National Council on Disability
International Watch Federal Advisory Committee
Conference Call Meeting Minutes
March 2, 2006
12:00 P.M. Eastern Time
Roll Call
Welcome
Present
Kathy Martinez, Facilitator
Joan Durocher
Jeff Rosen
Tina Singleton
Kathy Guernsey
Jerry Mindes
Rob Horvath
Sarah Warren
Judy Heumann
Cappie Morgan
John Miers
Michelle Magar
Yerker Andersson
Janet Lord
Susan Sygall
Cindy Lewis
Sylvia Yees
Alicia Contreras
Ric Opstelten
Rebecca Russo (for Arlene Kanter)
Mark Engman
Amend/Approve the Agenda: Agenda approved.
Update on the 7th Ad Hoc Committee on a Comprehensive and Integral International Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities (Katherine Guernsey and Janet Lord)
Kathy Guernsey reported that the 7th Ad Hoc Committee recently concluded at the United Nations Headquarters in New York. It was an unprecedented three week meeting with the intention of completing reading of the most updated text issued by the chair in October of 2005. The first reading was completed followed by amendments of a number of articles. There is now a more up-to-date working text which is available on the UN website. She stated that at the end of the session the chair broke up the text into three categories. They were as follow: - no significant issues remaining
- articles with some issues remaining
- articles with difficult issues remaining
The Chair proposed that at the eighth session of the Ad Hoc Committee in August that we concentrate on those articles with some or more difficult issues remaining. The articles that fall under those categories are:
“Some issues remaining”:
- preamble
- definitions
- general obligations
- women with disabilities
- children with disabilities
- situations at risk
- freedom of expression and access to information
- respect for the home and family
- education
- habilitation and rehabilitation
- adequate standard of living
- social protection
- international cooperation
Ms. Guernsey stated that there were three articles that the Chair categorized as “difficult issues remaining” including Article 12 which is called equal recognition before the law; the Article of Protecting the Integrity of the Person; and the Article on Health. The Chair proposes that we focus on those issues at the next session. Ms. Guernsey added that the meeting was rather successful with good progress made. She stated that a number of members of the NGO community are not happy with some of the articles and their current text.
Ms. Lord stated that monitoring has not been a well developed piece. The working group of 2004 has only produced one piece of monitoring on a national level with no text incorporated into the draft convention on international level monitoring with many believing that the national level piece of it needs development as well.
Ms. Lord stated that there are governments trying to push forward various positions on monitoring. She stated that there was a brief discussion at this session on international level monitoring and States came out with their positions on the subject. Part of the delay on the discussion of monitoring is because the UN human rights treaty body system is under review. In fact, the entire UN human rights system is in flux. We are talking about a new Human Rights Council that would replace the UN Commission on Human Rights and there has been a lot of discussion about modifying the existing human rights treaty body system.
Ms. Lord stated that much more discussion will take place among governments intersessionally between now and August. Governments are meeting in their regional groupings at the UN and various individual national governments are putting together their positions on monitoring. There are some states that have come out in strong opposition to the creation of a separate treaty monitoring body for the convention. The majority, however, are stating that we do need a separate treaty monitoring body.
Ms. Lord added that the NCD report prepared after the symposium on monitoring held at American University in October was widely disseminated. The report received a lot of attention because some of the ideas were very clearly reflected in the Office of the High Commissioner For Human Rights report that came out on monitoring that set forth some ideas for the consideration of governments about what the components of a monitoring mechanism might have.
Ms. Lord stated that there is still no definition of disability and there will likely be a lot of discussion around the definition of disability in August.
Ms. Heumann interjected to ask whether the definition will end up being different then the current World Health Organization (WHO) definition.
Dr. Andersson interjected that the ADA definition is better than the WHO definition/ICF definition. He added that he and Mr. Rosen had attended a briefing at the State Department and that the delegation did not appear to do a good job letting people/organizations know that the meeting was taking place and therefore, few people with disabilities were in attendance.
