Joint Committee On Human Rights Ninth Report

2. The case for and against further delay

6. In its response to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, the Government observed—

There are already a range of mechanisms in place to promote and protect children's interests in England and we need to be convinced that any new structures will make a real difference to the lives of children and young people.[16]

In his oral evidence in November 2002, the then Minister for Children and Young People summed up the issues on which the Government felt it needed to ponder further before it decided to offer children in England similar protection to those in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. These concerns could be summarised in five questions—

— Would the creation of a Commissioner add value to existing mechanisms for the promotion and protection of children's rights?

— Can the Commissioner's role be defined with sufficient accuracy?

— Would the office of the Commissioner have the resources to live up to the expectations placed on it? Or to put it another way: are we prepared to pay what is needed for an effective commissioner, and does that represent value for money?

— Would it be able to do enough to achieve systemic change?

— Would its existence encourage others not to acknowledge their responsibilities to achieve change?[17]

We note that the issue of resources is largely in the hands of the Government itself. We assess the evidence on the other questions raised by the Minister for Children and Young People below.

Would a Commissioner add value to existing mechanisms?

7. The Government has introduced new mechanisms for co­ordinating and promoting children's issues. Recent developments include: a Cabinet Committee for Children and Young People chaired by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; a Minister for Children and Young People, within the Home Office; the Children and Young People's Unit (CYPU), based at the Department for Education and Skills; the Children's Fund; a Children's Rights Director; and a National Clinical Director for Children. What could a Commissioner add?

8. The key issue, as we spelled out in some detail in our report on a human rights commission, is independence. As Judy Lister of Save the Children put it—

... neither the CYPU or any government minister is going to champion the interests of the child if it conflicts with government policy.[18]

9. The position of the former Minister for Children and Young People within the Home Office exemplified potential conflicts of interest particularly acutely. When we put this point to Mr Denham he responded that he had—

... never felt that my job as a Home Office Minister has led to a conflict of interest between if you like Home Office policy and my responsibilities as Minister for Children and Young People.[19]

We are surprised the Minister had never felt such conflict—it seems to us that clashes between the Home Office agenda and children's rights is natural and occasionally inevitable—in deciding where the balance should lie, both sides need dispassionate advocates within government. A Minister with cross­cutting responsibilities to speak for children within government is a good thing. It is not the same as an independent champion to point out when it appears that this voice has not been sufficiently heard.

10. In our report on the case for a human rights commission, we discussed the need to "mainstream" human rights concerns within the decision­making processes of public authorities. The Minister for Children and Young People underlined—

... the Government's commitment to the Convention and to making every effort to apply its principles and spirit to all our work with children and young people.[20]

But the UN Committee observed—

... the lack of a rights­based approach to policy development ... the Convention has not been recognised as the appropriate framework for the development of strategies at all levels of the government throughout the State party. The Committee is also concerned at the absence of a global vision of children's rights and its translation onto national plan of action.[21]

11. The Government is preparing an overarching national strategy for children which may go some way towards meeting the needs identified by the UN Committee and others. But the real test is delivering the plan, which will be overseen by the Children and Young People's Unit. But the CYPU is part of the machinery of government—it can encourage and co­ordinate, but it cannot criticise, advocate change, act as a champion, or publicise failures and shortcomings. The Office of Children's Rights Commissioner for London have described the value that they feel they add—

In our experience different Government agencies, which might otherwise fail to collaborate effectively, can be persuaded to collaborate in partnership with an organisation which is clearly drawing its guidance from the wider principles of the UN Convention rather than purely organisational or political concerns … Although [our] role will involve challenging current policy and practice from time­to­time, in practice the role is recognised as complementary to, rather than somehow undermining of Government ...[22]

12. We welcome the creation of the Children's Rights Director, a post recently established by the Government, which has the task of looking at the care of looked after children. The UN Committee expressed itself as—

... concerned that the majority of children in the care system do not attain basic qualifications.[23]

James Sweeney, aged 16, brought home the reality of the limited life options of care leavers when he gave evidence to us, saying—

80 per cent of care leavers leave care with no training at all. I am an unproud example of that statistic. The necessary support was not set up, despite constant inquiries by myself …A children's rights commissioner would be essential to promote and implement and advocate children's rights in schools, in the law, social services and other local authorities.[24]

13. The Children's Rights Director has responsibility towards around 200, 000 children in England.[25] We also welcome the establishment of the new post of National Clinical Director for Children within the NHS—who is potentially concerned in one particular aspect of the rights of all children in England. But these posts neither satisfy the criterion of independence from Government, nor do they address the full range of issues relating to all the rights of all children.

