Non-discrimination

It is notable that the Committee makes a specific call regarding equality in Northern Ireland, calling for, “comprehensive anti-discrimination and equality law, particularly in Northern Ireland” (paragraph 25a).  It also calls on the UK to enact the outstanding provisions of the Equality Act 2010 (paragraph 25b), including the socioeconomic duty (Section 1, EA 2010) and combined discrimination (section 14, EA 2010).

Just Fair considers that the call regarding equality in Northern Ireland is a welcome development and reflects the continued calls in Northern Ireland for a single equality act and updates to equality laws, which have lagged behind the rest of the UK.  (The Equality Act 2010 does not apply to Northern Ireland – the power to legislate for equality rests with the Northern Ireland Executive). 

Just Fair also welcomes the calls regarding Section 1 and Section 14.  In the Committee’s 2016 concluding observations a similar recommendation on Section 14 (paragraph 23) called for ‘intersectional’ rather than ‘combined’ discrimination, which Just Fair considers to have been a more progressive framing and would allow individuals to bring claims on more than two grounds of discrimination, where this reflects their lived experience.

The importance of naming specific groups who face particular violations of their rights is noted above in the Groups and Identities section.  It is therefore very useful that, relation to discrimination, racism, stereotypes and inequalities (paragraph 25c), specific groups and identities that are disproportionately affected are explicitly mentioned.  These include Disabled people and people who experience racism (including Gypsies, Roma and Travellers, persons of African or Asian descent and members of Jewish, Muslim and Hindu communities).

It is also important that the Committee goes beyond recognising discrimination by calling for concrete measures. These include targeted awareness-raising campaigns and affirmative action measures in areas such as decent work, social security, adequate housing, healthcare, and education to ensure that all individuals fully enjoy ESCR without discrimination.

Migrants, refugees and those seeking asylum

It is important that the Committee recognises that inequality and barriers to the enjoyment of rights for migrants, refugees, and those seeking asylum is caused by a combination of recent legislation – specifically naming the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024, the Illegal Migration Act 2023 and the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 – alongside barriers to asylum claims and the no recourse to public funds (NRPF) condition (paragraph 26). 

As noted above in the section on those seeking asylum, refugees and migrants, this is the first set of concluding observations to the UK by the Committee in which the NRPF condition is explicitly mentioned. While the concluding observations call for a review of the rule (paragraph 27c), rather than its removal – as Just Fair campaigns for – is nonetheless significant. The recommendation highlights that the purpose of the review is to prevent increased poverty and precarity among migrants and those seeking asylum, marking a useful step forward.

The recommendation on access to asylum and statelessness determination procedures, as well as to legal aid, without discrimination (paragraph 27b), is also very important in addressing the barriers faced by people seeking asylum.

Situation of British National (Overseas) visa holders

Another new area for the Committee is the barriers faced by British National (Overseas) visa holders in relation to accessing their rights. The inclusion of this issue appears to be a result of successful and important work by civil society organisations. The recommendations (paragraph 29) cover issues such as barriers to labour market access, home fee status and eligibility for student finance, the transfer of pension benefits and integration measures.

Equality between men and women

Just Fair welcomes the issues raised in this set of concluding observations, including negative stereotypes and objectification of women in the media (paragraph 31a), as well as access to justice and responses to gender-based violence (paragraph 31b). As noted above in the section on women, the inclusion of these issues – despite the existence of a specific UN treaty on women’s rights (CEDAW) – demonstrates how seriously the Committee regards these matters as barriers to women’s enjoyment of their rights.

Human rights budgeting is an important tool for ensuring government spending prioritises people. Therefore, the recommendation in paragraph 31c on gender-responsive budgeting – to guarantee women’s equal access to employment, social security, healthcare, education, and decision-making roles – is very important in working towards equality between men and women. This recommendation also stands out because highlights a wide range of intersectional groups. As noted above in the section ‘Intersection – identities’ – this is crucial for exploring how people actually experience their rights.

