Committee on the Rights of the Child
13 September 2005
The Committee on the Rights of the Child this morning took up the
second and third periodic reports of Australia on how that country
implements the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the
Child.
Presenting the reports, Mike Smith, Permanent Representative of
Australia to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said they
underlined Australia's respect for its obligations, and its
commitment to upholding the principles contained in the Convention.
Australian Governments were responding to compelling evidence that
investment in early childhood was an effective and cost-effective
strategy for improving outcomes for children both now and in the
future, and recognized the need for coordination of nation-wide
activity to promote child development in the country. Family law
reforms, which were announced in July 2005, would facilitate shared
parenting, consistent with the best interest of the child, and would
also address the specific needs of indigenous children in the family
law system. Further developments in immigration detention policy,
particularly the movement of families with children out of detention
facilities into the community, ensured that the current immigration
detention policy was administered with greater flexibility, fairness,
and in a timelier manner.
Issues raised by Committee Experts, including Kamel Filali who served
as Country Rapporteur for the reports, concerned the Government's
global policy on children and families, and the role of the Human
Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission as well as questions on
health and education. Questions were asked on the disparity between
indigenous children and non indigenous children in such areas as
health, infant mortality and education. Other questions included what
the country was doing to respond to the significant number of
suicides among the youth of the country. Several Experts also raised
the topics of mental health, obesity, malnourishment and suicide
among indigenous children, and one Expert asked whether studies had
been done on this last phenomenon.
In preliminary concluding remarks, Jean Zermatten, the Committee
Expert serving as co-Country Rapporteur for the reports, said a new
direction had been taken in Australia in terms of family policy and
stronger families and communities. All these recent efforts bore
witness to the interest attached by the State party in children,
including those affected by the policies of the family and of the
State. It was hoped the two Optional Protocols would be ratified
soon. The situation needed to be improved in at least two items,
particularly with regards to the disadvantages of indigenous
children, as this was a source of concern for the Government, and for
the status of refugee and asylum-seeking children, although a lot of
progress had been made in this area in particular.
The delegation of Australia included representatives of the Attorney
General's Department, the Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination,
the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous
Affairs, and the Department of Family and Community Services.
The Committee will issue its final observations and recommendations
on the reports of Australia at the end of the session which will
conclude on 30 September. The Committee will reconvene on Wednesday,
14 September at 10 a.m. when it will take up the second periodic
report of Algeria (CRC/C/93/Add.7).
*Reports of Australia*
The second and third periodic reports of Australia (CRC/C/129/Add.4)
demonstrate the special place that children hold in Australian
society. High levels of effort and resources are committed to
ensuring that Australian children are able to reach their full
potential and that the rights to be found in the Convention are
available to them. Most Australian children enjoy lower infant
mortality rates, better health, higher educational outcomes and
greater leisure opportunities than their counterparts in many other
countries.
The reports show that Australian Governments have continued to seek
opportunities to improve the implementation of the Convention on the
Rights of the Child in Australia. One of the main achievements in the
period covered by the reports has been the increased coordination of
policies and monitoring mechanisms for children. The Convention is
implemented by nine governments, each of which develop initiatives to
implement the Convention that best meet the needs of their respective
jurisdictions, which means that the Convention is implemented in a
variety of ways across the country. This means that there will never
be complete consistency in the manner in which it is implemented, but
this is not required to implement the Convention. The report also
demonstrates Australia's commitment to children outside of Australia.
Despite the efforts on behalf of children, significant challenges
remain, the reports say. Australian Governments continue to address
the needs of indigenous children, particularly in the areas of
health, education, family violence and the juvenile justice system;
yet indigenous children continue to suffer disadvantage in these
areas, compared with non-indigenous children. The child protection
system is another area of concern, as despite extensive efforts since
the Committee's consideration of the initial report, including a
number of reviews into the operation of child protection services in
a number of States and significantly increased funding for
initiatives targeted at high risk groups, the number of children in
need of care and protection remains unacceptably high.
