7. Memorandum from the Children's Rights
Alliance for England
Introduction to CRAE
With our 180+ member organisations, we promote
the fullest implementation of the United Nations Convention on
the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), which the UK Government ratified
in 1991. CRAE carries out public policy advocacy; provides training
to service providers and to children and young people; disseminates
up-to-date information on all aspects of children's human rights;
and undertakes projects of national significance.
THE NATIONAL
MINIMUM WAGE
The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights (CESCR) is concerned that the minimum wage protection does
not extend to workers under 18 years of age (Paragraph 15)
The Low Pay Commission presented its Fourth
Report to the Government in February 2003. It did not recommend
that the Government introduce extending minimum wage legislation
to under 18s, but for the first time, it recommended that the
Government should ask the Commission to consider in detail the
introduction of a minimum wage rate for 16 and 17 year olds[41]The
Government has accepted the recommendation and the review is to
be carried out over the summer with a report presented to the
Government in February 2004.
All workers should be entitled to wage protection
rights, including workers who are under 18 years of age. The national
minimum wage was introduced to protect the most vulnerable workers
yet it fails to protect young people from economic exploitation.
The minimum wage was introduced to protect the lowest paid workers
yet the current exemption of under-18s, fails to protect one of
the lowest and vulnerable groups of people.
The CESR is concerned that the minimum wage
is discriminatory on the basis of age, as it affords a smaller
proportion of the minimum wage to persons between 18 and 22 years
of age (Paragraph 15)
Young People aged between 18 and 21 continue
to only be entitled to a lower "youth rate", although
Article 7 requires "fair wages and equal remuneration for
work of equal value without distinction of any kind." In
their Fourth Report the Low Pay Commission recommended that 21
year olds should receive the adult rate of the national minimum
wage[42]but
the Government has not taken this recommendation forward. [43]
The Low Pay Commission did recommend that those
aged 18-20 should receive the adult rate of the national minimum
wage, arguing that it could damage employment and training opportunities
for young people this age group "We continue to believe
that young people are vulnerable in the labour market and merit
special consideration." [44]Although
the Commission believes that the development rate should be linked
to training it did not feel that it should be linked only to fully
accredited training as they felt this could create a risk to youth
employment. [45]
The lower rate cannot be justified on the grounds
of age. A lower rate based on age, instead of training, gives
employers no incentive to train employees and encourages the employment
of young workers, on short-term contracts, as cheap labour, displacing
more expensive older workers. A development rate should only exist
for the first six months of employment for all those in formal,
accredited training and those that are entitled to "Right
to Time off for Study and Training." It should not be arbitrarily
linked to age.
A TUC poll of young people[46]found
that they are overwhelmingly opposed to lower rates for young
people; 70% thought that young people work just as hard as their
older colleagues and should therefore be entitled to the same
rates as pay.
The effect of minimum wage legislation as it
currently stands, together with little or no benefits, the abolition
of the student grant and additional pressures related to setting
up home for the first time, could cause severe and genuine hardship
for young people.
CRAE hopes the Joint Committee will confirm
that the UK's obligations under the Covenant require the Government
to extend minimum age protection to young people without discrimination.
CORPORAL PUNISHMENT
The Committee recommends that the physical
punishment of children in families be prohibited in line with
recommendations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child (Paragraph
36)
UK law continues to condone "reasonable
chastisement" by parents. In October 2002, the Committee
on the Rights of the Child again recommended that the UK Government
"with urgency adopt legislation throughout the state party
to remove the `reasonable chastisement' defence and prohibit all
corporal punishment in the family" and "promote positive
participatory and non-violent forms of discipline"[47]
We hope the Joint Committee will emphasise that
the UK's obligations under the Covenant as well as under the Convention
on the Rights of the Child and the European Social Charter require
the Government to legislate to remove the "reasonable chastisement"
defence and combine law reform with comprehensive awareness-raising
and public education.
All forms of corporal punishment have been banned
in ten European countries, and Israel. Sweden was the first country
to ban corporal punishment in 1979. Between 1981 and 1996 only
four child abuse deaths were recorded in Sweden compared to the
UK, where between one and two children die each week from abuse
and neglect in the home.