The Committee highlights concerns about the relative high unemployment and underemployment rates of disadvantaged groups (paragraph 32). This is an important recognition, particularly in terms of the underemployment issue, which may be linked to precarious work conditions meaning that people do not have enough hours of work to earn enough for an adequate standard of living.  There is also recognition of regional disparities and structural barriers faced by disadvantaged groups. 

The Committee recommends (paragraph 33) that the State Party, along with the devolved government of Northern Ireland, strengthen efforts to address unemployment and underemployment of the following disadvantaged groups:

• Women
• Disabled people
• Young people
• Minoritised ethnic groups
• Migrants

The Committee identifies specific steps to be taken in relation to:

• Implementation of targeted public sector schemes
• Enhanced vocational training and employment services
• Ensuring reasonable accommodation (adjustments) in recruitment and the workplace
• Developing private sector partnerships

The Committee notes that this work should be guided by General Comment No. 18 (2006) on the right to work.

Given the current UK Government focus on work and encouraging people to work, this detail provides a helpful framework for seeking to ensure that proposed policies and measures are underpinned by a rights-based approach – one that recognises and addresses the systemic barriers faced by disadvantaged groups.

The Committee recognises the UK Government’s proposals for improvement by way of the Employment Rights Bill but still seeks to highlight concerns in relation to the undermining of just and favourable conditions of work (paragraph 34).  It specifically notes:

• The prevalence of part-time, temporary, zero-hour contracts and precarious self-employment
• Concerns about work place discrimination and harassment
• Exploitation faced by migrant workers on certain visa schemes
• Enforcement of labour laws and disparities in application.

This reflects the Committee’s recognition of fundamental weaknesses in relation to protections for workers – from the type of work arrangement to discrimination, exploitation, and enforcement.

The Committee’s recommendations respond to these concerns and, as in other areas, explicitly highlight and name groups which are particularly affected such as:

• Women from minoritised ethnic groups
• Disabled people.

The Committee recommends that there is intensification of efforts to address precarious working conditions and create decent work opportunities for these groups, and highlights the importance of following the guidance of General Comment No. 23 (2018).  This may be a weaker construction than the 2016 “progressively reduce the use of” but this could be a reflection of the proposals that the UK Government set out in relation to legislation around the use of exploitative zero-hours contracts (paragraph 35a). 

There is important recognition of the inherent link between labour and social security rights, as well as a recognition of the distinction between theoretical legal protection and the reality of experienced protection in the recommendation at paragraph 35b. This recommendation states that the State Party should guarantee labour and social security rights for workers in precarious employment are that are fully protected in law and practice.  While this recommendation may on first glance look quite general, there is a lot to unpack.  ‘Guarantee’ is a strong word and the Committee has used this in place of a weaker alternative such as ‘improve’.  The requirement that the UK ‘guarantee’ rights sets a high standard for compliance.  In order to satisfy the requirements of this recommendation – or even show progress – a great deal will be required: monitoring, disaggregated data, and engagement with workers on the ground to assess if the rights have been fully protected not only on paper through legal provision but also in practice in their day-to-day experiences.

The recommendation at paragraph 35c that the State Party should ensure that migrant workers enjoy equal rights to other workers – again in law and in practice – identifies particular areas to be addressed for these workers.  These areas include wages, job security, rest and leisure time, and access to social security protections and trade union membership.  Reflecting evidence presented to the Committee, they highlight the need to eliminate exploitative practices – some of which are specifically listed – affecting migrant workers, particularly those employed under specific visa arrangements, and linked to the exploitation of migrant workers. 

The recommendation at paragraph 35d on strengthening enforcement bodies for labour rights is rich with requirements.  This construction of enforcement would require proactive labour inspection and monitoring which is well resourced, both financially and technically, to identify and address issues which go beyond a passive, reactionary route to remedy which is worker-led.  Furthermore, any remedy must be effective and there is recognition that some workers – particularly migrant workers -may face additional barriers in seeking remedies, and that this must be addressed.

The Committee also recommends that protections against discrimination are enhanced in relation to ethnicity and gender identity, and that effective reporting and redress mechanisms are in place to reinforce measures against harassment (paragraph 35e).

