A report that provides an overview of the Committee's work during the 2008-09 parliamentary session and draws attention to improvements to the human rights landscape in the UK which it has commended in reports during the year. It also mentions a number of continuing areas for concern.
This is the Committee's second annual report monitoring the Government's response to human rights judgments in the European Court of Human Rights. The Committee criticises the Government for its failure to respond to many of its recommendations in its previous report (17th report session 2006-07, HL 128/HC 728, ISBN 9780104011065). The Committee believes the Government should take a consistent and transparent approach across departments to the way in which it responds to declarations of incompatibility and judgments fro the European Court, with the Ministry of Justice co-ordinating the response to adverse judgments. This report also examines a number of issues arising from outstanding judgments: access to artificial insemination for prisoners and their partners; controlling membership of trade union; prisoners' voting rights; investigations into cases involving the use of lethal force; security of tenure for gypsies and travellers, and the corporal punishment of children.
In its report of last year on the Communities and Local Government's Departmental Annual Report 2007 (HC 170, session 2007-08, ISBN 9780215037978) the Committee commented on the particular nature of the Department's work: on its unusual reliance for the achievement of the goals Government has set it on a plethora of other Departments, agencies, non-departmental bodies, local authorities and other stakeholders; on the long, devolved delivery chains by which those goals therefore have to be delivered; and on the skills of influence, brokering and negotiation which are required to achieve them. In this Report the Committee assesses the progress made since last. The most recent Cabinet Office Capability Review concludes that there has been a positive "direction of travel" for CLG in that period, but the Committee concludes that there is still some way to go before CLG can be said to be performing at the highest achievable level of effectiveness. The Department's overall performance against its Public Service Agreement targets is likewise moving in the right direction but still short of full effectiveness. Achievement of efficiency targets is applauded. Finally, the report considers examples of particular policies which highlight some of the Department's strengths and weaknesses, and follow up some issues in earlier inquiries. These issues include: eco-towns; the Decent Homes programme; Home Information Packs; Fire Service response times; Firebuy; the FiReControl programme. The report also considers the Department's response to the serious flooding of summer 2007, and to the reviews which followed; and the mismanagement of European Regional Development Fund monies.
The Committee calls on Defra to review Ofwat's entire remit so that the regulatory regime will keep pace with the changes set to follow from greater competition and the challenge posed by scarcer water resources. On the matter of surface water drainage, Ofwat should have intervened to ensure a more measured set price increases for this service were levied on sports clubs, churches and voluntary organisations by water companies in recent months. Ofwat and the Government should explore how the costs of highway drainage - currently born by water customers - could be shared with local taxpayers who benefit from the service. Uncertainties created by the Cave and Walker reviews (both of which reported during the current Price Review) along with changes to the regulatory regime proposed in the draft Flood and Water Management Bill may have hampered the ability of water companies to raise money on the capital markets in a manner likely to push up customer bills. Warning of water scarcity in the South and East of England, the Committee calls for the creation of a 'water efficiency obligation' to ensure the regulatory regime emphasises the need to preserve resources and to rewards customers who install efficiency measures. Other recommendations are made on the uneven regional impacts of investment in water infrastructure, the impacts of climate change, and the issue of transparency, from the price review process itself to how well Ofwat currently requires companies to demonstrate they undertake effective consultation with consumers during business planning.
This report follows the Committee's first report of session 2008-09 on the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (HL paper 9/HC 93, ISBN 9780104014165) in which the Committee welcomed the Government's intention to ratify the Convention but drew attention to proposals for reservations and interpretative declarations. The Committee was concerned that there had been insufficient scrutiny of these proposals, not least because draft texts had not been published, and that the Office for Disability Issues had not robustly challenged Government departments about their proposals. The Government laid the Convention before Parliament on 3 March, heralding the beginning of the ratification process. Four reservations and one interpretative declaration were proposed. The Committee has criticised the Government for ruling out formal consultation on these proposals and also drawn attention to the limited opportunities for parliamentary scrutiny and control of the ratification of treaties. Ratification should take priority over potentially lengthy and futile discussions about whether or not to enter reservations but the Government's approach to some of the reservations has been unduly cautious and may detract from the position role the UK has played in relation to the Convention. The Committee considers that the reservation relating to service in the armed forces is open to challenge as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. The reservation relating to immigration control is felt to be too broad, its purpose has not been adequately explained and so it should be dropped. The Government should clarify matters in relation to the reservation and declaration on education and should consult on how to deal with the treatment of benefits appointees.