My Lords, I, too, welcome this long-awaited Bill. Like the noble Baroness, Lady Massey of Darwen, as someone who has long fought for the rights of children, I am particularly pleased to see in Clause 11(2)(a) that ““age”” is the definition of one of the groups or communities which share a common attribute and therefore will be covered by the Bill. Clearly this could be used to challenge measures that have an adverse effect on children and young people and, arguably, discriminate against them because of their young age. There is therefore the potential for the Bill to correct a long-standing gap in legislation to protect children’s rights.
In this context, it would be helpful in Clause 82(1) if proposed new Section 76A(1)(b), at page 46 line 37, were worded, ““to promote equality of opportunity between men and women, boys and girls””.
In October 2002, the international treaty monitoring body for the Convention on the Rights of the Child—that is, the Committee on the Rights of the Child—urged the UK Government to establish independent human rights institutions for children across the UK and nationally. Such institutions should have a broad mandate and appropriate powers and resources in accordance with the Paris principles for independent human rights organisations adopted by the UN in 1993.
The Bill is a wonderful opportunity to create an independent human rights institution that will promote and protect the human rights of children as well as adults, but it needs a few changes. However, if the Commission for Equality and Human Rights is to work for children, the legislation must be inclusive and explicit. A specific reference to children in Part 1 of the Bill would ensure that from the outset children’s rights and interests would be considered and effectively resourced within this new body.
I was glad to see that in the revised Bill Clause 9(2)(b) refers to ““other human rights””, which means that the measures in the Bill will not now take precedence over the UNCRC. However, I would still like to see the six core international human rights treaties named in this part of the Bill. An explicit mention, in particular, of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child would mean that, from the outset, this body would have to work for children. The European Court of Human Rights has acknowledged the deficiencies of the ECHR in protecting children’s rights and it now uses the UNCRC as the framework for making judgments about them.
It is now accepted wisdom that children are not served well by organisations concerned also with the rights and welfare of adults. There have been many advances in recent years to listen to the voices and concerns of children, but organisations are still too often run in the image of adults, with working practices and agendas largely adult-dominated. That is why this new body must have dedicated structures, post holders and resources for children.
We can learn from the National Care Standards Commission, which has a children’s rights director with a specific remit to safeguard and promote the rights and welfare of children within the organisation, which, as we know, was established by the Care Standards Act 2000. Right now, the Change for Children programme gives much emphasis to getting services and structures right for children at a local level, with the Children Act 2004 establishing the posts of director of children’s services and lead member for children’s services—all proof that children have distinct needs and can too easily be lost, as in the appalling case of Victoria Climbié and other children who have followed her.
But children are not just powerless at an individual level; they are probably the least powerful group in society at a collective level, mainly because they do not have a vote. So I ask the Minister whether one of the new commissioners within the new equality commission will be designated to work with the Children’s Commissioners of the UK countries on children’s equality rights issues.
Of course, the Children’s Commissioner for England is further proof of children’s need for a dedicated champion and organisation, though clearly this welcome new post does not fulfil the role of an independent human rights institution for children as laid out in the Paris principles. The Children’s Commissioner is a high-profile listening officer.
The legislation about the Children’s Commissioner was improved considerably as it passed through this House, giving him independent powers and requiring him to ““have regard to”” the Convention on the Rights of the Child. However, the Children’s Commissioner for England is not rights based, unlike those in the rest of the UK and Europe. Whereas commissioners in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland must promote and protect children’s rights, the general function of England’s commissioner is narrowly to"““promote awareness of the views and interests of children””."
It is worth pointing out that under Clause 17 the new equality commissioners can take up individual cases of discrimination whereas the Children’s Commissioner for England cannot. There is clearly potential, therefore, given the limited powers of the Children’s Commissioner, for this to be partly mitigated if a dynamic and productive partnership could be developed between him and one of the new equality commissioners, particularly if that commissioner is given a special brief to deal with children’s equality issues.
Some might be anxious that making special claims for children in the Bill opens the floodgate for other vulnerable groups. Perhaps that is no bad thing, though to these people I would say four things. First, children are the only people in our society, besides convicted prisoners, the insane and your Lordships, who are not allowed to vote. They are unenfranchised and lack a political voice. Secondly, babies and children as a group are uniquely vulnerable and dependent on adults to protect their rights.
Thirdly, in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, children have their own comprehensive set of economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights. As I said earlier, the European Court of Human Rights now uses the convention as its framework for making judgments. In a recent judgment the court asserted:"““The human rights of children and the standards to which all governments must aspire in realising these rights for all children are set out in the Convention on the Rights of the Child””."
It could not be more clear.
Fourthly, equality issues are still too often framed by adults for adults. How many of us think of child workers when considering age equality in the workplace? How many of us think of children as the victims of violence when discussing domestic violence? And how many of us think of babies and children when considering the public’s fear of crime? Children are easy to ignore, and that must change.
I turn to an issue which has taken up many hours of debating time in your Lordships’ House, with the Minister sitting on that very Front Bench, but which I consider has still not been resolved. I refer to equal protection for children under laws of assault. I hope and believe that the Bill and the commission it sets up provide a chink of light in an otherwise dark area of policy. With due respect to my noble friend Lord Lester and his amendment to the Children Bill in 2004—now an Act—the problem with the law as it stands is that it is not firmly based on equal rights and is still subject to the vagaries of interpretation in a way to which the law as it applies to adults is not subjected.
I believe that there is no right for anyone to hit another person, no matter what the age of the person being attacked and what the relationship with the attacker. This does not preclude the law being applied sensitively, humanely and helpfully to caring parents doing their best to teach their children how to behave. But we need a clear line drawn on the basis of equal human rights, and that is what I seek from the Bill. I emphasise that my noble friend and I share the objective of stopping all violence against children. We merely differ on the means by which this is to be achieved.
The Commission for Equality and Human Rights marks a watershed in our commitment to human rights and equality. These are exciting times, and children should be at the centre: it is children who offer hope and a path to the human rights culture to which we all aspire. If we want children to be part of this new body, we must make sure that the legislation explicitly requires this. It is much better to have children in mind when the foundation stones are being laid than trying to build them in later.
I shall not repeat them, but I associate myself with the remarks of my noble friend Lady Thomas of Walliswood and the noble Baroness, Lady Massey of Darwen, regarding Stonewall’s concerns about the provision of goods and services to lesbians and gay men facing discrimination. We have all had a number of such cases drawn to our attention. There is an opportunity here for change and I hope that the Government will listen to it.
Equality Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Walmsley
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 15 June 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Equality Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
672 c1278-81 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:27:49 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_259569
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_259569
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_259569