*Presentation of Reports*
MIKE SMITH, Permanent Representative of Australia to the United
Nations Office at Geneva, said Australia had always taken, and
continued to take, its obligations under the Convention and other
human rights instruments with the utmost seriousness. The periodic
report underlined its respect for its obligations, and its commitment
to upholding the principles contained in the Convention. Australia
had a federal constitutional system in which legislative, executive
and judicial powers were shared or distributed between the Federal
Government and those of the six States and two internal
self-governing territories. Australian Governments at both a federal
and state level were responding to compelling evidence that
investment in early childhood was an effective and cost-effective
strategy for improving outcomes for children both now and in the
future. Australian Governments had also recognized the need for
coordination of nation-wide activity to promote child development in
Australia. Australian Governments were therefore finalizing a
National Agenda for Early Childhood to better coordinate current
child development activity in Australia and to guide future
investment to ensure all children received the best possible start in
life.
While some headway was being made, Mr. Smith said, indigenous
children remained among the most disadvantaged children in Australian
society. The Australian Government's commitment to improving outcomes
for these children was reflected in a new set of arrangements for the
administration of indigenous affairs based on the principle of shared
responsibility. The Government was also strongly committed to
preventing exploitation of children, both in Australia and elsewhere.
As a reflection of this commitment, the Australian Government had
recently introduced several new changes to criminal laws to
strengthen protection of children against trafficking, pornography
and other offences.
As part of Australia's orderly and managed migration and visa system,
the comprehensive arrangements for detention of unauthorized arrivals
and those who breached visa conditions had further developed such
that, as of 29 July 2005, all families with children were moved from
immigration detention facilities into the community. This was in line
with a number of legislative changes to the Migration Act, which
would ensure that the current immigration detention policy was
administered with greater flexibility, fairness, and in a timelier
manner. The overall intention of the package of amendments was to
ensure that the best interests of children were taken into account.
The family law reforms focused on shared parental responsibility and
also addressed the specific needs of indigenous children in the
family law system.
*Questions by Experts*
KAMEL FILALI, the Committee Expert acting as Country Rapporteur for
the reports of Australia, said the presence of high-level dignitaries
in the delegation showed the importance that Australia gave to the
Convention and to the dialogue with the Committee. The current report
was a good one, and followed the guidelines, and Australia was to be
commended for having given due attention to some of the previous
recommendations of the Committee. Regarding progress made, the
Committee took note of the creation of family relationship centres,
and of the national Plan of Action launched in 2000 against the
sexual exploitation of children, among other things.
However, Mr. Filali said, he remained concerned by the fact that
several of the previous recommendations of the Committee remained
valid today, in particular the reservation that Australia had made to
the Convention, in particular as the Committee continued to believe
that this reservation was an obstacle to the implementation of the
Convention; the application of the general principles such as that of
non-discrimination or the superior interest of the child; and the
treatment of asylum seekers. Regarding this last issue, Australia was
one of the only countries in the world to apply a policy of
obligatory detention of illegal immigrants, and this detention had no
limits in time.
Mr. Filali also noted his concern for the fact that the Ministry of
Children and Youth had been relegated to the status of a
Parliamentary Secretary, and had a reduced budget. Further, it
appeared that the Attorney General had the power to block any
decisions of the Commission on Human Rights and Equal Opportunity.
The police also appeared to hold excessive powers to stop children
from going to specific places, which appeared to be contrary to the
right to freedom of meeting and association, as recognized by the
Convention.
Questions asked by other Committee Experts were on various topics,
including the ratification of the two Optional Protocols to the
Convention; did the State inform indigenous and refugee children of
their rights, and whether children were in a position of being heard
directly by a judge; the limited circumstances under which children
could lose citizenship; and what the country was doing to respond to
the significant number of suicides among the youth of the country.
One Expert also raised the issue of violence, inquiring whether there
was a culture of violence in the country, and asked what Australia
was doing to combat violence against children, in particular with
regards to indigenous children. The issue of corporal punishment in
schools was also raised in the context of violence and an Expert
asked whether the awareness-raising on this topic requested by the
Committee after the presentation of an earlier report had taken
place.
The situation of indigenous children was also a topic on which many
questions were asked, including the disparity between them and
children of different ethnic origins in such areas as health, infant
mortality and education. An Expert also asked whether there had been
an assessment of the results of a programme covering indigenous
children, and if so, what were the results of this assessment.
*Response by the Delegation*
Responding to these questions, the delegation gave information on how
the Convention was implemented in Australia, saying that the Federal
system gave responsibility for implementing the Convention to the
Federal Government and that of the States and territories. The
Government had a number of ministerial councils across a wide range
of policies at which central Governments liased regularly with their
counterparts in the States and Territories in order to have a
coherent approach. The National Agenda for Early Childhood had been
developed after close consultation among all levels of Government and
would ensure that all children had the best possible start in life,
with policies targeting their needs.
