Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Kimberley here, just writing a few thoughts about UN's Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

For those who don't know, the UN created an AdHoc committee to draft and publish a convention outlining the rights of folks with disabilities. Countries are encouraged to read and sign their approval. However, it doesn't stop there; countries have the responsibility to do an internal review to ensure that, as a nation, we uphold the tenants of this convention. Thus, after the review is completed, and any changes needed are made, that country is said to have 'ratified' their signature to the convention. A record number of countries attended and signed the convention on the date of its release (thankfully, I'm proud to say) Canada was there representing us! I am some what perturbed, though, at how long it took Canada to ratify this convention: 19 days shy of three years!!!!!!!! Numerous other countries ratified much before we did, and not just the countries you might expect - sure, some of the leading edge European countries (i.e. Belgium, Denmark and Sweden) beat us, but so too did other nations (i.e. Algeria, Bangladesh, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Haiti, Iran and Rwanda) and that is just to name a few! 81 nations were able to ratify before we did!

What is behind the major delay in ratification? Canada was a large player in the drafting and wording of the convention - some key peices are uniquely Canadian! It just doesn't make sense. However, in understanding that by ratifying, Canada is agreeing to abide by the principles and to make ongoing progress towards a more inclusive and accessable society. Infact, we will be held accountable, scruntinuzed by other nations and the UN . My hunch is that beaurocracy got caught up in the "what if"s" ... what if we have to make complete overhauls? what if we are called to task about unemployment and housing nightmares that folks with disabilities currently face. Must be scary knowing everything can now change and that stepping on the disenfranchised will now be recognised for what it is.

All that said, Canada did ratify - with much pomp and arrogance, but I shall leave my rants for another time - on March 11, 2010. With ratification in place, there can now be higher expectations of this great nation we live in! Folks with differing abilities are better positioned to demand access to services and inclusive practices that have, traditionally, been unwelcoming and inaccessable. To this end, the Council of Canadians with Disabilities and the Canadian Association for Community Living have drafted a working paper to help spark dialogue about making real and meaningful changes in Canada to better align ourselves with the components of the Convention.

THINGS TO THINK ABOUT: Canada ratified convention, but included a Declaration and Reservation - put simply, a disclaimer about a few peices that they interpreted to mean certain things (i.e. the use of supportive or substitute decision makers) and how Canada will or will not come in line with this interpretation (i.e. if the Convention is to be read that these alternative decision makers will be eliminated, in Canada we will reserve the right to appoint persons in certain and specific cases). I wonder if this is one specific scenerio that was holding up the process and as a compromise or as a solution, they made a stated reservation/ammendment? how Canada stands on this issue? Im curious.

Also interesting is that Canada chose not to sign, let alone ratify, the Optional Protocol to the convention....you know, the peice that allows for complaints to be filed and an enquiry to ensue, and actions to be taken. Hmmmmmmmmm