Child Rights: The Movement, International Law, and Opposition

7 Implementing the Convention on the Rights of the Child in Canada A Question of Commitment

141 D d Seven Implementing the Convention on the Rights of the Child in Canada A Question of Commitment R. Brian Howe There is no question about Canada’s official commitment. In 1991, with the approvaloftheprovinces ,withtheexceptionofAlberta,theGovernmentofCanada ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), committing governments at all levels in Canada to a policy of ensuring that Canadian laws,policies,andpracticesareconsistentwith therightsof thechild asdescribed in the CRC. Alberta initially was hesitant, but in 1999 it too gave its support.1 Official commitment, however, is not the same thing as actual commitment . Official commitment is when a government makes a pledge to pursue a particular course of action. In Canada, upon ratifying the CRC, the federal and provincial governments made a pledge to implementing the rights of the child. Actual commitment is when a government follows through on a pledge through undertaking measures to put the pledge into effect, whether in the form of laws, policies, or programs. This is done despite whatever obstacles stand in its way. Based on an examination and analysis of developments in Canada during the 1990s and 2000s, this article will assess the level of the commitment by Canadian governments to the rights of the child. As with an individual person, the commitment of a government is not an all-or-nothing affair. It varies in degree and may be described in an ascending 142 r. brian howe order of strength. First is symbolic commitment, where government support for a particular course of action is at a low level. Commitment may be real but it is shallow, as reflected in no or very limited efforts and in much reliance on symbolism, where words are used as substitutes for deeds.2 Second is wavering commitment, where political authorities are ambivalent about a course of action, supportive and positive at one time but hesitant or vacillating at another . This is reflected in government efforts that occur in spurts and where there are forward and backward developments without clear signs of progress. Third and finally is deep commitment, where government authorities sustain a high level of commitment to a course of action as shown in strong and determined efforts to overcome obstacles. Efforts ultimately are successful and are recognized as such. I propose to assess the level of Canada’s commitment and to explain what level the country has reached and why. The first part of the paper will set the stage by providing a brief background discussion of the significance of the convention and obstacles to implementation. The second part will look at Canada’s record since 1991 and provide evidence of its wavering commitment. The final part will account for why Canada has wavered in its commitment and will discuss prospects for change. I argue that this wavering is due in large part to a lack of unified public support for the principle of children’s rights. Obstacles to Implementation It is impressive that apart from the United States and Somalia, 192 countries have ratified the CRC, making it the most widely and most quickly ratified international treaty in world history. It also is impressive that these countries have agreed to the general meaning of children’s rights outlined in the the socalled three Ps in the CRC: rights of provision (provision of health care, education , economic welfare), rights of protection (protection from abuse, neglect, violence, exploitation), and rights of participation (a voice in decisions affecting the child).3 And it is impressive that they have agreed to the convention’s three guiding principles: nondiscrimination, where children are to be protected from all forms of discrimination; the best interests of the child, where a primary consideration in all actions concerning children is their best interests; and participation, where children have the right to be heard and their views given weight in accord with their age and maturity.4 With such widespread international agreement, it is virtually impossible for countries to defend themselves against failure to act on the basis that they do not support the concept of children’s rights. They might try to defend themselves by saying that they have done more than that suggested by critics or that shortcomings and failures are 143 implementing the convention on the rights of the child in canada due to unforeseen circumstances. But they cannot deny their official support of the convention. This is an advance. The CRC is a significant...