of the statutory duty on local Government to commit to end child poverty had been made. In the coming weeks the Wales Child Well-being Monitor had been published, which included a set of targets for eradicating child poverty, focusing on employment, education, health, and housing.
In terms of concerns raised on the situation of childcare centres, the delegation said that yesterday the Prime Minister had announced that the United Kingdom was committed to improving childcare across the country, starting with an initial 30, and then rolling out to 60 communities, free nursery services for children, aged two years, for any family who was in need of them.
Preventive measures included flexible working services for parents to combine work and care for their children; Family-Nurse Partnerships aimed at vulnerable families from birth to the age of two; and the Family Intervention Projects which would be rolled out across the country to all vulnerable families, including specifically families with adolescents that were prone to anti-social behaviour and youth crime. Besides the support services, the State had a responsibility to intervene in cases where the parents were not capable. In cases where care proceedings had been taken to court children had the right to express themselves and to be heard; the child was consulted and a qualified social worker represented his/her interests.
Responding to Experts’ concerns that children might be taken into care, simply if the family was poor, the that was not the case in the United Kingdom and children were only taken into care if they were at risk, the delegation affirmed. It was true that the current outcomes for children in care were considered poor; however, ambitious targets had been set to improve outcomes for children in care centre, for example a number of programmes that had been set up in this vein, among others included, “Care Matters” in England, and “We can and Must Do Better” in Scotland, and “Towards a stable life and brighter future” in Wales.
With regard to questions raised by the Committee on breast feeding, the delegation said that in England there was an update of regulations in 2007 and an independent review would be ready in 2009 as to what actions needed to be taken on breast feeding. Investment in the UNICEF Baby-Friendly hospitals was another step taken to address this issue, among other things.
On mental health services, in England, two measures existed to monitor progress: a survey-based measure on emotional well-being, and another on the quality and accessibility of services had been undertaken. A total of 322 million pounds in 2003-04 and 523 million pounds in 2006-07 had been spent on child and adolescent mental health. In Wales, new capital investment of 36 million pounds had been announced to develop in-patient units. In Scotland, a health inequalities strategy was launched that spanned the population, with a total of 78 recommendations. Among priorities identified were the general health and well-being of children in their early years. Moreover, minimizing the health inequalities in children was at the forefront of a forthcoming child health strategy in England to be published in 2008.
On teen pregnancy, the delegation said across the United Kingdom teenage pregnancy rates have been falling steadily. For instance, England’s teenage pregnancy rate had fallen steadily since the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy had been launched in 1999. Between the 1998 baseline year and 2006, the under-18 conception rate fell by 12.9 per cent, to its lowest level for over 20 years. The under-16 rate had fallen by 12.1 percent over the same period.
While there has been steady progress nationally in reducing teenage conception rates, there was huge variation in performance between local areas. The best local authority has seen a reduction of over 40 per cent, whereas in some areas rates have increased – in some cases significantly. The key developments that have supported England’s strategy included a national media awareness raising campaign (RU Thinking) targeted at 13 to 17 year-old boys and girls, through advertisements on independent radio and in teenage magazines. A further campaign (Want Respect: Use a Condom) aimed at sexually active older teenagers focused in high under-18 conception rate areas. Encouragement and support for parents to discuss sex and relationship issues with their children was available through the “Time to Talk” initiative, supported by the Parentline Plus helpline and website. Also, all secondary schools had a duty to provide sex education. As a minimum, that required them to deliver the aspects of sex education in the statutory science curriculum, which included teaching on human reproduction and Sexually Transmitted Infections/HIV. In Northern Ireland, all post primary schools were required to provide relationships and sexuality education. Financial support to meet childcare costs for youths who became pregnant was also provided.
The Hague Convention did not extend to the Overseas Territories, said the delegation. There was a department for international development designed to strengthen their capacities to support child rights through the adoption of national action plans.
Preliminary Concluding Observations
LUCY SMITH, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of the United Kingdom, thanked the delegation. It was obvious now that children were a priority in the United Kingdom. A lot had happened since 2002. Among a positive developments was the withdrawal of reservations to the Convention; the 2004 Children’s Act; the Children’s Plan; and the equality and human rights commissions. It seemed now that the United Kingdom was not afraid any more to allow the Convention on the Rights of the Child to be the basis of all the policies and plans in the country.
Among remaining concerns, Ms. Smith highlighted the lack of dissemination of the Convention; lack of services for mental health and adolescent health; juvenile justice issues, in particular regarding the age of criminal responsibility; and the need to prohibit corporal punishment, which was necessary to respect the dignity and vulnerability of the child.
It was great news to hear the recent actions taken by the United Kingdom for eradicating child poverty; however the current situation was very worrying for the Committee, and it was hoped that the most vulnerable children were targeted first, Ms. Smith concluded.
KAMEL FILALI, the Committee Expert serving as co-Rapporteur for the report of the United Kingdom, thanked the delegation for the frank and constructive dialogue, and was happy to hear all the answers to the questions. He felt that there was a real commitment and engagement to move forward using the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and to remove obstacles which hindered its implementation. The Committee would provide concluding observations at a later time. However he wished to stress their paramount importance and the need for them to be taken into consideration in the preparation of the United Kingdom’s next report. It was reassuring that the children were being protected, as a result of all the positive action taking place.
For use of the information media; not an official record
CRC08028E