COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS CONCLUDES REVIEW OF THE REPORT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM

The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights this morning finished consideration of the sixth periodic report of the United Kingdom.

Introducing the report, Scott McPherson, Director of Law, Rights, International and Judicial Policy at the Ministry of Justice of the United Kingdom, noted that the country had a strong and vigorous civil society which was ready to hold the Government to account. Its approach to giving effect to international obligations had not been to directly incorporate them into domestic legislation. The Government was confident that the existing legal and policy framework in the country fulfilled its international obligations across the spectrum of economic, social and cultural rights, as the domestic legislation provided a range of legally enforceable duties on public authorities in areas, such as health, education and equality.

In the discussion that ensued, Committee Experts expressed concern about the intention of the United Kingdom to replace the Human Rights Act with a British Bill of Rights, asking about the impact of the new bill on the status, the application and the full enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights. They also raised the issues of the domestic application of the Covenant, the United Kingdom’s overseas development assistance in the sector of education, position of migrants, asylum seekers and undocumented persons, the cumulative effects of budget cuts on social security, access to justice, education and healthcare, and the global fight against tax evasion in the Overseas Territories. Other issues raised included gender equality and gender pay gap, multiple discrimination, unemployment and the national minimum wage, the Trade Union Act of 2016, housing deficit, child poverty, and mental healthcare services.

In his concluding remarks, Nicolaas Jan Schrijver, Committee Member and the Committee Rapporteur for the United Kingdom, noted that, whereas there was full respect for the United Kingdom Government’s choice on whether to ratify the Optional Protocol, the Government had to take full responsibility for the implementation of all Covenant rights. Mr. Schrijver wondered whether all the necessary measures had been applied in the case of arms sales to Saudi Arabia which were used in Yemen.

In his concluding remarks, Mr. McPherson emphasized his country’s strong commitment to the protection of human rights, including to the provision of social welfare services in the areas of education, health care, housing, childcare and others.

Concluding the meeting, Waleed Sadi, Committee Chairperson, expressed hope that some of the Committee’s concerns would be taken on board by the delegation and the Government of the United Kingdom.

The Committee will next meet in public on Friday, June 24, at 4 p.m. for the closing of the session.

Report

The sixth periodic report of the United Kingdom is available here: E/C.12/GBR/6.



Presentation of the Report

SCOTT McPHERSON, Director of Law, Rights, International and Judicial Policy at the Ministry of Justice of the United Kingdom, said that the United Kingdom had continued with its commitment to advancing human rights internationally, and it remained keen to play a leading role in the United Nations’ process of enhancing human rights protections around the world. The United Kingdom supported the work of the United Nations’ expert human rights mechanisms, including the treaty bodies, special procedures, as well as the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The United Kingdom had a strong and vigorous civil society which was ready to hold the Government to account. It remained committed to economic, social and cultural rights.

Its approach to giving effect to international obligations had not been to directly incorporate them into domestic legislation. The Government was confident that the existing legal and policy framework in the country fulfilled its international obligations across the spectrum of economic, social and cultural rights, as the domestic legislation provided a range of legally enforceable duties on public authorities in a number of areas, such as health, education and equality. That meant that there were many ways to challenge decisions by public authorities where there was domestic legislation relating to the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights through, for example, bringing a claim to a tribunal for a judicial review.

The United Kingdom was a multi-national country, within which the Governments of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales had legislative responsibilities for major areas of public policy, including health, education, housing, and in Northern Ireland and Scotland also for justice. The different administrations might have differing experiences and approaches in relation to some of the issues raised by the Committee. There were different political parties with distinct policies leading each of the devolved Governments. The Committee was aware of the United Kingdom’s historical links with the Crown Dependencies and British Overseas Territories. Although they were not part of the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom retained responsibility for their legal representation at the United Nations. The Covenant had been extended to three Crown Dependencies: Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man, and to nine British Overseas Territories, said Mr. McPherson.

Questions by Experts

NICOLAAS JAN SCHRIJVER, Committee Member and the Committee Rapporteur for the United Kingdom, raised the question of the domestic application of the Covenant and differences approaches in different domestic legal systems. For example, the Committee had been informed that Scotland’s National Action Plan had the ambition to promote a better incorporation of economic, social and cultural rights in Scotland, potentially through a more direct incorporation. As for Northern Ireland, the more direct application of economic, social and cultural rights was part of the Good Friday Agreement, but that dimension was still to be implemented in the domestic legal order.