Economic assistance and support was provided directly to Australian
families by the Federal Government, by way of direct payments and
support for childcare. This amount was not at the discretion of State
Governments to redistribute, as it was paid directly to families in
order to provide the best possible environment conducive to the
development of their children. Regarding the incorporation of the
Convention into domestic law, Australia had implemented it with the
same policy that it used on all international instruments that it had
ratified. As for the application of the Convention in local courts,
courts had a role in interpreting domestic law and applying it, where
this was clear and unambiguous, but where legislation was passed that
was specifically relevant to the rights covered by an international
instrument, the court would have recourse to the international
instrument to resolve any ambiguities or misunderstandings in
national legislation, and would do so in order to ensure that rights
recognized by that Convention were applied as per international
standards.
The delegation explained the independent role of the Human Rights and
Equal Opportunity Commission. It noted that the Commission's Human
Rights Commissioner had responsibility for children's rights, and had
produced reports, including on children of asylum seekers, and was
entering into dialogues with school-children on their perception of
their rights. Committee Experts raised various other issues regarding
the powers of the Federal Government in relation to the States and
Territories, and with regards to the National Commission on Human
Rights, to which the delegation responded briefly. The Government
endeavoured to persuade States of the appropriate changes required to
their programs and policies in the context of the application of the
Convention, the delegation said, but the Experts should bear in mind
the pressure that was brought by the populations of those States in
that respect.
The Minister for Family and Community Affairs was a Cabinet Minister,
allowing for greater focus and importance on the issues covering
children and youth. Youth Affairs now had a position in the Cabinet
and had an effective role, allowing for greater focus and importance
on the issues covering children and youth. The Prime Minister had
declared that early childhood development was a priority for the
Government. In terms of dissemination, the Judicial College played a
role in educating judges with regards to the human rights of children
and the Convention.
The delegation also noted that there was data in the report that was
disaggregated with regards to, among other things, HIV/AIDS by age.
There were reviews underway in Australia with regards to children
that would provide longitudinal and cross-sectional data in many
fields including parenting, health, education, and childcare.
Australia was very close to ratifying the two Optional Protocols to
the Convention. A number of laws both at the Government and at the
State and Territory level had required amendment in order to be in
compliance with the Protocols, in particular with regard to child
pornography and trafficking. The domestic processes for formal treaty
ratification were underway.
Responding to the issues raised on indigenous children, the
delegation said Australia had a universal social security system,
which provided generous support to those unable to work, as well as
to the family benefits which were referred to earlier, a health
system accessible to all, and an educational system with equal
access. Indigenous people benefited from those systems as did other
Australians. There were also a number of indigenous-specific
programmes aimed at providing for the needs of that population.
Australian Governments shared concerns on the continuing disparity in
the conditions that confronted indigenous Australians, but believed
that this was not due to ongoing or endemic discrimination, but was
due to an interaction of a complex system of cultural, historic, and
social factors. The Council of Australian Governments had reaffirmed
its continuing commitment to enhancing reconciliation between
indigenous and non-indigenous Australians, with a national framework
of principles for Governmental delivery of services to indigenous
Australians.
A more coherent or integrated Government approach was being worked
for in order to provide for the needs of indigenous communities, the
delegation said, and trials were being undertaken in order to
identify policies which worked in order to improve engagement with
indigenous communities. Reports had been published which reflected a
new determination by the Australian Government to address the
disadvantages undergone by indigenous persons. However, it was
acknowledged that this could not be achieved quickly or easily, and
required long-term commitment. The extent of the challenge remained
evident in the data contained in the report. The gulf between
indigenous and other Australians remained unacceptably high in many
areas.
*Questions by Experts*
Committee Experts then raised various other issues, including what
was being done to ensure that paid maternity leave was applied
everywhere and whether breast-feeding was encouraged in all regions.
Issues related to education received attention from several Experts,
ranging from the price of day-care in nurseries; what was being done
to ensure that indigenous children had continuing access to education
in the context of repeated expulsions from schools; and whether
courses on indigenous history were included in the school curriculum.
Questions on corporal punishment in schools and legislation on this
topic also continued to be posed by Experts.