14. The essential quality possessed by a potential commissioner, and lacked by most of the existing mechanisms, is therefore independence from Government. As Veronica Plowden of the Children's Rights Alliance identified—

In debates over the need for a Children's Rights Commissioner for England, the Government has appeared to misunderstand the role of independent human rights institutions, asserting that the existence of governmental bodies makes their establishment unnecessary.[26]

We conclude that existing arrangements for the promotion and protection of children's rights and interests are insufficiently independent from Government to ensure that the rights and interests of all children in England are fully protected and promoted at all times. That independence is the key value that a Children's Commissioner would add to existing mechanisms, which do not in themselves obviate the need for a commissioner.

Could a Commissioner make a difference?

15. Esther Rantzen observed that "adults are frightened of children having rights but not needs"[27] and Andy Butler, aged 15, echoed the frustrations felt by other minorities who, through prejudice, get saddled with the blame for lawless behaviour. He told us—

... if somebody is mugged, it is a 'youth'. When people read the papers or see the news they think, "Oh, it is a youth that has done all these bad things", so all youths must be like that.[28]

Not only do children suffer inequality of treatment by public authorities, but they are often not listened to. A children's commissioner would give a voice to children in the decision­making forums of the nation.

16. The Minister for Children and Young People appeared concerned —

... that the belief that simply the creation of an independent voice would automatically lead to policy changing or being better in certain areas when it is quite clear that the Government does take up already issues raised by a whole variety of NGOs ... would [a children's commissioner] make a material difference to the quality of what government does?[29]

Our answer is that a commissioner could not alone make that difference—but that a commissioner would be able to encourage public authorities to make a reality of a theoretical commitment to putting children's needs at the heart of policy and practice.

The right to life

17. A clear example of this gap between aspiration and practice was identified by the UN Committee in relation to gypsy, Roma and traveller children. The Committee expressed concern at—

... the discrimination against [these] children ... [and] ... the existing gap between policies and effective delivery of services.[30]

Sheri Chamberlain of Save the Children told us that despite two major initiatives to try to improve the lot of travellers in Northern Ireland (race relations legislation recognising Irish travellers as a minority ethnic group and their inclusion as a priority group in the government's Promoting Social Inclusion initiative), there has been—

... very little progress ... travelling children [in Northern Ireland] under the age of 10 are ten times more likely to die than children from [the] settled population and they also have very much higher rates of hospitalisation … we have not seen any change in those figures.[31]

18. An independent commissioner could "make a material difference to the quality of what Government does" by applying independent pressure and by bringing together NGOs, experts and public authorities to find effective ways to deliver government policies in this area. A commissioner could also make a difference to what the parents of these children do, and indeed to offer impartial advice to both parents and public authorities on how to balance the right to life with the right to privacy, family life, and the right to be free from discrimination in this very vexed area of public policy.

19. The Safe Routes to Schools initiative is an example of a positive development in relation to children, but it is only a start. Professor Hall noted in relation to a recent controversy over speed cameras—

... where was the public voice speaking on behalf of children? There was nobody. There were people speaking on behalf of the motor industry behind the scenes no doubt, there were plenty of people speaking on behalf of the motoring organisations and adults but where was the public voice talking from the child's perspective?[32]

An independent voice for children could, we believe, significantly improve the consideration given to children, not only in transport but also in other areas of policy development.