CHILD POVERTY
The Committee also notes with particular
concern the high levels of child poverty among certain groups
of society (Paragraph 18)
Tax Credits
The Government has introduced a new child tax
credit and working tax credit, which came into force on 6 April
2003. The rates of the tax credit were set in the Budget 2002
and no new money has been announced beyond an earnings related
increase. Commenting on the latest figures for Households Below
Average Income published on 13 April, the Institute for Fiscal
Studies (IFS) suggests that the Government is further behind schedule
than last year in meeting its child poverty target. The IFS has
calculated that for the Government to meet its target of reducing
child poverty by a quarter by 2004-05, the child element in the
tax credit would need to be increased beyond the link with earnings.
An additional £3 per week above average earnings growth would
lift a further 200,000 children out of poverty, at a cost of £1
billion per year. The Child Poverty Action Group recommends this
measure be taken. [48]
300,000 people who applied by the January deadline
were still waiting for tax credit payments at the end of April.
In an emergency statement to Parliament on 28 April, Dawn Primarolo
the Paymaster General apologised to the families concerned and
said that they should receive payment within a week. [49]This
confusion may compound the already grave problem of low take up
of means tested benefits. Figures released by the Department of
Work and Pensions in March revealed that over two million poor
households are failing to claim means-tested benefits worth as
much as £4.5 billion a year.
Child Trust Funds
A new Child Trust fund will provide every child
with an initial endowment at birth of £250. Children from
the poorest third of families will receive £500. This will
be backdated to include all children that were born from September
2002. Parents and other family members will also be able to make
additional contributions. The first children to benefit from the
Fund will become 18 in 2020. Further details will be out in the
summer.
The Social Fund
Child Poverty Action Group have called for the
discredited Social Fund to be reformed commenting on the Budget
2003 they said: "The social fund, intended to help the poorest
and most vulnerable, does not work and continues to leave many
families without adequate support." [50]
Social Security
16 and 17 year olds continue to only be able
to claim benefits in certain restricted circumstances. Care leavers'
financial support is now provided by local authorities, with no
nationally agreed rates.
Refugees and Asylum Seekers
Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and
Asylum Act 2002 states that support for asylum seekers may not
be provided if "the Secretary of State is not satisfied that
the claim was made as soon as reasonably practicable after the
person's arrival in the UK". Following this section of the
Act coming into force on the 8 January 2003, there were numerous
cases of destitute asylum seekers.
The High Court ruled, on 19 February, that the
Government had been wrongly interpreting the law when making decisions
under section 55. A bid by the Home Secretary to have this ruling
reversed in the court of appeal failed on 18 March 2003. It is
crucial that the decisions made under this legislation are monitored
to ensure that asylum seekers are treated with full and fair consideration.
An updated version of Policy briefing 75 has been issued by the
Government following the judgement. However, the situation needs
to be monitored to ensure that asylum seekers are not continuing
to suffer destitution under section 55. Although the legislation
does not explicitly apply to under 18s it will apply to pregnant
women and the Nationality and Asylum Support Service has said
that it intends to treat young people who appear to be over 18
as adults until they can prove otherwise.
From 22 July 2002, people whose asylum claims
are being considered are not allowed to be employed, unless they
gained permission from the Home Office prior to this date. Before
this change in policy, asylum seekers could seek work after a
period of six months.
Discriminatory levels of social security for
asylum seekers persist. The total amount of financial support
received by asylum seeking families is 76% of social security
benefits provided to other destitute families on Income Support.
The Joint Committee should underline that the
rates of child poverty and the discrimination against certain
groups of children are unacceptable in a rich industrialised country
and in conflict with the UK's obligations under the Covenant.
The Joint Committee should urge the Government
to undertake all necessary measures to accelerate the elimination
of child poverty, ensuring a rapid improvement for children in
the poorest families and a narrowing of the income gap between
them and the most affluent.
The Joint Committee should also urge the Government
to ensure that any reform of the asylum system should give specific
attention to children's rights, asylum seekers should have the
same entitlement and access to cash benefits and tax credits as
other families living in the UK.
DISCRIMINATION IN
EDUCATION
The Committee is concerned about the persistence
of de facto discrimination in relation to some marginalised groups
in society, especially ethnic minorities and persons with disabilities,
in various fields, including . . . education (Paragraph 14)
Refugees and Asylum Seekers
Section 36 of the Nationality, Immigration and
Asylum Act 2002 takes away the responsibilities of Local Education
Authorities (LEAs) for children of asylum seekers who are placed
in Accommodation Centres. Segregated education provision is both
regressive and discriminatory. A founding principle of the Education
Act 1944 was that school-based education should be available to
everyone; the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 undermines
this principle. A child's immigration status should not be a factor
in deciding whether or not a child can attend a mainstream school.