Several experts also raised the topics of mental health, obesity,
malnourishment and suicide among indigenous children, and one Expert
asked whether studies had been done on this last phenomenon. Experts
also asked for more details with regards to reports of the
sterilization of children with disabilities.
Other questions were on the possibilities available for
institutionalised children to keep ties with their families; issues
of domestic violence, as indigenous children were over-represented in
this field as well and issues linked to an apparent increase in child
abuse; and what was the policy of the Government with regard to the
"export" of children who had come to Australia and were placed in
nearby host countries, and what was the status of the children in
those countries.
*Response by Delegation*
Continuing to respond to the questions, the delegation of Australia
said the new arrangements for the administration of aboriginal
affairs had come into effect in 2004. The Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Commission had been abolished, as it had become out
of touch with aboriginal concerns, and 30 indigenous coordination
centres had been established across the country, forming a network.
An indigenous advisory group to the Government had also been created,
the National Indigenous Council; it was not a representative body,
but provided advice to the Government. The Government was engaging
with new representative bodies as they emerged in line with the
preferences of aboriginal people themselves.
Regarding the notion of shared responsibility, the Government was
undertaking agreements which spelt out what all partners would
contribute to ensuring long-term outcomes that would improve the
situation for indigenous communities, the delegation said, and this
involved the communities themselves in planning for their future.
Initially, the Government had been entering into quite simple
agreements on this basis, many of them going into issues aimed at
improving children's health and attendance at school.
Indigenous children were over-represented in the institutions of the
country, and this was due to various socio-economic factors, the
delegation said. Where these children were placed in care outside
their families, a principle was followed requiring that they were
either placed first with their extended family, or if not possible
within their indigenous community, and if this was not possible,
within another indigenous community. Under-nutrition was a recognized
problem, and the causes of it were multiple, including financial
constraints and environmental and social conditions. There was an
action plan that provided a number of strategies for addressing these
factors.
Regarding the changes that had been made in immigration detention
policy, these would give much more fairness, flexibility and
timeliness to the situation of those who were waiting for a solution
for their problem, the delegation said. All families with children
were placed in community arrangements outside detainment centres.
People had freedom of movement in the community, and welfare support
was fully funded by the Australian Government. Non-governmental
organizations had significantly assisted the Government in
implementing the arrangements and ensuring a smooth transition.
Health and education services were provided.
Legislative changes had been communicated to the courts on how the
issue of asylum seekers was to now be treated, the delegation said.
With regards to temporary protection visa holders, these had either
had a further process for being assessed for permanent visas, or were
in the process of doing so. This would give access to family reunion
rights for those who gained that status. The arrangements for the
placement of people in the community did not include for them to be
placed in specific forms of group residency. The oversight of those
people was in the hands of NGO groups which provided support.
Regarding the loss of citizenship, legislation was being reviewed,
with major changes expected to ensure that children could not lose
their citizenship without a ministerial decision, and that
citizenship would not be removed if that would render the child
stateless, the delegation said. Some sweeping changes to family law
had recently been announced to ensure that the child's best interest
was given primacy. The best interests of the child were the focus of
the new approach to divorce proceedings, for example, although the
issue of shared parental responsibility was not allowed to expose the
child to violence from any parent. Regarding the changed security
environment of the world, Australia was working towards enhancing
national security whilst protecting fundamental rights and freedoms,
in particular those of children. Children under the age of 16 could
not be questioned in the case of terrorist offences, among other
criteria. Legislation ensured that while all possible was done to
protect the Australian community from terrorist attacks, this was not
done at the expense of children's rights.
There were no provisions in legislation directed against particular
groups of the community, the delegation said, and any attempts to
link ordinary Muslims to these terrorist threats were to be
condemned.
Experts then asked various questions and raised points with regard to
the anti-terrorist legislation, pointing out the potential for abuse
of this legislation. In response, the delegation said that
anti-terrorist legislation contained special protections for
children. In relation to family law, all children who came through
the court system were spoken to by a counsellor, who also spoke to
the parents, and who could put the child's views to the court without
putting the child on the stand. A separate representative advocated
for the rights and interests of the child in situations of divorce or
family law. The Government recognized that there was a clear
difference between the best interests of the child and the views of
the child, and aimed to allow for both to be given voice.