In recognition of concerns raised in evidence and by the Committee regarding the level of the minimum wage, wage inequalities across the UK, and unequal pay disproportionately affecting women, Disabled people, and minoritised ethnic groups, the Committee makes a series of recommendations.  The minimum wage is highlighted as a source of concern for the Committee on the basis that despite periodic increases, it has not “kept pace with the rising cost of living, making it insufficient to enable a decent living for workers and their families, particularly those in low-paid jobs, the public sector and precarious employments”. 

This is a reiteration of concerns raised in the 2016 concluding observations (paragraphs 36 and 37) that the minimum wage should be set at a level which provides workers and their families with a decent standard of living.  In its recommendation at paragraph 37a of the 2025 concluding observations, the Committee highlights that the minimum wage should be indexed to the cost of living and adjusted regularly in collaboration with social partners “to ensure that workers and their families enjoy an adequate standard of living”.  This may be useful for ensuring that the way in which minimum wage rate recommendations by the Low Pay Commission this year take into account the cost of living is continued in subsequent years and not a one-off practice.  There is also an apparent link made in the recommendation between the minimum wage (which falls under article 7 of ICESCR) and the right to an adequate standard of living (article 11).  

The recommendation on minimum wage also underlines the requirement that there is full compliance across all sectors and forms of employment, in all jurisdictions. This is an important addition and reflects the Committee’s broader insistence that rights are provided for in law and in practice.  It also suggests a follow up on evidence received by the Committee indicating that, while the UK may have a minimum wage which applies across all sectors, it is not universally received in full by all workers in all sectors.  Although this point is not explicitly stated, it relates directly to the UK Government’s obligation to ensure effective enforcement of labour rights – including for workers in precarious work arrangements and those under certain visa schemes.

The recommendation at paragraph 37b on strengthening measures to guarantee equal pay for work of equal value for women, Disabled people and minoritised ethnic groups – by way of enforced mandatory pay transparency reporting, cross-sectoral job valuation, and binding measures with sanctions to close pay gaps – appears to set a higher requirement than the existing gender based pay gap reporting and proposed disability and ethnicity pay gap reporting in the UK.  It also does not appear that the Committee applies this requirement only to employers over a certain size (as is the case with UK law/proposals).  This may be useful in relation to resisting any attempts to water down proposals or further limit their application. Just Fair also welcomes the explicit link with monitoring, reporting and sanctions.

The explicit recommendation regarding coordination with the devolved government in Northern Ireland is a further recognition by the Committee of the devolved structure of the UK and a demonstration of their understanding of it (paragraph 37c). 

The issue of trade union rights is perhaps an area where the Committee was not as detailed as some other areas of the concluding observations (paragraph 39). 

The concluding observations suggest that the UK Government review the legislation it has already committed to repealing and acknowledge that the existing law was unhelpful to both workers and businesses. This appears slightly out of step with the rest of the Committee’s recommendations although the Committee does reiterate that any such review must ensure compliance with article 8 of ICESCR and safeguard trade union rights without undue restrictions (paragraph 39). Just Fair’s submission to the Committee highlighted that even if the UK Government goes ahead with these repeals as planned, what will be achieved is to make things that were egregious a little less bad but that the UK would remain in non-conformity with International Labour Organization standards and the European Social Rights Committee.

The Committee raises the issue of both enforcement and access to remedies in relation to workers who were subject to ‘blacklisting’ practices for being trade union members.  This ties into broader issues around enforcement and access to justice which are a common theme throughout the labour rights sections of the concluding observations.

The Committee also recommends the prompt implementation of electronic balloting for industrial action, with adequate technical support and consultation with trade unions and employers.  This recommendation may be useful to trade unions campaigning for the implementation of e-balloting to ensure that the UK Government’s Next Steps to Make Work Pay commitment to set up a working group with stakeholders takes place and electronic balloting is implemented.

As in the concluding observations of the Committee following the sixth periodic review of the UK in 2016, the 2025 observations express concern that benefits cuts, as well as reductions and suspension of benefits, have eroded the right to social security and the right to an adequate standard of living in the UK.  The 2025 concluding observations explicitly note the disproportionate impact on Disabled people, low-income families, and workers in precarious employment. 