Could the delegation inform the Committee on the state of affairs with respect to the intention of the British Government to replace the Human Rights Act by a British Bill of Rights? What exactly prompted the Government to embark on that reform? To what extent would the new bill have impact on the status, the application and the full enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights? How did the Government plan to comply with the Good Friday Agreement, which stipulated the application of human rights, if the Human Rights Act of 1998 were to be repealed?

As for overseas development assistance efforts, the Committee commended that the norm of 0.7 per cent of the Gross National Income had been achieved. To which extent were those development efforts guided by a human rights approach and in particular contributions to the fulfillment of economic, social and cultural rights in developing countries? There were reports that British development projects sometimes supported the privatization of education in some developing countries.

With respect to the position of migrants, asylum seekers and undocumented persons in the country, question was asked on the extent to which the Government considered that those vulnerable and marginalized groups were entitled to a kind of minimum protection under the rights contained in the Covenant, in terms of overnight accommodation, food, access to healthcare and education for children. What kind of country-wide measures of support were taken for refugees and stateless persons to ensure that they were able to integrate effectively within the country once admitted? Under what circumstances were they entitled to work?

On the issue of the budget cuts in the form of austerity measures, the Committee noted considerable and often cumulative effects on social security, access to justice, education and healthcare, especially for vulnerable and marginalized groups, such as women, children, persons with disabilities, ethnic minorities and migrants. Did the Government consider avoiding such regressive measures?

Did the Government consider the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Covenant in order to provide its citizens with further means of redress and in order to contribute to the strengthening of the global protection of human rights?

Another Expert asked about the duty of the State party to devote maximum resources to the fulfillment of economic, social and cultural rights. It seemed that the inheritance tax limits would gradually increase in the future, and that the corporate tax at 25 per cent would be lowered to 19 per cent, which did not serve the purpose of dedicating the maximum resources to the fulfillment of economic, social and cultural rights. Could the Government justify that?

On global fight against tax evasion, the United Kingdom Overseas Territories were identified as very popular jurisdictions for hiding money, noted the Expert. Important advances had been made in the United Kingdom through the registry of companies, and the Government was committed to work with Overseas Territories to avoid tax evasion. What were concrete plans in that regard?

One Expert underlined the responsibility of the United Kingdom’s central Government to uphold all the duties established under the Covenant. How did the United Kingdom Government guarantee that all rights were enjoyed all over the country?

With regard to gender equality, an Expert raised the issue of women’s equal participation in decision-making in both the private and public sectors. What was the basic data on their participation across the entire public sector? There was still a big gender pay gap across different sectors. Was the mandatory reporting of gender pay gap by employers enforced, and what were the outcomes of that reporting?

WALEED SADI, Chairperson of the Committee, asked whether anti-discrimination and gender equality could be achieved progressively. There were certain issues that required an urgent approach, rather than a progressive one.

On employment, it was noted that some groups still faced persistent obstacles to jobs, such as young people, Muslims, migrants and women with disabilities. Why did the unemployment among those groups continue to be very high? What measures were taken to remedy the situation? Low-skill labour accounted for 45 per cent of all labour in the country, out of which migrants made up 16 per cent. What could be done to improve the working conditions for migrant workers? There was a lack of a single comprehensive source of information across the board for all sectors of work. The minimum wage was given to persons above 35 years of age, which suggested some form of discrimination. The minimum wage had to be a minimum living wage, it was stressed.

The recent Trade Union Act of 2016 stipulated requirements before launching an industrial action. What were the specific provisions of that law? Would minimum social benefits provide enough for decent living?

Was there any study on the cumulative impact of all budgetary cuts on vulnerable groups? Had all other alternatives been exhausted before the decision to implement permanent cuts?

Replies by the Delegation

SCOTT McPHERSON, Director of Law, Rights, International and Judicial Policy at the Ministry of Justice of the United Kingdom, responding to a question by the Chairperson, reminded of the upcoming referendum vote on staying or leaving the European Union on 23 June, urging that caution should be taken not too read too much into what the two campaigns were saying. The Westminster Parliament would not normally legislate on matters devolved to national Parliaments.

A representative of the Scottish Government explained that Scotland was exploring the benefits of domestic incorporation of the Covenant in the promotion and protection of economic, social and cultural rights. A representative of the Overseas Territories noted full commitment to the fulfilment of economic, social and cultural rights. The rate of development of some of those rights would vary due, in part, to the diversity of the Overseas Territories.