Governments at both the Australian and State and Territory level put
considerable resources into providing assistance to parents to assist
them in dealing in the most effective and cooperative way with the
entire gamut of the relationship between the parent and the child,
the delegation said, and this included nutrition, education and
supporting parental skills including communication between parents
and their children in order to determine their needs and views. There
was a Youth Round Table, which discussed issues that had an impact on
youth, and the aim was to have a diverse group of youths on the Table
so that a significant variety of experiences and viewpoints were
demonstrated.
On a question regarding the family environment and alternative care,
the delegation said support for early childhood was a key national
Government policy, with the aim of helping families to provide a safe
and caring family environment whilst balancing work and familial
responsibilities. Concerning the issue of maternity leave and whether
mothers could engage with their families whilst not losing their
chances in the workforce, 52 weeks of unpaid parental leave were
allowed. Since July 2004, all women who gave birth or adopted were
entitled to a maternity payment, an amount equivalent to
approximately 12 weeks of parenting payment, and it was an equivalent
social benefit to paid leave.
On family violence and its impact on children, the delegation said
that the Australian Government placed substantial importance on
resolving the issue and it had numerous programmes to deal with it.
Also, a new Women's Safety Agenda had been announced to address
domestic violence and sexual assault. The Government funded a
national community crime prevention programme, which provided funding
for grassroots movements working towards, among other things,
preventing domestic violence. All of the family law arrangements
concerning children were applicable to parents who were not legally
married.
With regard to child protection issues, a commitment had been made to
developing a national approach, the delegation said. Interest had
been expressed in how the family courts and state and territorial
courts had liased, and a project had been implemented providing
intensive case management of any case involving children where there
were allegations of physical or sexual abuse. The Government was
currently supporting the roll-out of this programme nationally.
Regarding children in institutions, only 4 per cent of children were
in institutional/residential care, and this was mostly for children
with complex needs that could not be met in foster care, or for large
groups of siblings who needed to be kept together.
Regarding the subject of childcare and its costs, the Government was
increasing the number of places, and was conscious of the need to
continue to provide these to ensure that women's workforce
participation was not impeded. A 30 per cent rebate on the cost of
childcare was also provided to help families cover it. Corporal
punishment was prohibited in all Government schools, and in some
states also in non-Governmental schools. While individual
non-government schools determined their own policies, corporal
punishment was viewed as a last-resort measure to only be applied
under the gravest of circumstances. Outside of schools, while the
rules were diverse among the States, at least one jurisdiction had
codified what did not count as reasonable correction.
A question was posed by an Expert on whether there was
awareness-raising in Australia on the effects of corporal punishment
and whether parents and teachers were informed of the negative
effects of it in the context of a campaign, and the delegation
responded that Australian agencies had a range of information
available for parents with the aim of enhancing their parenting
skills, and this included information on managing conflict within the
family and dealing appropriately with demands and behaviour from
children.
Responding to further questions on whether the Government was doing
anything to get rid of corporal punishment on a legal basis, and
whether the Government recognized different types of punishment such
as psychological, the delegation said there was a need for and
already was an extensive community debate on discipline and the
appropriate means for managing it within the family. The Government
was of the opinion that prohibiting corporal punishment without the
approval of the community would not be the most effective means for
this. There was considerable repugnance for child abuse throughout
the community, and therefore it was expected for the issue to
continue to progress.
Continuing on the field of health, the delegation said the Australian
Government was concerned at the rate of the spread of sexually
transmitted infections, and had launched its first national strategy
on this topic in June 2005. The Government had also spent substantial
funds on obesity and malnutrition research in order to develop
guidelines so that all young persons and children had access to
information on their needs with the aim of improving the nutritional
health of all Australians. There were also breast-feeding promotion
initiatives with the aim of educating mothers and counsellors about
the advantages of breast-feeding. Commitment to breast-feeding among
Australian mothers remained high, and the Government supported and
encouraged women to breast-feed in order to give their children that
important start in life.
With regards to mental health and the availability of resources to
children and young people and the issue of suicide, the delegation
said the Government had a wide range of strategies on mental health,
including on children, as well as those who also had drug and alcohol
problems. There was a national plan recognising the importance of
mental health issues, and this from infancy, and it specifically
focused on strengthening interaction in relevant other sectors of
Government including housing and social welfare. Health services and
programmes catered for all people at all stages of their lives.