Children in Custody
Children in detention still have no statutory
right to education, and in practice receive a very low standard
of education. The Government announced on 9 May 2003, that they
aim to have 90% of young people in the youth justice system in
full-time education, training or employment by 2004. It is crucial
that adequate money is made available to ensure these targets
are met.
Children in custody should have an equal statutory
right to full-time education and those with special educational
needs should have equal entitlement to have their needs met.
Special Educational Needs
The Special Educational Needs Disability Act
2001, which extends the provisions of the Disability Discrimination
Act 1995 to education, came into force in summer 2002. However,
disabled children can still be refused admission to mainstream
schools on the grounds of limited resources or the perceived needs
of other children. The Joint Committee should urge the Government
to promote inclusive education and allocate further resources
to schools to enable full admission of disabled children to mainstream
schools.
Minority Ethnic Groups
Black children continue to be three times more
likely to be excluded from school than other ethnic groups[51]
In January 2003 the Government published new
guidance on school exclusions for England, following draft guidance
issued for consultation in January 2002. Although the Government
received criticism from NGOs over the proposals to give head teachers
new powers to exclude children for certain "one off"
offence, even when the head teacher is not satisfied on a balance
of probabilities that a child was responsibility for the "offence"
the guidance was not amended in the issued guidance.
The Government recently published a consultation
paper on improving the educational attainment of minority ethnic
groups and ring fenced £155 million for an ethnic minority
achievement grant. [52]The
Joint Committee should urge the Government to ensure that it has
a strategy to actively consult with the Afro-Caribbean and Pakistani
children it is aiming to help.
DISSEMINATION
The Committee is concerned that human rights
education provided in the State party to school children . . .
does not give adequate attention to economic, social and cultural
rights (paragraph 13)
There has been no systematic dissemination of
information about the Covenant to children or adults, nor any
systematic evaluation of children's rights. Citizenship education
became a statutory subject from September 2002. Initial guidance
for citizenship education mentions human rights but does not specifically
mention the Convention. [53]Initial
guidance for primary schools (where citizenship education is encouraged
but not compulsory) does not refer to human rights[54]
The Joint Committee should urge the Government
to ensure adequate inclusion in the primary and secondary school
curriculum of human rights education, including the full range
of children's civil and political and economic, social and cultural
rights. The curriculum for teacher training should reflect this.
All professionals who work with and for children should promote
knowledge of and respect for human rights.
The Committee requests the state party to
disseminate the present concluding observations widely at all
levels of society (paragraph 44)
There is little evidence to support the fact
that the Government has disseminated the concluding observations
widely to all levels of society, especially to children and young
people.
The Joint Committee should urge the Government
to disseminate the Concluding Observations widely and produce
a child friendly version.
May 2003
41 Low Pay Commission (2003) The National Minimum
Wage: Fourth Report of the Low Pay Commission Building on Success
paragraph 4.1. Back
42
Low Pay Commission (2003) The National Minimum Wage: Fourth
Report of the Low Pay Commission Building on Success paragraph
4.64. Back
43
Department for Trade and Industry, (Press Release 19 March 2003)
Low Paid workers to get pay rise following Low pay Commission's
Recommendations. Back
44
Low Pay Commission (2003) The National Minimum Wage: Fourth
Report of the Low Pay Commission Building on Success paragraph
4.62. Back
45
Low Pay Commission (2003) The National Minimum Wage: Fourth
Report of the Low Pay Commission Building on Success paragraph
4.53. Back
46
TUC (2002), Young People: What do they know? Back
47
Paragraph 36. Back
48
Child Poverty Action Group Press Release 9 April 2003 Much
to welcome in Budget but pressure now on to meet child poverty
target. Back
49
Hansard 28 Apr 2003: Column 53. Back
50
Child Poverty Action Group Press Release 9 April 2003 Much
to welcome in Budget but pressure now on to meet child poverty
target. Back
51
Department for Education and Skills (2002) Statistics of Education:
Permanent Exclusions from Maintained Schools in England. Back
52
Department for Education and Skills (2003) Aiming High: Raising
the Achievement of minority Ethnics Pupils. Back
53
Qualification and Curriculum Authority (2000) Citizenship at
key stages 3 and 4. Initial Guidance for Schools. Back
54
Qualification and Curriculum Authority (2000) Personal, social
and health education and citizenship at key stages 1 and 2. Initial
Guidance for schools. Back
| 