Mr. Rosen stated that the panel present at the State Department briefing consisted of no one with a visible disability. In attendance were Tracy Justesen and Pat Morrissey. Mr. Rosen inquired (at the briefing) why there were no people with disabilities involved in primary roles. Mr. Rosen stated he asked Mr. Steven Hill (the lead negotiator) at the briefing what his qualifications were to lead the delegation.
Dr. Anderson stated that he had asked the NAD (National Association of the Deaf) to draft a letter to Condoleezza Rice asking her support of the UN Convention, but believes that other countries should take responsibility to improve the lives of people with disabilities.
Ms. Martinez added that the National Council on Disability has written numerous letters to the State Department recommending that people with disabilities represent the disability community.
Update on the second meeting of the State Department/USAID Federal Advisory Committee (Kathleen Martinez)
Ms. Martinez reported that the State Department Advisory Committee has met twice and the Charter for the committee is up in June. At this point, it has taken a year to nominate and confirm people. The committee commenced its second meeting on February 6th and agreed on three focus areas: providing recommendations on implementing Section 504; continuing to monitor developments on the UN Convention; and continuing to provide input on USAIDs programs and services. The committee has been tasked with coming out with a report before June and Ms. Martinez stated that as a member of the Committee she can publicly state her frustration with spending so much time getting up to speed and the Charter is already up in June.
Mr. Horvath stated that he was at the meeting and there was no indication either way about whether or not the committee would be re-chartered in June.
Cappie Morgan added that she was also in attendance and asked about the logisitics of re-chartering a committee.
Ms. Martinez added that there is a new Executive Director of the Committee, Stephanie Ortoleva.
Overview of USAID’s 4th Report on the Implementation of USAID Disability Policy (Rob Horvath)
Mr. Horvarth reported that USAID has issued its latest bi-annual report on the implementation of USAID’s disability policy (released in November 2005). He stated that the report can be accessed through AID’s web site. He also suggested if anyone wishes that they could email him and he will mail a copy. He stated that the report outlines the progress that the agency has made over the past two years and presents an honest appraisal of the places that need strengthening in the implementation of the policy and the inclusion of people with disabilities in development efforts. There is an outline of recommendations that were in the last report and the progress to date as well as other recommendations.
Mr. Horvath stated that the report includes the actual text of the two new policy pieces put into place last year. One on the accessible infrastructure and the second on insuring that proposals and requests for proposals contain the language asking NGO’s and contractors to speak to how they are going to address disability policy in their programs.
Mr. Horvath stated that there were 74 missions and in the annex of the report it outlines the summary of what each mission reported in what they were doing in the area of and for people with disabilities. He stated that they did not receive 100% response from USAID missions but were able to include 3-4 questions in the mandated annual report summary.
Mr. Horvath concluded by adding the reports in the back are self-reporting from the missions and most of the activities are activities that the missions initiated on their own. He encouraged individuals to contact the missions themselves and provide comments to them directly.
Ms. Martinez asked Ms. Heumann whether the World Bank has an institutional policy on disability (similar to USAID’s policy).
Ms. Heumann responded that the World Bank (WB) does not have a written policy but has initiated the practice internally, within the institution, the intent to include disabled people in the Bank’s human resources policies and practices. WB has a practice that all new bank facilities will be accessible and millions of dollars have been allocated to make bank offices around the world come to a certain level of accessibility. Institutionally, the bank has an adviser on disability with a small staff within the human development component of the bank. Each one of the six regions of the Bank has a person that is responsible for being the focal point on disability. Ms. Heumann added that the Bank has been involved in forming the Global Partnership on Disability and Development, and is a member of the partnership. It has a small multi-donor trust fund which is currently being supported by Norway, Finland and Italy. It has an international coordinating council and three committees.
New Business
The InterAction Conference will be held April 10-12, 2006 with President Bill Clinton being in attendance.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 1:00 p.m. eastern time. |
