A. Introduction

1. In accordance with article 7 of its Standing Orders, the Conference set up a Committee to consider and report on item III on its agenda: "Information and reports on the application of Conventions and Recommendations". The Committee was composed of 178 members (92 Government members, 26 Employers' members and 60 Workers' members). It also included 20 Government deputy members, 39 Employers' deputy members and 87 Workers, deputy members. (Endnote 1) In addition, 23 international non-governmental organisations were represented by observers. (Endnote 2)

2. The Committee elected its Officers as follows:

Chairman: Mr. M. Rood (Government member, Netherlands);

Vice-Chairmen: Mr. A. Wisskirchen (Employers' member, Germany); and Mr. W. Peirens (Workers' member, Belgium);

Reporter: Mrs. F. Montenegro Diaz (Government member, Nicaragua).

3. The Committee held 22 sittings.

4. The Committee joined the Committee of Experts in paying tribute to Mr. Thiecouta Sidibé, former Director of the International Labour Standards Department of the International Labour Office, who retired at the end of March this year. His long experience and his personal commitment to the defence and promotion of the Organisation's standards, combined with his helpfulness and skill in enabling the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards to complete its tasks have earned him both the respect and the affection of the members of the Committee who have known him. The Committee wishes to record both its gratitude to Mr. Sidibé and its welcome to Mr. Héctor G. Bartolomei, his successor as Director of the Standards Department and representative of the Secretary-General in the Committee.

5. In accordance with its terms of reference, the Committee considered the following questions: (i) information supplied under article 19 of the Constitution on the submission to the competent authorities of Conventions and Recommendations adopted by the Conference; (ii) reports supplied under articles 22 and 35 of the Constitution on the application of ratified Conventions; and (iii) reports requested by the Governing Body under article 19 of the Constitution on the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1957 (No. 111); and on the Minimum Wage-Fixing Machinery Convention (No. 26) and Recommendation (No. 30), 1928; the Minimum Wage Fixing Machinery (Agriculture) Convention (No. 99) and Recommendation (No. 89), 1951; and the Minimum Wage Fixing Convention (No. 131) and Recommendation (No. 135), 1970. (Endnote 3)

6. As usual, the Committee began its work with a discussion of general aspects of the application of Conventions (particularly ratified Conventions) and Recommendations and the discharge by member States of standards-related obligations under the ILO Constitution. It then discussed the general survey made by the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, which dealt with minimum wages (wage-fixing machinery, application and supervision). Finally, it considered various individual cases relating to the application of ratified Conventions or compliance with the obligations to supply reports replying to the comments of the Committee of Experts and to submit Conventions and Recommendations to the competent national authorities. The examination of those cases, which is the essential work of the Committee, was based principally on the observations contained in the report of the Committee of Experts and on the oral and written explanations provided by the governments concerned. The Committee also referred to its discussions in previous years, comments received from employers' or workers' organisations and, where appropriate, the reports of other ILO supervisory bodies. In view of the short time available, the Committee followed its usual practice of making a selection among the Committee of Experts' observations and consequently discussed a limited number of cases. A summary of the information supplied by governments, the discussions in the present Committee and any conclusions it has drawn is set out in Part Two of this report.

7. The representative of the Secretary-General suggested that, for reasons of efficiency and costs and without any substantive loss in the end result, the Committee might this year consider provisionally forgoing formal minutes for its general discussion. The Committee recalled that the secretariat has hitherto put out minutes not only of the Committee's discussions of individual cases (which are published in the Provisional Record of the Conference appended to the Committee's report) but also of its general discussions. Having regard to the importance of the general discussion to the supervisory system as a whole, the Employers' members, supported by the Workers' members, proposed postponing any decision until next year, after due reflection. The Committee so decided.

B. General questions relating to international labour standards

I. Supervisory system

(i) Roles of the supervisory bodies

8. The Committee reaffirmed its support for the supervisory system and its reliance on the Committee of Experts' report, prepared as it is on the principles of independence, objectivity and impartiality. The Committee of Experts' report is an essential basis for the work of the present Committee, which recognises its high quality. The Committee believes that the supervisory system depends on a constructive dialogue between the two bodies.

9. The Workers' member of the United States felt that the vast majority of members of the Conference Committee had also adopted the principles of independence, objectivity and impartiality in the evaluations made in its own report to the Conference, as shown in paragraph 20 of its 1989 report: the Committee's conclusion last year in the case of the application of freedom of association under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), by the United Kingdom in respect of the Government Communications Headquarters at Cheltenham - in which case only the Government concerned dissented - showed that the principles were achieved in reality. The Employers, member of the United States thought the supervisory system was now moving into an era when the present Committee could conduct its work free from the political considerations of the past, and with independence, objectivity and impartiality, as the Committee of Experts always has done.