The United Kingdom Government had reviewed its position regarding the ratification of the Optional Protocol, and the benefits of the ratification remained unclear, due to the existing legal framework.

As for the British Bill of Rights, the delegation said that the Government would consult fully with devolved administrations before the adoption. The Bill would remain faithful to the basic principles and rights which the United Kingdom signed up to in the European Convention on Human Rights and the Good Friday Agreement. The Human Rights Act opened the system to abuse.

The Equality Act provided comprehensive protection against direct and indirect discrimination, requiring public bodies to foster equality between different persons. The Government was aware that the report had identified a number of cases that needed further attention and improvement and was considering appropriate measures.

As for migrant workers and support for them, the United Kingdom Government published all their rights and provided advice to workers on their rights. A more targeted source of information existed for migrants workers, such as overseas domestic workers. There was an organization which provided leaflets for workers in 18 languages. The Welsh Government’s Refugee Inclusion strategy was published in 2008. More recently, the Refugee and Asylum Seeker Delivery Plan had also been launched.

The United Kingdom Government had published a new overseas development assistance strategy in November 2015 where the Government would invest more to tackle crime and corruption in developing countries. It would promote economic development and prosperity, and work to tackle extreme poverty.
The budgetary cuts should be considered in the wider reform context. The Government believed that its welfare reforms would have a long-term positive impact by targeting resources more effectively. A strong safety net continued to exist. Spending to support people with disabilities and health issues would be higher. In Scotland, social welfare spending was focused on the most vulnerable groups.

As for the fight against global tax evasion, the United Kingdom Parliament had the unlimited power to legislate for the Overseas Territories. However, partnership with the Overseas Territories was considered the best way to move forward. The Overseas Territories with financial centres would provide the United Kingdom law enforcement and tax authorities with timely access to information on companies and their assets in those territories.

The delegation stated that the British Parliament had the most diverse composition in history, with high participation by women. Some 50 per cent of public appointments should go to women. As for the horizontal occupational segregation, work was done in schools to improve the situation. Discrimination on grounds of gender could be claimed in front of courts in a civil claim.

The gender pay gap remained at 19.2 per cent, and there were plans to extend gender pay gap reporting. Scotland had launched a partnership for change committed to a 50-50 gender balance by 2020, and it would publish legislation requiring gender balance on the boards of all public bodies. Scotland also increased funding for childcare, while Wales required public sector employers to address gender inequalities and to report annually on disparities in pay.

The national minimum wage was meant for all workers with low wages, and it was different for various age groups. The national minimum wage was designed to balance the boost in wages and business affordability. In Scotland, the Scottish Government pays living wages to its staff and encouraged other organisations to do so.

The Trade Union Act of 2016 introduced the requirement of a 50 per cent turnout for industrial action. That would restore public confidence in industrial action and would balance the interests of businesses, unions and the public.

There was the highest employment rate on record, with over 2.3 million more people in work since 2010. As for employment access for people with disabilities, the Government was committed to halving the employment gap. With respect to access to the labour market for minorities, in 2015 the Government had set a target to increase their employment by 20 per cent by 2020. Youth unemployment had been significantly reduced since 2010.

Concerning the cumulative effect of the welfare changes on the most vulnerable groups, it was explained that the spending to support persons with disabilities and health conditions was higher. Welfare spending was not the only way to support persons with disabilities; there were also other public spending measures, such as healthcare and infrastructure building. Improving life chances for children and tackling child poverty were covered by new measures. Work was the best way out of poverty, which was why measures for moving to employment were given priority. Education attainment was the biggest single factor that ensured that poor children did not end up as poor adults. As for the persistent unemployment among certain groups, it took place due to complex reasons, and the Government continued to analyze the problem in order to improve policies.

Regarding the unemployment rates in Scotland, a delegate explained that modern apprenticeships were used to reduce the rates. It aimed to tackle gender imbalances, as well as higher unemployment rates among minorities.

Questions by Experts

An Expert raised the question of healthcare for the elderly, and the abuse, neglect and maltreatment of children and elderly people in the health care sector. To what extent had the earlier recommendations been observed? Lack of accessibility and affordability of health care for migrants, asylum seekers, victims of trafficking and minorities had been reported. What measures were taken to remedy that situation?

