2. An Overview Presentation to Senate Committee on Human Rights December 13, 2004

3. National Children’s Alliance  Created in 1996  Network for collaboration on policy development for change  62 national organizations  Cross-sectoral and multi-disciplinary  Evidence based approach to policy development Link research to policy Link policy to practice  Government Relations  Sector Capacity Building

4. Operating Principles  Unique Leadership Style No formalized organizational structure Principles based network Shared model of leadership Active participation of organizations Transparent, consensus building decision making process

5. Mission  Promote the health and well being of children in Canada through Facilitating dialogue Strengthening the network Developing policy Engaging organizations Promoting development and implementation of National Children’s Agenda Foundation for the policy work of the Alliance is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child

6. Convention on the Rights of Children Rights of the child defined by:  Rights of provision  Rights of protection  Rights of participation  Ratification of the Convention includes the obligation of states parties to report to the United Nations on progress towards implementation

7. Monitoring Implementation of the Convention  Concluding observations of the United Nations in 1995 and 2003 indicated concern about the lack of a permanent monitoring mechanism in Canada  In 2003 the United Nations also pointed to the lack of a national “ombudsman” for children’s rights  United Nations recognizes that the participation of the NGO community as fundamental to monitoring implementation

8. Monitoring Implementation  Complex and ongoing task to monitor implementation of the Convention (human,economic and social rights)  Convention itself reflects inter-related rights and freedoms  Monitoring balances research with participation of the NGO community  Child and youth participation inherent in the process

9. Barriers to Monitoring  Lack of co-ordination across jurisdictions (noted in the U.N. Concluding Observations)  Lack of co-ordination across federal departments  No resourced “centre of responsibility” within federal government  F/P/T processes not designed for coherent cross- sectoral children’s policy (National Children’s Agenda)  No child advocate or ombudsperson at the federal level

10. Barriers – cont’d  Data availability and access Under-resourced data collection and analysis at federal level Lack of data for vulnerable sub-populations No co-ordination of data sources across jurisdictions Restrictions re: privacy Declining capacity of NGO community

11. Federal commitment  Lack of “earmarked” resources for monitoring implementation  Problems working horizontally  Minimal support to NGO community for monitoring  Under-resourced process to develop the National Plan of Action  Difficulty in making a commitment to concrete benchmarks and timelines in the National Plan of Action  Lack of a process to work with provinces and territories

12. Role of NGO Sector  United Nations expects NGO Reports on implementation  NGO sector has the networks and expertise to monitor implementation  As the “third party” can bring research and practice to monitoring role  NGO sector transcends jurisdiction (pan-Canadian and grassroots in scope)  Permanent monitoring mechanism could bridge and support both NGO and government reporting

13. Towards Accountability  Role of “third sector” more than monitoring governments  Intersecting roles of governments and the NGO sector in service delivery imply need for partnership  Need to to track progress of Canada’s children over time in a way that meaningful to all stakeholders (governments, NGO sector, United Nations, communities)

14. Telling the Story of Canada’s Children  Therefore we need to collectively tell the story of Canada’s children (this will give us the knowledge and understanding we need to monitor implementation  Through a sustainable mechanism it would be possible to support a long term, cohesive approach to monitoring

15. Principles for Monitoring  Evidence-based  Ecological model as foundation (role of family, community, governments)  Engagement critical  Reflect the inter-related rights and influences on children’s lives  Asking the “right” questions respects the Convention (what is and what should be)  Voices of children and youth

16. Model for Monitoring Convention  All jurisdictions (federal/provincial/territorial) Legislation and regulations Case law Policy Practice Research and Statistics Public Opinion Voices of Children and Youth

17. Process of Monitoring  Engagement needs to be: Cross-sectoral (Governments, NGO sector, Private Sector) Intergovernmental (federal, provincial, territorial, regional, municipal, aboriginal) Horizontal (health, social, education, recreation, environment, justice etc..) Vertical (from grassroots communities to pan-Canadian perspectives)

18. Permanent Monitoring Mechanism  Recommendation: Development of a “Council” that would build the collective capacity of all stakeholders to exercise their roles and responsibilities to “monitor” the progress of Canada’s children  “Council” would enable the monitoring of international and domestic agreements within a co-ordinated network

19. “Council” Mandate  Increase body of knowledge on the health and well-being of Canada’s children  Develop and engage cross-sector and multi- disciplinary networks  Track progress and monitor international and domestic agreements  Build capacity of communities to “tell the story” of Canada’s children  Engage children and youth  A national “advocate” for children

20. Functions of the “Council”  Research and Development  Knowledge Translation  Network and Partnership Development  Tracking progress  Reporting  Mobilizing for change

21. Roles of the “Council”  Facilitator and Co-ordinator  Bridger  Catalyst  Capacity-builder  Broker for consensus  Funder of key monitoring initiatives  Links research, practice and policy  Build on existing (“distributed organization”)

22. Conclusion  Federal Government’s responsibility to monitor implementation dependent upon role of NGO community  Barriers to monitoring can be overcome by supporting NGO capacity to “tell the story of Canada’s children”  Sustainable monitoring mechanism such as the proposed “Council” provides the infrastructure and networks

23. Thank you Dianne Bascombe Executive Director National Children’s Alliance 331 Cooper Street, Suite 707 Ottawa, Ontario 613-560-5843 ext 229 dianne@nationalchildrensalliance.com