The right to education

20. In opening the debate on the UN Convention in Westminster Hall, the Minister for Children and Young People said—

We agree with the UN that every child has the right to a good education. Education is the foundation for social and economic security later in life.[33]

The UN Committee stated that it was—

... concerned at the still high rate of temporary and permanent exclusions affecting mainly children from specific groups (ethnic minorities inter alia black children, Irish and Roma travellers, children with disabilities, asylum seekers etc.) ...[34]

We recognise that the Government has now begun to tackle the problem of permanent exclusions, but Professor Brighouse illustrated the problem in relation to temporary exclusions when he told us that—

There is no national data, but … the number of days lost to children and their rights, through [fixed term] exclusions, last year in secondary schools [in Birmingham alone] was one million. Twenty years ago … it was less than a few handfuls. That is a recent systemic phenomenon of our schooling system … and a children's rights officer would look at those sorts of things.[35]

While acknowledging the right of the other children and the teachers to get on with what they are doing, he went on to say—

… if we introduce somebody whose absolute straightforward concern was children and children's rights, then I think that they would make some progress. I do not believe for a moment that they would get rid of it all overnight …it is a very, very difficult issue.[36]

21. The right to education guaranteed by Article 28 of the UNCRC is unlikely to be realised by children who are frequently excluded from school. Teachers must also enjoy their right to work without fear of violence. The lack of provision for disruptive children inhibits the effective recourse to temporary exclusion, so children remaining in the classroom suffer consequential disruption and this adversely affects the right to education of the non­disruptive majority as well. We believe that a commissioner for children's rights could occupy an extremely valuable role in seeking a solution to the growing problem of school exclusions which seeks to reconcile competing rights and needs—including those of the non­disruptive majority.

The right to protection from mental or physical violence

The UN Committee was "... concerned at the widespread bullying in schools".[37] More than 20,000 children a year telephone ChildLine with complaints of bullying[38] and it is the most common reason for a child to call the helpline.[39] Diana Savickaja, age 10, told us that—

Bullying is a big problem. Lots of people get bullied in our school.[40]

Carole Easton, chief executive of ChildLine, referred to—

... the range of bullying that would be covered under human rights discrimination—humiliation, degrading treatment and physical abuse.[41]

23. We note the positive obligation on government imposed by Article 19 of the CRC to "take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence".[42] Despite numerous anti­bullying initiatives, there is an absence of enduring effect. Diana Savickaja's experience was that—

"They tell you off …the people do it again and nothing happens".[43]

24. It is an issue in which the voices of all children need to be heard and listened to, and brought into the political and decision­making process. Carole Easton explained what is missing when she said—

We are concerned that there are not independent means of evaluating and monitoring effectiveness of bullying policies … what we hear from young people is that they are either on the shelves gathering dust or... [children] have not been involved in the discussion and implementation [of them] and therefore they do not function.[44]

It is perhaps instructive to compare the progress made by the Equal Opportunities Commission in combatting bullying and sexual harassment in the workplace. We note that no comparable body exists to do this for children. Esther Rantzen told us that when ChildLine set up its bullying helpline in the 1980s—

… we were greeted by a large group of journalists who said to us, " but surely [bullying] is a normal part of growing up?" In other words, the children felt that they must not tell tales, and the adults felt that it was not a serious problem. The presence of a commissioner for children provides a focus for children, just as the creation of ChildLine did. We do understand that some children are facing problems they cannot solve by themselves.[45]

These experiences were further confirmed in reports supported by both ChildLine and OFSTED in March 2003.[46]

25. In this context we welcome the new initiative launched by the Government on 26 March 2003 to promote anti­bullying measures.[47] We hope that it will not suffer the fate of other anti­bullying initiatives, and fizzle out after the initial burst of enthusiasm. What is needed is constant pressure, and the provision of the opportunity for children to feed back their views on what is working and what is not. We need to establish a virtuous circle of zero tolerance of bullying. That requires the active co­operation of children—it will not work if it is just a "top down" initiative.

26. Children have an equal right to that of adults to be freed from the idea that some level of harassment is an inevitable part of life—and the opportunity to assert their right to be free of physical and mental violence. The persistence of the experience of mental and physical violence by children against children in our schools needs to be tackled with at least as much attention and vigour as has been given to the problems of adults within the workplace. We conclude that a commissioner for children could play a catalytic role in encouraging the greater participation of children in developing effective anti­bullying strategies and in disseminating best practice within schools.