An Expert noted that funding had been cut for crucial mental health care services. There appeared to be an underinvestment in mental health care, as well as an increasing number of deaths in prisons and detention. Three quarters of persons with mental health problems did not receive care at all. Cases of detention of children with mental problems in police cells was recorded. Was there any intention to amend the Mental Health Act in order to improve the rights of persons with mental health problems?

One Expert asked about the measures adopted to ensure that children did not live in absolute destitution. Why did the Lives Changes Act repeal the duty of the State party to meet time bound targets to eliminate child poverty?

What measures were taken to deal with the housing deficit? There was a high number of people and children living in overcrowded and inadequate housing. What measures were taken to reduce the high levels of street homelessness?

Concerning protection of family, the delegation provided no information on Northern Ireland. Turning to childcare and family responsibility, it was noted that some 72 per cent of women with small children did not have paid work. What was the percentage of fathers who used parental leave?

As for domestic violence, there was no information on girls with disabilities. Was there any policy targeting that particular category, as well as relevant data? Was there any plans to decriminalize abortion in Northern Ireland?

On the right to food, an Expert said that a rising number of families relied on food banks, and 8.4 million families lived in food-insecure households. At the same time, the rate of obesity was very high, and it was linked to the fact that poor families relied on diets that were cheap but not sufficiently nourishing. What were the plans to more strictly regulate the marketing of unhealthy food to children?

The right to adequate standard of living and health was also raised. There was a surprising rise of mortality of elderly people which could be linked to the austerity measures, such as reductions in pensions. What steps were taken to avoid such impact of the austerity measures?

With respect to the quality of education, several studies had shown disparities in education performance linked to income differences. People from low-income families had worse results than children coming from high-income families. That gap was widening, and those disparities undermined social mobility and the very democratic values that the Government was committed to, such as equal opportunities for all. What were the concrete strategies to tackle those acute disparities in educational performance? In higher education, there had been an increase in university fees since 2002, which undermined access to university education by poor students.

On extraterritorial obligations and the right to education, the United Kingdom Development Agency had been funding the privatization of education in countries such as Ghana, Kenya, Uganda, Nigeria, India and Pakistan. That type of education had a negative effect on access to primary education and contributed to the segregation of poor families. Furthermore, the quality of such education was very debatable. Would the Government evaluate its funding of such education in developing countries?

What steps were taken to promote the Irish language in Northern Ireland in order to protect people’s cultural rights? As for the cultural rights in Scotland, there were difficulties for children and young people to enjoy them. What were the policies that could be developed to stimulate cultural rights?

Another Expert raised the question of minority cultures and their compatibility with the majority culture.

An Expert referred to the issue of the implementation of economic, social and cultural rights in the business context. The Government had adopted a national action plan to ensure that businesses respect the Covenant rights. The national action plan was general in some aspects, and it did not contain information on implementation. What were the achievements and challenges of the action plan? Was there any monitoring mechanism? The regulation of overseas businesses and their respect for economic, social and cultural rights was a problematic issue.

Follow-up Questions by Experts

One Expert said that the application of the Covenant was universal across the territory under the jurisdiction of the State party. However, the United Kingdom did not follow that approach. Was the Government ready to make a national action plan for the national-wide application of the Covenant?

Another Expert expressed perplexity over the fact that the United Kingdom Government seemed to have treated the Overseas Territories as foreign territories in relation to the global fight against tax evasion. More clarification on the December 2015 agreement was hence needed.

The question on the philosophy behind the austerity measures was reiterated. Was the national minimum wage sufficient for decent living or not? As for the Trade Union Act, its impact was not as positive as presented by the delegation. Substantial tribunal fees for discrimination and unfair dismissal complaints had been introduced. How did that comply with the Covenant?

NICOLAAS JAN SCHRIJVER, Committee Member and the Committee Rapporteur for the United Kingdom, noted that the Government’s claim that the United Kingdom had a very strong legal framework for social protection was, in fact, a strong argument in favour of ratifying the Optional Protocol.

Speaking of British arms transfers to Saudi Arabia, Mr. Schrijver noted that the Saudi military campaign in Yemen had resulted in a disaster for the local population. Did the Government feel any responsibility to prevent the violation of human rights in countries where British businesses were directly or indirectly involved?

The Expert also asked for a clarification on the refugee and asylum policy which was the responsibility of the United Kingdom Government rather than of national Governments.

