---

Equality Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 42:"Page 4, line 37, at end insert—" ““(   )   In determining what action to take in pursuance of children’s human rights, the Commission must have particular regard to the importance of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, Clause 9(3) rightly requires the commission to have particular regard to the European Convention on Human Rights, but that treaty was not drafted with children in mind. Even within the confines of civil and political rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child is much broader. It includes, for example, children’s right to have their views given due weight in Article 12; disabled children’s right to active participation in the community in Article 23; children’s right to appropriate information in Article 17; and, even more crucial, children’s right to protection from all forms of violence in Article 19. Incidentally, I note that the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Massey of Darwen, has been inadvertently left off the amendment, and I regret that. Those supporting the amendment believe that there is a special case for including by name the Convention on the Rights of the Child. There is no more ratified human rights treaty in the world, as, I am sure, your Lordships will agree. No fewer than 192 states have ratified it and, in so doing, have agreed to implement fully all the rights of all children. The convention gives children a comprehensive set of economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights. Human rights bodies, including the European Court of Human Rights and the parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, use the convention as their benchmark for determining children’s human rights issues. Domestic courts increasingly refer to the convention when considering matters affecting children. As the noble Baroness, Lady Massey of Darwen, would have said—she sends her apologies for not being able to be with us this afternoon—the convention’s clear guidance would be invaluable, particularly at a time of so much change in children’s services in this country. I should also add that the Local Government Information Unit also supports that approach. It says:"““We believe that there is a risk that the human rights of children will not be fully addressed in the activities of the new commission unless specifically referred to in the statutory framework””." The Committee on the Rights of the Child, the international treaty-monitoring body for the convention, strongly urges that legislation refer explicitly to the convention, even when a broadly based human rights body serves children. Your Lordships will remember that last year, during debates on Part 1 of the Children Act 2004, the House made strenuous efforts to create a rights-based Children’s Commissioner for England, for England’s 11 million children. That was to be in line with the rest of the UK and Europe. Although, I am glad to say, the legislation was improved considerably as it passed through both Houses, sadly it remains ““rights-light”” and second class in that respect. While commissioners in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland must promote and protect children’s rights, the general function of England’s commissioner is narrowly defined as being,"““to promote awareness of the views and interests of children””." Noble Lords will understand, therefore, that children in England especially, but not exclusively, very much need the new commission to promote and protect their human rights. Self-evidently, babies and children are uniquely vulnerable to having their human rights violated. As the Joint Committee on Human Rights said in its report of May 2003, making the case for a rights-based children’s commissioner:"““Children are vulnerable to exploitation and oppression in ways that adults are not””." Can any of the exiting equality bodies confidently claim that they fully serve the needs and interests of children, or that children are included in the organisation’s priority setting and decision making? With the commission we have a new opportunity to weave children’s issues throughout the fabric of the organisation. This amendment is essential. We must ensure, first, that children are central to the commission, not an add-on, and, secondly, that the commission will take a broad approach to children’s human rights, having regard to all the articles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as the general comments and concluding observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child. It is to the Convention on the Rights of the Child that children’s rights advocates look to transform children’s lives. I hope that the Minister will agree that we can and should ensure that that is achieved by the explicit inclusion of the convention in the Bill. I beg to move.