Submitted by crinadmin on
[GENEVA, 21 September 2007] - The Committee on the Rights of the Child held its General Day of Discussion on Friday 21 September. The subject was "Resources for the Rights of the Child – Responsibility of States" (article 4). After initial presentations, the meeting split into two groups to discuss the "use of resources to the maximum extent" and "available resources and their allocation to children." Ms Yanghee Lee, Committee Chairperson, opened the meeting by emphasising that the inclusion of the provision is essential to the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The meaning of ‘maximum extent’ and ‘available resources’ would be central to the discussions, she said. She added: “We must bear in mind it is the responsibility of States to implement economic, social and cultural rights.” Mr Kamal Siddiqui, Member of the Committee of the Rights of the Child, began the presentations. He said: “We are concerned not just with financial resources, but human and organisational too.” Consideration of resources must be qualitative, as well as quantitative, he said. Mr Siddiqui pointed out that when States sign the Convention, they must cooperate internationally as well as taking national responsibility. He spoke of a number of factors which he considered integral to the question of allocation of State resources, including political will, the system of taxation, and international cooperation. “A strong political will does not exist in a vacuum,” he said. Issues such as military expenditure, independent tracking, the involvement of civil society and, particularly, the question of whether there had been genuine consultation with children, were crucial. Regarding the use of resources to the maximum extent, he also listed several factors which would be of prime importance including: whether targeting has taken place to ensure resources go to the most marginalised groups, such as girls; whether there is coordination among service providers and beneficiaries; whether there is an effort to implement low cost solutions; and whether there is regular and independent monitoring regarding how resources are being used. Mr Patrick Reichenmiller, of the World Bank, then spoke on behalf of Ms Iqbal Kaur, Social Protection Specialist in the Middle East and North Africa, World Bank, who was unable to attend due to flight delays. “Its needless to rationalise the importance of investing in children”, he began, adding the World Bank was committed to supporting the agenda. He said he intended to highlight the emphasis the World Bank places on children, while stressing the need for collective action that is “participatory, transparent and accountable.” Although significant progress was being made, most of the Millennium Development Goals relating to children will not be met, Mr Reichenmiller said. He went on to describe how children and youth form a core part of the human and social development policies at the World Bank. He said collaborations with UNICEF and the ILO had been very constructive. Ms Lee said she hoped the meeting could be the start of a close relationship between the World Bank and the Committee. Mr Eibe Riedel, Member of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ECOSOC) then took the floor. “It is an honour to be here on a topic that really matters”, he said. He spoke of the importance of the words ‘to take steps’, which suggests long term aims which do not burden the State with immediate expectations. However, he said, all rights contain certain key elements which must be honoured without delay, for example non-discrimination. Another key feature is the non-retrogression of provisions, Mr Riedel added. He said State parties must at all times guarantee the minimum rights such as access to housing, health, and basic education. The modalities of achieving these target rests with States, and “there is no one recipe for the realisation of rights”, he said. “There must be a country by country approach.” The issue of resource allocation has remained controversial, not least because of some vague language used in the CRC, Mr Reidel said, although he added this was the only way the provisions could be adopted. He cautioned: “Resource constraints alone cannot justify inaction. State parties must say what they have nevertheless done to improve the situation. Even the least developed states can begin elementary protection of rights.” Where, for example, there has been an natural disaster such as the Tsuanami, the State has an obligation to seek international assistance. He concluded by saying the Committee supports the States to take the approach most appropriate to that State. Some say this too easy for the States, but the Committee always looks at whether the States have taken sufficient steps in general. “There are limits to State discretion”, he said. Find out more about the General Day of Discussion here (information on the meetings of the working groups will be poste on this page in due course) Further information