The 2025 observations go further than those in 2016, expressing additional concern that welfare policy reform has resulted in “severe economic hardship” and highlighting its impact in relation to food bank use, homelessness, and negative effects on mental health and stigmatisation. 

This is an important recognition – both of the extent of the policies’ impact and of how rights are interlinked.  The Committee draws a clear connection between social security, work, health and an adequate standard of living.  It is also important to note that this direct and strong criticism of the UK was made before further welfare reform and proposed cuts were announced in April 2025. 

The Committee makes five specific recommendations in relation to social security.  These recommendations contain both criticism of UK Government policy and clear direction on what must be done to address the inadequacy of social security protection in the UK.  The first recommendation is a priority issue in that it is one of the three recommendations identified by the Committee as being subject to the follow up procedure.  This first recommendation urges the UK governments to assess the impact of welfare reforms introduced since 2010 on “the most disadvantaged groups” and crucially the Committee specifically recommends taking corrective measures and then spells out that this would involve reversing policies such as the two-child limit, the benefit cap and the five-week wait for the first Universal Credit payment (paragraph 41a).  This is a reiteration of a 2016 recommendation to review and reverse social security benefit cuts introduced by the Welfare Reform Act 2012 and the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016.

The Committee also specifically and directly recommends an increase in budget allocation for social security.  Further, it highlights (reiterating again a previous 2016 recommendation) the need to index social security benefits with the cost of living. The 2025 concluding observations state that this should be by way of an independent and transparent mechanism to ensure an adequate standard of living. It specifically states that this should apply also to daily allowances provided for people seeking asylum (paragraph 41b).

In addition to the assessment of impact of past reforms on disadvantaged groups, the Committee urges the UK to conduct an independent review of the eligibility criteria for social security which also takes into account reliance on digital-only and automated approaches and consistent with rights protections, including considering barriers which they may create (paragraph 41c).

The UK is also urged to ensure that Disability related benefits – including specifically named Personal Independence Payment and Employment and Support Allowance provisions – are adequate and in line with the human rights model of Disability and that the recommendations of the Committee on the Rights of Persons of Disabilities are taken into account (paragraph 41d).

Finally, the UK is referred back to the Committee’s General Comment No. 19 (2007) on the right to social security and the importance of social protection floors as an essential element of the right to social security as well as recommendations made by the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights.

Again, it is important to recall that these recommendations were made before the April 2025 announcement of further reform and cuts to social security provision in the UK which will have direct and significant negative impact on Disabled people by the UK Government’s own admission.  That announcement was made after the concluding observations had been published and is in direct conflict with a number of the recommendations – such as the recommendations set out at paragraphs 41b and 41d. 

Given that one of the priority areas upon which the UK Government is to report in two years’ time is the recommendation at paragraph 41a (to review and correct the impact of welfare reforms since 2010) this is an important area for civil society to monitor and engage with the UK Government in seeking to improve social security protection and compliance with their obligations under ICESCR.  Just Fair would strongly encourage CSOs working in this area to ensure that any assessment undertaken to comply with this recommendation includes impacts of the proposed reforms announced in April 2025 as well as the historic impact and that in so far as possible this should be analysed from a cumulative impact perspective.

Care

In relation to childcare, the recommendation (paragraph 43a) is strikingly similar to the one in 2016 concluding observations, focusing on the, “availability, accessibility and affordability of childcare”, however it does go a little further in 2025 in introducing concrete examples of actions to take – including increased public funding and targeted financial support, such as childcare allowances. These concrete examples are particularly useful for organisations campaigning on the issue.

The recommendation on paternal leave (paragraph 43b) would have been strengthened if more detail was provided in terms of what “ensuring adequate paid, non-transferable leave” looked like in practice. It may be useful for civil society organisations to lay this out for the Committee in the next review.

In the 2025 concluding observations, the Committee has taken a broader approach  in relation to shared caregiving (paragraph 43c), and called  for “a gender-sensitive, intersectional, intercultural and human rights-based approach”. The next step for advocacy groups may be to seek more specificity from the Committee in order to make greatest use of this.   