Awareness of and compliance with human rights

27. Article 42 of the UNCRC requires the Government to "make the principles and provisions of the Convention widely known … to adults and children alike". The UN Committee reported that it was—

… particularly concerned that, according to recent studies, most children are not aware of their rights included in the Convention.[48]

Fred Tyson Brown, aged 14, confirmed this when he told us—

I have been in school for a decade and only ever had one lesson on the subject. This did not explain that we have rights, only that some countries break them.[49]

28. As the Minister for Children and Young People rightly pointed out, the statutory citizenship curriculum only started in September 2002. Although we welcome the introduction of the citizenship curriculum, we are disappointed that the UN Convention is not given the prominence that it deserves and to which children are entitled. And we should be making sure that institutional practices are not at variance with the principles we preach to the children within them. OFSTED had already told us—

Compliance with human rights does not currently form one of the criteria by which OFSTED assesses the performance of the public authorities with which it deals.[50]

A commissioner could, and should, have a role in spreading the message about children's rights in schools. We believe an independent commissioner could make a significant difference to the work of teachers in seeking to ensure that all children are taught about their rights under the UN Convention in schools.

Participation by children in decisions that affect them

29. Article 12.1 of the Convention requires that—

States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.

The UN Committee was concerned that—

... there has been no consistent incorporation of the obligations of Article 12 in legislation for example ….in education ... school children are not systematically consulted in matters that affect them.[51]

We understand that the Department for Education has consulted children, for example in its preparation of the Green Paper on transforming secondary education and training for 14 to 19 year olds.[52] This good practice needs to be implemented more widely and at the local level too. We add a note of caution illustrated by Joel Semakula, aged 12, who complained to us that in his experience consultation was typically tokenistic—

... when the government is building a play scheme… ask young people where they think it should be, rather than what colour the walls should be.[53]

30. Opponents of a children's commissioner for England are concerned that the demand for children to be listened to in decisions that affect them will mean that the office of children's commissioner would seek to substitute itself in place of parents. Families First pointed out that—

… no statutory office will ever be able to satisfy [a child's] longings for personal care and intimacy. Such needs can only be met within a loving family environment. A children's commissioner will always be a poor substitute for a father or mother who is always 'there' for his or her child.[54]

The Family Education Trust observed that—

Parents tend not to feature very prominently in the thinking and public pronouncements of those demanding a children's commissioner, and yet it is parents who spend more time with their children than anyone else, who care for them, know their needs and show a daily practical interest in their lives.[55]

On the other hand the Welsh Children's Commissioner, for example, reports that over half of all the contacts made to his office on behalf of children and young people in his first year were made by parents.[56] Professor Hall also offered us an alternative view, drawn from experience in his own particular area of practice, which is neurology and child disability. He recalled—

... one child very well who was about six years old and the question was whether he should have his heel cord lengthened. He was a child with spasticity and I was working with a particular orthopaedic surgeon who was very sensitive to these sort of things. We did not have a long discussion with the mother first as we might have done a few years [earlier]. We had a discussion with the little boy himself about what would be the benefits, about what he might be able to do after this surgery which he could not do now, and he was quite excellent in his own insight into whether it should be done, what the benefits would be and why it would be better to put it off for a year because of his particular school situation. He was only just over six years old and he was not a particularly smart, well­tutored child and we were all quite taken aback at the extent of his insight. That is something that increasingly paediatricians do, but it is by no means universal.[57]

31. In our view, parents should not feel threatened by a commissioner who helps spread the message in the health service and other parts of our public services that what children have to say about decisions that affect their own lives is worth listening to. We do not believe, as some detractors do, that consulting children will necessarily result in children being manipulated or becoming cynical.[58] Implementation of Article 12 of the Convention has potential benefits for all of us. It is beneficial for children to learn that they are stakeholders in policies that affect them rather than passive recipients of services by adults. Clearly, consultation must be appropriate to the age and understanding of the child and children will have to understand, as adults do, that consultation does not mean power but may mean influence. Participation by young people does not equate to giving them what they want.

32. A children's commissioner will only be effective if it is making a positive difference to the lives of children and their parents. Only in cases of abuse will the interests of children, their parents and families not coincide and in those cases statutory mechanisms for protection and intervention already exist. The children's commissioner will not duplicate these mechanisms but will have a role in ensuring that they are effective.

33. Consultation is not itself easy. Reaching out and listening to children needs special expertise. And consultation has little purpose if those consulted cannot follow through the response to their views. We conclude that a children's commissioner could make a significant difference by helping children and young people make an appropriate contribution to consultation by public authorities, and could provide useful guidance to all levels of government and public services on the effectiveness of meaningful consultation with children and young people about decisions that affect them.