10. The Employers' members recalled that the Committee is prescribed in article 7 of the Standing Orders of the Conference and that it has competence to consider the measures taken by member States to give effect to the provisions of Conventions to which they are parties and to present a report to the Conference. The Committee is an essential part of the supervisory system and should be strengthened as much as possible. They considered that, while the opinions expressed in the Committee of Experts' report have considerable importance, the present Committee is not formally bound to follow them: this position was legally, historically and logically justified, and if it were not so the dialogue with governments would have no purpose. Each Committee has its own responsibilities; neither was subordinate to the other, but the spirit of mutual respect and cooperation should prevail. In reality the Conference Committee had always played its own independent role and recognising this did not imply a weakening of the supervisory mechanism. On the contrary, it was undeniable that numerous cases where progress had been made were in large part due to the intensive discussions of the present Committee. The theoretical question of this Committee's role should be examined in the interest of intellectual clarity. But, in actual practice, there were never any differences between the Employers' and the Workers' sides: a long list of cases could be made where the spokespersons of the Workers distanced themselves from the findings and the evaluations of the Committee of Experts. On the whole, divergences from the report of the Committee of Experts were more frequent and numerous on the Workers' side than on the Employers' side. The difference merely consisted in that the Employers had explicitly emphasised this fact and explained why this was justified. In actual practice, there was never any difference between the two sides. They acknowledged too that, as shown in paragraphs 18 to 30 of the Committee of Experts' report, the constitutional and other special procedures can help further to solve difficulties, although their variety does not allow the present Committee to follow them. The Government member of Germany agreed with the Employers' position.

11. The Government member of the United Kingdom also thought that the work of the present Committee would be superfluous if the opinions of the Committee of Experts could not occasionally be questioned. The Government member of Pakistan was of opinion that, where a government was forced to depart temporarily from a ratified Convention which it generally applied, understanding should be shown, and this attitude would lead to greater numbers of ratifications. The Government member of Cuba recalled that the Committee of Experts' work should be based on Governments' reports. The Conference Committee's discussions, in so far as they may be objective and impartial, may provide further objective information without implying that the Committee of Experts can circumscribe its comments exclusively on this Committee's discussions.

12. The Employers' member of the United States took the view that the Committee of Experts should respond to questions of method and substance raised in the present Committee and that it should be prepared to explain and re-evaluate its opinions: such further dialogue would serve to strengthen the supervisory machinery, and the Employers, members hoped the Committee of Experts would begin to do more of this next year. The Government member of the United States also said that the Committee needs and is entitled to a response from the Committee of Experts to the various questions raised: the work of the present Committee was becoming more complex and technical in the post-Cold War period and it needed more information in order to do its job correctly.

13. The Workers' members pointed out that they continue to follow the situation in cases not mentioned in the Committee of Experts' report this year; they expect the Committee of Experts to continue to give close attention to the remarks of the present Committee. They added that any reforms of the supervisory system should not in any event weaken the application in law and practice of ratified Conventions, as this would also discriminate against countries which scrupulously respect their engagements. The Workers' member of the Netherlands referred to the value of enriching the Committee of Experts' work with the testimony of Conference Committee members with direct knowledge or experience of the suffering caused, for example, by the abuse of trade union rights. Though the International Labour Office provides a vital link between the two bodies, there was sometimes, as he had observed last year (paragraph 7 of the Committee's 1991 report), a lack of continuity, when it was not clear why certain cases were included in the Committee of Experts' report one year but not another: the Committee should be informed why certain cases were chosen but not others. The Workers' member of France stated that the Committee of Experts' report was silent concerning certain cases of violation of Conventions universally recognised. The Workers' member of Greece stated his view that the Committee of Experts does not always take sufficient account of the factual information - for instance as to the collective bargaining situation - given in the discussions of the present Committee. In a specific case, the Workers' member of Ecuador said that, although his country was noted by the Committee of Experts as a case of progress in relation to the Maternity Protection Convention, 1952 (No. 103), because the Labour Code incorporated the Convention, in practice earlier legislation continued to impede effective guarantee of the right to maternity protection.

14. The Employers' and Workers' members observed that the choice of individual cases in the Committee of Experts' report to be discussed by the present Committee becomes more difficult both because of their increased number and because governments often supply their reports late. The Employers' members thought it would be suitable to examine if the periodicity of the reporting system should again be modified and the interval between the requests for reports increased according to the different categories of Conventions; the old Conventions, especially those which are obsolete, should be revised more rapidly than in the past; and the Committee of Experts' observations could concentrate on essentials and be presented in a more concise manner. The Government member of Ecuador agreed that the Committee of Experts' report formed the basis of the present Committee's work, but drew attention to the difficulties caused to the Conference delegations when the report is received so late that it cannot be given all due forethought.