Replies by the Delegation

SCOTT McPHERSON, Director of Law, Rights, International and Judicial Policy at the Ministry of Justice of the United Kingdom, explained that by focusing on what people had in common, the Government could focus on the shared sense of future. The Government was focused on creating more integrated communities, with opportunities for all, regardless of ethnic or cultural backgrounds.

Mr. McPherson noted that the United Kingdom had a long historical tradition of devolution of powers to its constituent parts, such as Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, the Crown Dependencies and the Overseas Territories. He reminded that each State party had to decide for itself how to best achieve economic, social and cultural rights. The Government had no plans to introduce a single national action plan for the implementation of economic, social and cultural rights covering all its parts because the development of such a plan would have consequences for the devolution of powers within the country. As for the joining to the Optional Protocol, the United Kingdom had reviewed its positon in 2014 as part of the Universal Periodic Review and would do so again during the next Universal Periodic Review.

On private education in developing countries, the delegation noted the report of the Committee Rapporteur. At the same time, it recognized the role the private sector could play in the development of education. It was important for national Governments to define the right balance between private and state education in compliance with international standards. For example, in Pakistan, the United Kingdom supported the Punjab Education Fund which enabled children to attend low-fee private schools, which was the case in Kenya as well, because there were no public schools in certain low-income areas.

As for financial regulation in the Overseas Territories, the delegation stated that the United Kingdom took the promotion of its human rights obligations seriously. The United Kingdom would exercise its power to legislate for the governments of the Overseas Territories only in extreme situations. Later in 2016 the United Kingdom Government would be receiving information on the assets held by British citizens in the Overseas Territories. The Government was now focused on working to make the arrangements with the Overseas Territories fully operational.

In response to a question on the philosophy of the Government’s welfare policies, it was noted that the richest fifth of the population would pay more in taxes in 2019-2020, namely they would pay 52 per cent of all tax, as opposed to the previous 49 per cent. Half of all welfare spending was still going to the poorest households. The public authorities were required to consider the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination and foster good relations when deciding policies and delivering services.

The delegation explained that the calculation of the national living wage relied on the judgment and expertise of the Low Pay Commission, which was consulted every year. Economic, labour and pay analyses were used for the calculation of the national living wage. By 2020, there should be an increase of some 2,000 pounds in average wages. The Low Pay Commission would continue to monitor the national living wage. As for the low-pay sector workers in the social care and cleaning industry, the delegation stressed that the national living wage applied to all workers. The Government was committed to cracking down on those employers who violated the national living wage requirements.

It was legitimate for the Government to balance the interests of businesses and trade unions. The measures of the Trade Union Act were subjected to a genuine scrutiny during the parliamentary discussion and there had so far been six discussions with social partners. As for the increased employment tribunal fees, the Delegation explained that the Government was currently reviewing them, including the impact of the fees on those who were most vulnerable.

Asylum seekers were only allowed to work if their request was being processed for more than 12 months without their own fault. There was a difference between asylum seekers and economic migrants, who could not ask for asylum. To that end, the Government had recently set up the Syrian Vulnerable People Programme, which provided those in need with health care and resettlement schemes.

Speaking of health care for older people and mental health, the delegation explained that a relevant institution had made recommendations to local municipalities on how to improve care services provided for older people at home. As for the access to health care for undocumented persons, such as Roma, homeless people, travelers and transgender persons, in 2016 new guidelines had been published for general practitioners on the basis of equality and human rights. There was no regulatory requirement for documentation, such as the proof of address, for example. As for persons with mental illnesses, the national health services were commissioned and funded. In 2016, the funding for mental health services was continuing to increase.

On the question of potential abuse and neglect in the care system of Wales, the delegation said that there was new legislation on how social care was delivered. Sustainable services were provided to people, who were not treated in isolation but as part of a family. Local authorities had to pay due attention to the rights of persons with disabilities. The Health Care Inspectorate checked across Wales whether those standards were met. Individuals whose asylum claims were considered and refugees received free health care. A strategy had been launched to improve mental health care services, and to avoid the provision of mental health care to children if other services or treatments were available to them.

The Scottish Healthcare Strategy aimed to establish a consistent data collection in order to provide better services. Asylum seekers were entitled to a full range of health care services, including to those whose applications had been refused. The Scottish Government had made investments to integrate health and social care. In Scotland, mental health treatment was strictly regulated in order to protect patients’ human rights. Some 150 million pounds were additionally set aside to improve access to mental health services. Deaths of mental health patients, or persons with mental conditions in prisons, are subject to investigation.