On suicide in particular, the delegation said Australia had had
encouraging results in reducing youth suicide through a national
strategy. Suicide rates had declined significantly, but the
Government remained committed to continuing to strengthen the
resilience of young people and to address risk and protective factors
for youth, thus continuing its fight against the phenomenon of
suicide. The aims of the national suicide prevention strategy were to
reduce all forms of suicidal behaviour, and to enhance resilience,
respect and mental health in young people, families and communities,
and many others including a community-wide approach sensitising all
to the factors surrounding suicide. The delegation also explained
that the disparity in figures between male and female suicides was
due to the fact that women more frequently did not succeed in their
suicide attempts, when compared to attempts by men.
States and Territories as well as the Government had a range of
alcohol and other drug prevention and sensitisation services for
youth and other population groups in order to address substance and
alcohol abuse across the country, the delegation said. On the
sterilisation of people with disabilities, the Government had been
very proactive to ensure appropriate decision-making, and considered
illicit sterilisation as a very serious matter. There was a
nationally consistent approach to the lawful sterilisation of minors
with a decision-making disability. Students with disabilities were
also covered by programmes with the aim of balancing their needs with
those of the education provider.
The delegation also clarified the issue of the minimum age of
criminal responsibility, pointing out that the child's individual
capacities were taken into account between the ages of ten and
fourteen. An Expert asked why this was a special category, and the
delegation said for children under 10, criminal law did not recognise
the child's capacity of understanding their act. Between 10 and 14,
there was a refutable presumption against criminal responsibility,
and it depended on the individual capacities of the child to
understand the meaning of their action before they could come within
criminal law. There was an unacceptably high rate of indigenous
children in detention, the delegation said, but the news on this
topic was not all bad as there had been a significant decline in the
rate over the last ten years.
On the reservation of Australia to article 37 of the Convention, the
delegation said this related to the physical and geographical
particularities of the country, which meant that in rural and remote
areas it was not feasible to have separate detention facilities for
adults and children. The Government believed it was more appropriate
for juvenile detainees to be able to retain contact with their
families. Experts in response urged the delegation to narrow their
reservation down in this respect so that it only covered this
particular point.
*Preliminary Concluding Remarks*
JEAN ZERMATTEN, Committee Expert serving as co-Country Rapporteur for
the reports, speaking in preliminary concluding remarks, thanked the
delegation for having answered the questions. Today's dialogue had
made it possible for the Committee to ask a number of questions that
had remained pending and to obtain more information, as well as to
allow the State party to express its opinion. The delegation was
thanked for its openness and precise work, and the State party was to
be congratulated on the number of recent legislative amendments it
had undertaken, including the spectacular change made to legislation
in the area of immigration. When it came to the setting up of new
bodies, including the ministerial task force on indigenous matters,
the State party was to be commended.
A new direction had been taken in terms of family policy and stronger
families and communities, Mr. Zermatten said. All these recent
efforts bore witness to the interest attached by the State party in
children, including those affected by the policies of the family and
of the State. It was the wish of the Committee that the State Party
would make a commitment soon with regards to treaties, and would
reduce its reservation to article 37 of the Convention. It was hoped
the two Optional Protocols would be ratified soon. The situation
needed to be improved in at least two items, particularly with
regards to the disadvantage of indigenous children, as this was a
source of concern for the Government, and for the status of refugee
and asylum-seeking children, although a lot of progress had been made
in this area in particular.
MIKE SMITH, Permanent Representative of Australia to the United
Nations Office at Geneva, expressed the appreciation of the
delegation for the spirit in which the dialogue had been held, and
for its productive and constructive approach. If all treaty bodies
were to adopt this approach, then there would be far fewer problems
in the treaty body system. That the Committee had recognised areas
where Australia had done well was appreciated, and that it had
suggested constructive methods had strengthened the recommendations
that had and would be made. It was an important role of the
Committees to take note of such things and to pass them on to other
States when they were appearing before the bodies. In areas where the
Committee continued to have concerns, it was hoped that the
information provided today would convince it that all the Australian
Governments were committed to resolving these issues. Positive trends
would continue to be accelerated, and work towards protecting the
rights of children would continue.
* *** *This press release is not an official record and is provided
for public information only.
--
HREA - {http://www.hrea.org }
Human Rights Education Associates (HREA) is an international
non-governmental organisation that supports human rights learning; the
training of activists and professionals; the development of educational
materials and programming; and community-building through on-line
technologies.
[Reply to this message] [Start a new topic] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] [Subject Index] [List Home Page] [HREA Home Page]