Exploitation and violence

There is a strong and specific recommendation on tackling sexual exploitation or and violence against children (paragraph 43d)– calling for the implementation of various enquiries already conducted across the UK. The cross referencing and reinforcement of the work by the Committee on the Rights of the Child is also welcome. This could be a very useful recommendation for those working on the issue.

Children’s social care system

Although contained within a section on poverty, rather than protection of the family, in the concluding observations – we are including children’s social care reform within the Protection of the Family section as it is a cross-cutting issue. This is the first time the issue of children being separated from their families on the basis of poverty has been included in concluding observations of CESCR to the UK (paragraph 45c). This is a positive step with the Committee recommending the financial support of low-income families to prevent separation and the allocation of sufficient resources to the children’s social care system more generally. The inclusion of the issue in this set of concluding observations is a recognition of the advocacy by groups and those with direct experience of the issue.

Note – while the Committee includes a section on poverty within the section on an adequate standard of living this analysis will address the issue of poverty below in a separate section.

The right to adequate housing

The Committee outlines the multiple violations of the right to adequate housing that take place in the UK in the concluding observations, identifying key pressure points in the housing crisis. It highlights concerns about the critical challenges in the availability, affordability and accessibility of adequate housing, which are noted as being further compounded by inadequate housing benefits, rising rental costs and inadequate property taxes (paragraph 46).

The Committee notes that the result of such policies is that many have been pushed into precarious living conditions or homelessness, with surging numbers of individuals, particularly single mothers with children, living in substandard conditions or inadequate temporary accommodation for extended periods. The 2025 concluding observations include, for the first time, a recommendation on temporary accommodation.  The Committee specifically mentions the habitability concerns that exist in temporary accommodation, calling for a comprehensive regulatory framework to address such issues.

The Committee highlights persistent barriers to specific groups, for example

• Gypsies, Roma and Travellers
• Women (including single mothers)
• Disabled people
• Young people
• Minoritised ethnic groups
• Migrants and people seeking asylum.

The Committee makes 8 recommendations related to housing (paragraph 47) stating that the State Party, along with the devolved governments of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales should:

• Ensure the availability of affordable and social housing units.
• Ensure the greatest possible security of tenure to tenants, including by amending section 21 of the Housing Act 1988, and guarantee that evictions, when unavoidable, comply with due process,
• Address the root causes of homelessness by ensuring adequate resources for local authorities, prioritizing long-term solutions, guaranteeing safe and adequate living conditions in temporary accommodation, and ending the punitive approach towards rough sleeping;
• Strengthen measures to prevent and combat intimidation by paramilitary groups against ethnic minorities and migrants in Northern Ireland in order to ensure their access to adequate housing and to prevent de facto segregation.

The right to food

In the concluding observations the Committee raises concern about increasing food insecurity, malnutrition, poverty and limited access to affordable and nutritious food, which disproportionately affect low-income households, in particular families with children.

The Committee recalls its General Comment No. 12 (1999) on the right to adequate food and the Voluntary Guidelines to Support the Progressive Realization of the Right to Adequate Food in the Context of National Food Security.

The Committee makes 5 recommendations related to food (paragraph 49) stating that the State Party, along with the devolved governments of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales should:

• Expedite the adoption of a comprehensive national strategy for the protection and promotion of the right to adequate food;
• Take measures to address the triple burden of malnutrition (undernutrition, micronutrient deficiencies and overweight/obesity);
• Ensure that social protection programmes target those most in need;
• Promote balanced diets;
• Introduce higher taxes on junk food and sugary drinks.

These recommendations remain largely unchanged from the previous concluding observations in 2016. Although they cover some important aspects of the right to food, they are not particularly strong on the issue of food insecurity, increasing food bank use, and issues such as holiday hunger.

Affordable electricity, gas, water, sanitation, heating as well as clothing

Access to water and sanitation have been mentioned before in concluding observations to the UK by the Committee in relation to Gypsy, Roma and Travellers (2016 concluding observations at paragraph 49) but not for the population more generally, as in the current concluding observations (paragraph 45d). Fuel poverty was highlighted in the 2009 concluding observations to the UK (at paragraph 28), but the specific named inclusion of electricity, gas and heating is new and important recognition by the Committee of people’s experiences on the ground, particularly as a result of the increasing costs since the cost-of-living crisis began.

