Madame Chairperson,
On behalf of the European Union, I would herewith like to submit to the Bureau of the Preparatory Committee for the Special Session on Children some broader comments on the second draft of the Outcome Document as circulated last month. The Central and Eastern European Countries associated with the European Union (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia) and the associated countries Cyprus, Malta and Turkey, as well as the EFTA countries members of the EEA Iceland and Norway align themselves with this statement. We hope these comments will be of assistance to the Bureau in its endeavour to prepare and organise the discussions in the most constructive manner.
1. The major structural approach of the text is much improved compared to the earlier draft. The present structure would also allow for a shorter, more concise text. This is possible with the approach of leaving some of the analytical aspects to the report of the Secretary-General, "We the Children". The ten points in the Declaration are well chosen, though not all of them are followed through in the subsequent text. Likewise, the EU supports the selection of the four areas given priority: promoting healthy lives, providing quality education, protecting from abuse, exploitation and violence, and combating HIV/AIDS. Strategies and actions within these areas should be rights based.
2. The EU is worried by the fact that the emphasis on the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the rights based approach has been weakened considerably in the revised draft outcome document. The spirit of a rights-based approach should be an integral part of the outcome document including in all interventions mentioned in the text. As it stands the text places too much emphasis on the rights of parents and often treats children as objects rather than individuals with their own rights independently from that of adults. The EU would like to see much more emphasis on the issue of child participation, which is one of the strongest manifestations of the rights-based approach.
3. The problem that the EU raised in relation to the previous draft outcome document about the goal setting is unresolved in the new draft. This is a major shortcoming. There are too many goals (lack of priority); too heavy an emphasis on statistical targets (thereby underrating the qualitative aspects); apparent arbitrariness on the percentages or time limits (thereby risking to trivialise the exercise); and unclarity about whether the goals are meant to be relevant in all countries or only reflect a global average (thereby being unclear about the real addressee). There are too many targets and the majority of them are less relevant for developed countries. Global targets need to be set to allow for national level articulation of meaningful challenges for both developed and developing countries. Also, some of the timeframes seem to be somewhat arbitrary.
4. It is important that UN goal setting be serious in order to have effect. The Special Session should only adopt a small number of priority goals and that these should to a large extent build on previously agreed international development targets and the Millennium Declaration. Further, EU partners recommended that, as in 1990, an appendix be put together containing more detailed targets agreed in the relevant UN bodies for the four selected priority areas, and that the Special Session makes a reference to these and further clarify that these are to be seen as ambitions in the programming of the relevant UN bodies. The Outcome Document should reiterate our support for the International Development Targets and reconfirm our shared determination to redouble our efforts to achieve these targets.
5. The main text of the Plan of Action should focus on actions to be taken by respective governments and to be incorporated in national planning. The chapter on follow up actions and monitoring should make references to national planning; necessary law-making; the establishment of monitoring systems; systematic co-ordination of activities by the authorities – vertically and horizontally; data collection (mentioned); awareness activities; training; co-operation with the civil society; child-friendly budget processes and parliamentary discussions. The question of accountability must be further clarified, in the current text it is not clear whether all actions are to be taken by governments or whether other actors also have roles to play.
6. Another major aspect for the very construct of the Outcome Document relates to the issue of burden-sharing. We welcomed the "International Action Against Child Poverty Conference" organised by the British Government in London on 26 February 2001 and recommend that the spirit and recommendations at this meeting be reflected in the Outcome Document. The chapter on mobilisation of resources should also emphasise the need for national efforts and mobilisation of domestic resources as the main pillar of development.
7. It is important that the text is written to be relevant in both developing and developed countries. It has to be made clear that the rights of the child also are violated in the industrialised countries. Another aspect of balance in the draft relates to which age group is focused. The text in its current form addresses situations for the very young children, rather than on those for all children, including adolescents. There is no reference to adolescents in the goals on education and health, and they are only given limited notion in the strategies devised to implement the goals. In this context, secondary education and their sexual and reproductive health and rights should be stressed.
There is also a limited focus on gender aspects in the current draft, not least is there a limited regard for the rights of the girl child and adolescent girls in relation to equal access to health and education services.
The EU has other comments relating to concrete aspects of the issues in the draft. We will refer to them in the course of the intersessional and in subsequent discussions. The Bureau has our full support in its difficult task.
Thank you, Madame Chairperson.