Suicide and harm reduction programmes were in place in prisons across the United Kingdom. The Department of Health was tasked to ensure that all cases of deaths in mental health care environment should be independently investigated. The review investigating the quality of practice and services in mental health care would be available in December 2016. The Mental Health Care Practice Code, reviewed in 2015, stipulated that police stations could only be used as places of safety in the absence of other locations. It would remove police stations as places of safety for persons under 17.

The delegation informed that the United Kingdom Government did not have one recognized measure or definition of poverty. Its measures aimed to tackle the root causes of poverty. A 2014 report on child poverty had demonstrated that parental unemployment was the key cause of child poverty, whereas education was key in ensuring that poor children would not end up as poor adults. Investment in child care, the national minimum wage and pensions were some of the most important measures to tackle poverty. The Government was committed to improving social mobility. The New Life Chances Measures programme aimed to improve the living conditions of children coming from low-income families. The Scottish Government is developing a Scottish approach to tackling poverty, in consultations with its Independent Poverty Advisor and based on Scotland’s Child Poverty Strategy. The Welsh Government focused on maximizing employability and on stronger economy in order to tackle poverty.

More affordable housing was one of the United Kingdom Government’s priorities. There were strict procedures for landlords on the eviction of tenants. Landowners had to give tenants special prior notice. As for homelessness, the Government had adopted a number of measures to take people off the streets. In Wales, a mandatory national registration had been introduced to tackle the issue of poor housing. All local authorities had an obligation to prevent and minimize homelessness. In Scotland, the Affordable Housing Programme had delivered over 30,000 affordable homes by December 2015, including over 20,000 for social rent.. Regulations also ensured tenants’ rights in case of evictions.

Childcare was available in different forms, such as tax-free childcare for children below age of three. As for the shared parental leave, it allowed mothers to gain statutory payments while fathers were at work, and the other way around.

Follow-up Questions by Experts

On the ratification of the Optional Protocol of the Covenant, an Expert reminded that the previous Universal Periodic Review recorded that the United Kingdom Government had not taken into consideration the recommendation by Spain to ratify the Optional Protocol.

Another Expert asked whether students in the Overseas Territories had the necessary social and economic resources to attend universities. Were there any plans to introduce tuition waivers for students from the Overseas Territories?

What steps were taken to deal with the housing crisis in Northern Ireland and the long waiting lists for social housing, which disproportionately affected Catholic families in Belfast? What measures were taken to provide adequate housing to Roma and Travelers?

One Expert observed that there seemed to be a lack of understanding of a cumulative impact assessment of the new welfare policies on economic, social and cultural rights.

Regarding extraterritorial obligations in the field of education, the problem was that some of the projects supported by the United Kingdom undermined the equality of education because they promoted segregation and undermined the power of local governments.

An Expert noted that sometimes the United Kingdom did not meet its international obligations under the pretext of devolution of powers within the United Kingdom. In the same vein, anti-secrecy laws for the Overseas Territories could be passed by the United Kingdom Parliament.

Was there any system in place to assess the remaining gender pay gaps and the equal pay for the work of equal value? The Equality Act of 2010 had not recognized dual discrimination, contrary to what the Expert understood was the claim of the delegation to the contrary.

NICOLAAS JAN SCHRIJVER, Committee Member and the Committee Rapporteur for the United Kingdom, raised the issue of blacklisting of workers for political beliefs, trade union membership and when they made complaints. That was prevalent particularly in the construction industry. Access to justice was often not easy for workers who did not have the resources to initiate proceedings. Would the Scottish Government penalize those companies that blacklisted workers?

Replies by the Delegation

SCOTT McPHERSON, Director of Law, Rights, International and Judicial Policy at the Ministry of Justice of the United Kingdom, said that the United Kingdom did not believe that allowing poor children in developing countries to go to schools led to segregation. The Government considered all its international legal obligations in the design of its policies.

As for abortion in Northern Ireland, the Northern Ireland Department of Justice had recommended that the current abortion law should be changed in case of fetal abnormality. However, Northern Ireland had not accepted that recommendation.

New funds had been allocated to the fight against domestic violence. The increased funding of 80 million pounds would ensure that the needs of victims with disabilities and those with complex needs would improve their protection. In Wales, the Government had adopted a landmark legislation in 2015 to ensure consistent application of support services to all victims of domestic violence.