Included in this paragraph (45d), but separated slightly by a comma, is clothing. Despite being included in the Covenant (Article 11(1)), this is the first mention of adequate clothing as an element of poverty in the UK in concluding observations by CESCR. Its inclusion is reflective of work undertaken civil society actors who have highlighted the issue. It may now give a new base for further advocacy and future recommendations.

Funeral/bereavement poverty

Despite advocacy from civil society, the Committee did not include a recommendation relating to the financial implications of funerals and bereavement on people’s right to an adequate standard of living. This would have been a new area for the Committee and it is one which civil society organisations may wish to advocate and advance at future reviews.

This section of the concluding observations is detailed and includes actionable recommendations. It also represents progress in comparison to previous concluding observations the Committee has made to the UK.

In the context of the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health (the right to health), the Committee examined the status of healthcare services, including a focus on mental health and extensive analysis of reproductive healthcare (paragraphs 50-53).

As regards healthcare services in general, the Committee expressed concerns about:

• “the inadequate funding for the health sector, the long waiting times for medical appointments, procedures and operations, the shortages of medical staff and equipment and the barriers to access to healthcare for the most disadvantaged and those living in remote areas.” (paragraph 50).

The Committee specifically recommends that the UK:

• “Strengthen measures to ensure universal health coverage in practice by increasing resources for the National Health Service, securing sufficient qualified medical staff, ensuring access to adequate medical equipment and infrastructure, reducing waiting times, improving health services in remote and rural areas and removing stigma and informational and technological barriers to access to health for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities, undocumented migrants and asylum-seekers and to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons in relation to gender identity-related healthcare, particularly in Scotland, guided by the Committee’s general comment No. 14 (2000) on the right to the highest attainable standard of health.” (para 51(a))

The specific emphasis on Scotland as regards gender identity-related healthcare is likely attributable  to the work of civil society advocacy in Scotland. The Committee provides a human rights analysis of healthcare system financing, provision and governance.  This analysis was not a feature in the preceding concluding observations on the UK (2016), where the Committee focused only on improving access for specific marginalised populations, rather than analysing the healthcare system from a systemic perspective. This change in perspective indicates a progressive step forward.

The recommendation of the Committee on financing the public healthcare services (the NHS) and the recognition of the specific groups which face disproportionate barriers in accessing healthcare services are both welcome.

While noting the Mental Health Bill 2025 and the new mental health strategies, the Committee expresses concern about “the high number of deaths by suicide and due to drug use and the rising levels of anxiety and depression” (para 50). In this regard, it recommends that the UK:

• “Strengthen mental health services and support systems by allocating sufficient resources, strengthening community-based support, undertaking initiatives to destigmatize mental health issues and implementing targeted measures for groups disproportionately affected by mental health problems.” (Para. 51(b)).

The Committee dedicates two paragraphs (52-53) to the topic of sexual and reproductive healthcare. The Committee notes with concerns the “high rates of maternal mortality and disparities in access to sexual and reproductive health services and information, which adversely affect women and girls from disadvantaged groups and in peripheral and remote areas” (para 52).

In this context, the Committee issues the following specific recommendations:

• “Increase efforts to ensure equal access to maternal health services for migrant women and women from ethnic minority groups with a view to reducing maternal and infant mortality rates and to adequately equip facilities for antenatal, perinatal and postnatal care, particularly in rural areas;”
• “Strengthen measures to ensure the accessibility and availability of appropriate, good-quality sexual and reproductive healthcare services and information, such as access to safe abortion services, including abortion medication, contraception and emergency contraception, for all women and adolescent girls (…) particularly those living in rural or remote areas.”
• Be guided by the Committee’s general comment No. 22 (2016) on the right to sexual and reproductive health and the Abortion Care Guideline (2022) of the World Health Organization (WHO) and take into account the recommendations made by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in its inquiry concerning the State Party.”