Can the Commissioner's role be defined with sufficient clarity?

34. We now turn to the other main objection voiced by the Minister for Children and Young People. The Minister commented in his evidence—

... we need to have some clarity or we will need ourselves to bring some clarity to the different roles that people want when they talk about a children's commissioner ... Some people seem to propose what essentially would be an ombudsman model, taking up individual cases ... Some at the other end of the spectrum want it to be a rights commissioner focused very heavily on the UN Convention and checking whether we have established those rights ... Some want a broader ranging children's champion, able to pick up issues and go off and investigate them, and yet others seem to propose a model that is more akin to a permanent committee of inquiry into failures in children's services. One thing which is fairly clear which is that it is quite difficult within sensible resources to fulfil all of those roles easily ...[59]

35. There are currently three ready­made UK models for a commissioner available for it to borrow from (in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland), as well as several international ones. The Welsh Commissioner has review and investigative powers and can call for information (people and papers) backed up by contempt of court powers. Otherwise, he does not have enforcement powers but issues public reports and believes that the threat of being "named and shamed" acts as a deterrent. His policy is to advertise his powers widely rather than be forced to use them and he has not had to yet. The essence of a children's commissioner is that he or she should be able to promote and protect the rights of children, and do this through investigation, inquiry, advice, guidance and public reporting. Peter Newell, for example, said—

I think the real purpose of a children's commissioner is to be an overall watchdog … it is absolutely essential that [a commissioner] should be able to comment freely and make investigations of anything that affects children's rights.[60]

Professor Hall felt that the emphasis should be on fundamental questions of policy rather than individual cases and he proposed that a children's rights commissioner "have the right to challenge inactivity".[61] Carole Easton agreed that the commissioner "should be strategic in priority".[62] The Children's Commissioner for Wales told us that he does not have, nor want, the responsibility for handling individual cases. We agree that a commissioner should not be an ombudsman, driven primarily by the investigation of individual cases. A commissioner must fill the gaps but not duplicate the work of existing agencies.

36. We recommend that the Government's starting point for the terms of reference of the proposed commissioner is that its main function should be one of investigation and reporting on matters affecting the rights and welfare of children. These functions should be supported by appropriate powers, and in exercising them the commissioner should be required

to safeguard and promote the rights and best interests of children and young persons;

to give paramount consideration to the rights of the child or young person;

to have regard in particular to the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child or young person (considered in the light of his or her age and understanding);

to have full regard to the importance of the role of parents and those with parental responsibilities in the upbringing and development of their children; and

to take into consideration any relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

37. The Government has said that, before it commits itself on a commissioner for the children of England, it wishes to wait and see what happens with the establishment of commissioners in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland—

… we are monitoring closely developments in the Devolved Administrations to see what lessons their experiences have for us.[63]

38. The Children's Commissioner for Wales has been in post since March 2001. In Scotland, the Education, Culture & Sport Committee recommended the establishment of a commissioner for children and young people in February 2002, and the Act of the Scottish Parliament establishing the office was passed at the end of March 2003. We note that England has neither a human rights commission nor a children's commissioner, while Northern Ireland already has the former and will shortly have both (as will Scotland in the foreseeable future). While we welcome this evidence that devolution is becoming a spur to democratic development, we are not persuaded that only the devolved jurisdictions should be "at the leading edge of international best practice".

39. Judy Lister of Save the Children was of the view that—

... the Government's position is going to be increasingly untenable as the other three countries develop a solid practice and [there is] some evidence of benefits.[64]

Andy Butler, aged 15, asked us if—

Children's Rights Commissioners exist and work successfully in other European countries … Why not England which has 11.3 million under 18s.[65]

40. We asked the Minister for Children and Young People how he would evaluate the achievements of the Welsh Children's Commissioner. He told us—

As the Welsh Commissioner has been established by statute, I suppose what we will do, or I certainly intend to do, is to read the reports that he produces on his work ... We will be very much relying on his own assessment of what he has been able to achieve and obviously we will be looking with interest at the Welsh Assembly.[66]

This seems to us a rather lackadaisical effort to get to grips with learning from the experience of the devolved institutions. The Children's Commissioner for Wales told us his office has "a powerful role in driving forward a cultural shift in the way parents and adults treat children". Among the matters that they have taken up are helping children with their complaints to public authorities, with access to health and medical records, choice of schools, special needs education provision and mediation, speech therapy (in a bilingual context) and suitability of foster placement. The Commissioner puts a special emphasis on working with children who are excluded or difficult to reach.