The delegation acknowledged a recent report stating there were 8.4 million families in the United Kingdom living in food insecure households. There was some evidence on the decline of sale of some unhealthy food products. Efforts were being made to improve the quality of food in schools, reducing salt and sugar, and to improve physical activity. In Scotland, there was a strong commitment to food sustainability, in line with the dignified food provision principle. The Government tasked a working group to investigate what drove people towards food insecurity. Students were entitled to free school meals if their families received welfare benefits.

There was a triple lock guarantee in place that the state pension would rise by 2.5 percent each year. There was also commitment to extend the lock by 2020.

The educational attainment gap for low-income families had narrowed since 2011. Among certain minorities that gap still remained high. Scholarships were provided to low-income students to buy textbooks and cover transport costs. Since 2010, the Government had significantly reformed higher education in order to ensure that economy remained competitive. Students could take loans to pay for their tuition, and measures were taken to improve access to higher education for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Students from the Overseas Territories were entitled to full student support if they lived in the United Kingdom for four years prior to university enrolment.

In Wales, education maintenance allowance permitted students from low-income backgrounds to remain in the education system after 16. Around one third of allowance benefit recipients had advanced to higher education. A new regulatory framework aimed to remove barriers to access to higher education. In Scotland, local authorities had an obligation to identify additional educational needs of students. Access to higher education was based on the ability to learn rather than on the ability to pay. In 2016-2017, support for students from the poorest households would further increase. An increase of 35 per cent had been noted in the higher education enrolment by students from the poorest families.

The United Kingdom was the first country to produce a national plan on business and human rights. The Government was prepared to set up mandatory measures where necessary. It continued to keep the legislative framework under review, and it worked with businesses with activities abroad to ensure adequate working conditions.

The delegation stated that the United Kingdom had one of the most robust arms export criteria. Risks of human rights abuses were the key part of the monitoring. All licensing decisions were based on expert advice from a range of Government departments. All advice and decisions were taken in line with the European Union consolidated criteria.

Employment benefits, namely the national living wage, were the same for all kinds of contracts, including the zero-hours contracts. The Government and independent research had shown that zero-hour contracts had a place in the national economy. In May 2015, the Government had banned the exclusivity clause in zero-hours contracts.
As for the blacklisting of workers by employers, the delegation noted that it represented a serious misuse and breach of the privacy of personal data. The Information Commissioner could investigate the breach and recommend actions to be taken. All public sector procurers were obliged to comply with non-discrimination principles when granting contracts. In Scotland, public bodies were require to discontinue contracts with companies that breached employment standards.

It was true that the section on dual discrimination of the Equality Act had not yet entered into force, the delegation said.

General Observations by Experts

One Expert noted a substantial lack of statistical information, which were important for the Committee Experts to be able to assess the current report and compare it to the previous ones. It was important to know how the budget was distributed. He noted that economic, social and cultural rights needed to be considered as human rights and not simply as rights.

Another Expert said that he was disappointed with the lack of adequate responses to the questions on the status and promotion of the Irish language, on the impact of austerity measures on pensions and the income of young people, and on equality in education.

Concluding Remarks

NICOLAAS JAN SCHRIJVER, Committee Member and the Committee Rapporteur for the United Kingdom, thanked the delegation for their replies, noting the absence of representatives from Northern Ireland. While there was full respect for the United Kingdom Government’s choice on whether to ratify the Optional Protocol, Mr. Schrijver reminded that the Government nonetheless had to take full responsibility for the implementation of all Covenant rights. As for extraterritorial obligations, Mr. Schrijver wondered whether all the necessary measures had been applied in the case of arms sales to Saudi Arabia, which were used in Yemen. Speaking of the austerity measures, it would be wise to embark on a more human-rights based assessment of their impact. There was a concern over the fact that asylum seekers had to wait for 12 months to regulate their status, and that during that time they had no access to work.

SCOTT McPHERSON, Director of Law, Rights, International and Judicial Policy at the Ministry of Justice of the United Kingdom, reminded the Committee of his country’s strong commitment to the protection of human rights, including to the provision of social welfare services in the areas of education, healthcare, housing, childcare and others.

Concluding the meeting, WALEED SADI, Committee Chairperson, expressed hope that some of the Committee’s concerns would be taken on board by the delegation and the Government of the United Kingdom.



For use of the information media; not an official record

ESC16/017E