Such an extended section on sexual and reproductive healthcare is positive. The specific attention given to sexual and reproductive rights of migrant women and women from a racialised ethnic minority background is welcome given that these groups are experiencing disproportionate impact as highlighted by reports sent to the Committee.

The content and scope of the Committee’s 2025 concluding observations are more extensive compared to those of 2016. In 2016, the Committee expressed concerns and recommendations solely about abortion services in Northern Ireland. It is also noteworthy that the Committee refers to the specific guidance of another UN specialised agency (the World Health Organisation) in the context of safe abortion as well as of that of another Treaty Body (Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)).

Across all the health-related observations and recommendations, it is significant that the Committee reiterates the relevance of the accessibility, availability, acceptability and quality framework (AAAQ framework) in the approach to rights-based healthcare. This framework was first articulated by the Committee in its General Comment 14. This framework is useful for civil society when it comes to analysing the human rights implications of health policy, laws and regulations.

The section on the right to education is mixed. In addition to recognising disparity in the coverage of early childhood education by income group (which has been recognised before) the Committee also expresses concerns regarding the disparity by region (paragraph 56a and 57a). 

The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic in terms of access to the right to education is reflected in the Committee’s recommendation that the UK ”[a]dopt effective measures to mitigate learning opportunity loss in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, in particular for disadvantaged children, and effectively prevent the further disruption of education” (paragraph 57b).

There is recognition by the Committee that more work needs to be done by governments across the UK to address attainment gaps and persistent significant disparities experienced by racially and ethnically minoritised children and children from low-income families which limits social mobility (paragraph 56 c) and the recommendation that there is comprehensive evaluation of existing programs reflects this (paragraph 57c).   

Further, the Committee recommends that the UK ensures that children from particular groups (Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children, Disabled children, migrant children and children from disadvantaged backgrounds) not only have access to quality education, but also that it is culturally appropriate and adapted to their needs (paragraph 57d). This is an example of a human rights-based approach being recommended – fulfilling the duty to provide a right to education entails ensuring that rights holders are able to receive an education that is available, accessible, acceptable and of good quality.

The inclusion of a recommendation on bullying (including cyberbullying), violence and gender stereotypes in schools is a new and welcome development (paragraph 57e).  This reflects the concerns set out by the Committee at paragraph 56e in relation to serious cases of violence, bullying and cyberbullying based on specific grounds, including sexual orientation, gender identity and race and the persistence of gender stereotypes.

Paragraph 57f, on discriminatory attitudes and stereotypes is multi-layered and should be unpacked and considered carefully. It contains a number of elements which must be addressed in order to achieve structural change in rights protections in education. It contains reference to the role of appropriate training programmes for teachers and a recognition of the role of teachers in preventing the perpetuating of stereotypes, the institutional role in avoiding this along with elimination of discriminatory attitude and stereotypes in educational materials and the school environment.

The Committee makes a number of strong recommendations regarding the right to education, however, there is no mention of higher or further education. Given the current crisis in funding in the UK university sector at present, this it is perhaps regrettable that this did not receive more attention.

This is a hugely expanded area compared to other concluding observations of the Committee relating to the UK. In previous concluding observations to the UK in relation to the right to participate in culture, the Committee has only ever highlighted one concern in the UK’s six reporting cycles: the protection of the Irish language, and in recent cycles this focused on an Irish Language Act. Protection and promotion of the Irish language and heritage (and Ulster Scots – a new development for the Committee) is included in the 2025 concluding observations (paragraph 59d), but so are a range of other issues, including:

• Protection of cultural rights and respect for cultural diversity – in particular in Northern Ireland (paragraph 59a)
• Increasing resources and improving programmes for the development of accessible recreational, art and leisure spaces, particularly for Disabled people (paragraph 59b)
• Ensuring non-discrimination in cultural participation and sports, particularly based on sexual orientation and gender identity (paragraph 59c)
• Repealing the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 (paragraph 61)
• Ensuring that trade agreements are implemented in a manner consistent with obligations under the Covenant with regard to the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights in other countries – in particular in relation to vaccine waivers (paragraph 63).

This is an expansion of interest in the right to culture in the UK by the Committee and a progressive step forward and reflective of the issues raised by civil society.