Canada against the family.

Once again, the family has been re-affirmed in a United Nations' document, but no thanks to the Canadian Delegation. At the second preparatory conference on Human Settlements, euphemistically termed Habitat +5, that took place in Nairobi, February 19-23, Mr. Kenneth Macartney, Director of the Environmental Relations Division of the Dept. of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, and Ms. Manon Boisclair, Deputy Director, who manned the desk for Canada, were uncharacteristically silent.

But that was preferable to what happened at the first preparatory conference, in May 2000. There the Canadian delegate took the lead in refusing to allow the paragraph on the family to be admitted into the Declaration to be presented to the General Assembly in June, in New York. As a result, the paragraph had to be re-introduced by the representative for the Holy See in Nairobi. Even then, the Swedish delegate, speaking for the European Union, and abetted by Norway, insisted that the family had no place in the Declaration, and demanded that the paragraph be bracketed.

What was all the fuss all about? The paragraph submitted by Msgr. Frank Dewane, on behalf of the Holy See, supported by Sudan, Poland and Iran, merely quoted from earlier UN documents, stating:

"We resolve to take into account the constructive role of the family in the design, development and management of human settlement...the family is the basic unit of society, and should receive comprehensive protection and support" (Habitat Agenda, para. 31)...to improve the quality of life within human settlements, and combat the deterioration of conditions including family instability." (Istanbul Declaration, para. 4).

There was more, but this will provide the tone of the paragraph, to which Sweden, Norway, and Canada (at the first Prep-com) objected.

In view of the vote in November, 1999 by Canadian school children, who listed 'Family' as their most important Right, the Canadian delegation's obstructionism at United Nations' Conferences since 1994 is inexcusable. When asked about the reasons for this, Mr. Macartney refused to accept the concept of the 'natural' or 'normal' family-mother, father and siblings. "It is not normal," he said, "for children in Canada to live in a family, with two parents. Most children live with a single parent, or in alternative living arrangements, including what you call abnormal relationships."

Stats Canada looking for evidence

In an effort to prove this, Statistics Canada is currently carrying Out a study of Canadian households.

"The results of this survey will determine government policy," according to one young hopeful, as she outlined the content of the survey. The questions are in four categories:

Section I concerns background information about the one answering the phone; e.g. his/her own family when growing up.

Section II delves into one's status: whether in a normal relationship, or common-law, or 'partnership'.

Section III enquires about children, their ages, and if they have left home. If so, why did they leave home, and how often does one have contact with them?

Section IV probes into one's personal feelings about existing relationships with children.

Judging from the behaviour of Canadian delegations at United Nations' Conferences, who, over the past seven years, at least, have persistently and adamantly refused to recognize the normal family, its rights and needs, one must conclude that the government now is looking for evidence to justify this attitude. But how valid will the results be?

Apparently, the telephone numbers are generated by computer, and may include hospitals, businesses, or other types of establishment. Is this the total number Stats Canada will use to make the statement: "One of two children live in common-law situations," for example? Or will they use, as a total, just the families whose representatives responded to the survey? Not many families will accept this invasion of their privacy. How will these families be included in the resulting statistics? And, finally, when was the Canadian government ever influenced by reality, or the actual needs of Canadian people; and when will Canadian delegations at United Nations Conferences start reflecting Canadian culture, and not their own personal hang-ups?

J.M.J. Children's Fund of Canada

Statement by Dr. M.J. Ferrari, President

Presented at the second session, Nairobi, February 19-23, 2001.

Chairman, Honourable Delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen:

In November 1999, UNICEF and Elections Canada collaborated to give children in Canada the opportunity to vote on their most important rights, selected from among the ten rights listed in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Seven hundred and seventy-four thousand, one hundred and eighty-five students from eleven hundred and ten schools participated. Youth under 18--sometimes as young as 6 years old--lined up to vote for what they considered to be their most important right. What would they select? Greater freedom? Non-discrimination? More privacy with their friends? People across the country, and especially their parents, waited with bated breath.

Surprisingly, in a way, but really not surprising, the right that received the most votes, by far, was the family. Said Laura Hannan, 14, spokesperson for the election:

"The right to have a family safeguards other rights." Then, she added. "A lot of children, in voting, voted for something that would house a lot of other rights."

While family received 24.2% of the vote, food and shelter came next with 19.6%. Health received 10.7%; education, 9.5%; rest and play, 9.4%; protection from harm, 9.2% and non-discrimination, 6%. Name and nationality, and their own culture-each received about 2% of the vote.

What children were voting for, in Canada, is the normal family: mother, father and siblings. To quote an honourable delegate addressing the Special Session on Children, in New York, last month:

"The family is the basic unit of society, where, we all agree, ethical, moral, and human values are inculcated in our children, (and) where they learn to be responsible adults. He was probably quoting in part paragraph 31 of the Habitat Agenda.

Incidentally, in New York, last month, the JMJ Children's Fund delegate was delighted to hear three government delegates, addressing the General Assembly, during the Children's Summit, stress the importance of the father in the lives of their children.

The family is, indeed, the basic unit of society, where both parents play a vital role: the mother as the heart of the family, the father as its protector and support. These facts should be reflected in all documents that issue from United Nations Conferences, and most especially from documents which aspire to promote the well-being of all persons, no matter what the circumstances of their birth.

There were 17 on the Canadian delegation: 6 already stationed in Nairobi; the first Secretary of the Permanent Mission of Canada to the United States; 2 from Housing, 1 from CIDA, 2 from related departments in Quebec and one from Manitoba--all at Canadian taxpayer expense.

Dr. Ferrari worked in the public health section of the Department of Immigration for many years. She writes from Ottawa.