41. The Children's Commissioner for Wales also told us that sees his role as not only working for children but with children and that he "allows children increasingly to define" what his office does. In his experience the main thing that children want is the right to have more responsibility—

Meaningful participation in decision making is one way of preparing young people for their role as adult citizens. It constantly surprises me that we expect 18 year olds to be fully engaged in our representative processes when we have given them so little direct experience of influencing and negotiating with the institutions that are meant to serve their interests.[67]

We conclude that the work done so far by the Commissioner for Children in Wales demonstrates the value of an independent body representing children's rights within UK legal, administrative and political structures.

16   Available on Back

17   See Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on 18 November 2002, HL Paper 98-ii/HC 81-i, Q113 Back

18   See Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on 15 July 2002, HL Paper 98-i/HC 1102-i, Q 29 Back

19   See Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on 18 November 2002, HL Paper 98-ii/HC 81-i, Q 108 Back

20   HC Deb., 24 October 20002, c 139WH Back

21   Concluding Observations, op cit, para 14 Back

22   Office of the Children's Rights Commissioner for London, Ev 9 Back

23   Concluding Observations, op cit, para 45 Back

24   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02,op cit, Q 255 Back

25   The Case for a Children's Rights Commissioner, Children's Rights Alliance for England, March 2003, pp 16-17 Back

26   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02, op cit, Ev 216 Back

27   ibid, Q 340 Back

28   ibid, Q 263 Back

29   See Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on 18 November 2002, HL Paper 98-ii/HC 81-i, Q 116 Back

30   Concluding Observations, op cit, para 49 Back

31   See Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on 15 July 2002, HL Paper 98-i/HC 1102-i, Q 5 Back

32   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02, op cit, Q 291 Back

33   HC Deb., 24 October 2002, c 139WH Back

34   Concluding Observations, op cit, para 45 Back

35   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02, op cit, Q 317 Back

36   ibid, Ev 68, Q 326 Back

37   Concluding Observations, op cit, para 45 Back

38   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02, op cit, Q331 Back

39   ChildLine, Ev 3 Back

40   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02,op cit, Q 246 Back

41   ibid, Q 331 Back

42   Article 19 UNCRC and Article 3 ECHR Back

43   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02, op cit, Q 247 Back

44   ibid, Q 331 Back

45   ibid, Q 332 Back

46   Tackling Bullying: Listening to the Views of Children, Christine Oliver, Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education, March 2003; Bullying: effective action in secondary schools, OFSTED, March 2003 Back

47   See DfES Press Notice 2003/0046 of 26 March 2003 Back

48   Concluding observation, op cit, para 20 Back

49   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02, op cit, Q 251 Back

50   ibid, Ev 242 Back

51   Concluding Observations, op cit, para 29 Back

52   DfES, 14-19: Extending Opportunities, Raising Standards, Young People's Document, HMSO, February 2002 Back

53   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02, op cit, Q 259 Back

54   Families First, Ev 21 Back

55   Family Education Trust, Ev 13 Back

56   Annual Report 2001-02, p 12 Back

57   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02, op cit, Q 281 Back

58   Centre for Policy Studies, Ev 22-24 Back

59   See Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on 18 November 2002, HL Paper 98-ii/HC 81-i, Q 105 Back

60   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02, op cit, Q 162 Back

61   ibid, Q 285 Back

62   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001--02, op cit, Q 347 Back

63   CYPU Response to the UN Committee's Concluding Observations, op cit Back

64   See Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on 15 July 2002, HL Paper 98-i/HC 1102-i, Q 29 Back

65   Twenty-second Report, Session 2001-02, op cit, Q 262 Back

66   See Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on 18 November 2002, HC 81-i, Q 102 Back

67   Annual Report, p 18 Back

previous page contents next page

House of Lords home page Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2003
Prepared 12 May 2003