15. The representative of the Secretary-General recalled that many complaints had been made over the years that members of the Committee - especially from developing countries - receive the Committee of Experts' reports only on arrival in Geneva. He intended to make proposals to solve the problem without any increase in expenditure for either the Office or governments. He explained that some cases were not mentioned in the Committee of Experts' report every year because reports were not due every year under the automatic requesting system determined by the Governing Body: this did not mean those cases were lost or neglected, and they would be examined again when the next reports were due. Proposals to deal with this question were also under consideration. The Committee had, notwithstanding, followed up this year on many cases discussed earlier by the present Committee.

(ii) Interpretation of Conventions

16. Several members of the Committee spoke to paragraph 7 of the Committee of Experts' report, which noted the earlier suggestion in the Conference Committee that the implementation of article 37 (2) of the ILO Constitution - which empowers the Governing Body to "make and submit to the Conference for approval rules providing for the appointment of a tribunal for the expeditious determination of any dispute or question relating to the interpretation of a Convention" - should be submitted to the competent bodies of the ILO for a prior in-depth examination. The Government members of Australia, Belgium, Cameroon, France, Germany, Pakistan, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Tunisia and the United Kingdom supported the suggestion that the matter should be studied in the Organisation. The Workers, members stated that the suggestion for such a study could serve to reinforce the supervisory system. However, a tribunal should not be used to weaken the roles of the Committee of Experts or the present Committee or throw doubt on the principles and methods of the supervisory bodies. They emphasised the tripartite aspect of the ILO's standard-setting: this is a characteristic not only of the supervision of international labour standards but also of their elaboration, and it must be remembered whenever the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties is invoked as a guide to their interpretation. ILO Conventions were not like other treaties, but had some resemblance to an "international collective agreement".

17. The Employers' members referred to the position they had taken in previous years in the Committee in regard to the interpretation of Conventions (paragraphs 13, 26 and 27 of the Committee's 1991 report): under the ILO Constitution only the International Court of Justice may give a definitive interpretation of a Convention; the present Committee proceeds in an independent manner under article 7 of the Standing Orders and presents a report to the Conference; for the accomplishment of its task it uses the report of the Committee of Experts as an indispensable basis for its work; given the great quality of the report of the Committee of Experts, its opinions also have a considerable importance for the present Committee, which is nevertheless bound neither formally nor legally to follow their views, given that they have no erga omnes effect, and this was logical because the dialogue with governments and other discussions would have no purpose if it were not possible to disagree with the Committee of Experts' views; finally, only those methods of interpretation mentioned in article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties are applicable.

18. The Government member of Spain thought such a tribunal should be an ad hoc body; its members would have to be internationally recognised experts and they would need to base their work on the Vienna Convention. The Government member of Tunisia thought the study should consider the relationship between a tribunal and the existing supervisory bodies; the effect of setting up such a tribunal on the decisions of this Committee, the Committee of Experts and the Committee on Freedom of Association; the relationship between the tribunal and the International Court of Justice; the procedure to be followed (including, whether the Governing Body would be involved); whether it would be a court of first or of last jurisdiction; and the effect of its judgments.

19. The Government member of the Syrian Arab Republic was in favour of setting up an article 37 (2) tribunal. The Workers' member of Norway stated that such a tribunal should have a tripartite basis, and that it would make the ILO's supervisory machinery more complete. The Workers' member of Finland stated that until recently the established interpretations made by the Committee of Experts have been considered binding by member States until the International Court makes a final decision; however, there was now a need for a special tribunal for speedy resolution of disputes in cases such as those involving Germany or the United Kingdom, where governments did not recognise the interpretations made by the supervisory bodies - including special commissions of inquiry - but at the same time failed to appeal to the International Court of Justice. The Government member of Germany did not believe reliance on the Vienna Convention would lead to ILO Conventions losing value.

20. The representative of the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) referred to the quasi-judicial role of the Committee of Experts which allowed the present tripartite Committee to aim through its debates at encouraging member States to apply Conventions effectively rather than condemning them. In his view, establishing an article 37 (2) tribunal would accentuate the judicial character of the supervisory system and made the procedures less flexible; there would be problems if executory judgments were pronounced against governments. Conventions were the fruit of political compromise reached in a tripartite framework and should be supervised too in a tripartite manner: existing mechanisms should be improved but not weakened.

21. The Government member of Iceland, speaking on behalf of the Nordic Governments (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden) considered it preferable to resolve problems in the spirit of mutual respect, cooperation and responsibility than to resort to an article 37 (2) tribunal. The Government members of Pakistan and Portugal emphasised the importance of dialogue between the two Committees, and if that did not resolve problems, solutions other than resort to the International Court of Justice should be sought. The Government member of the United States shared the view of the Nordic governments and considered a tribunal would be no more legally definitive than the Committee of Experts and that it could undermine the key role of the latter in the supervisory process. The Government member of Iraq considered the current machinery based on dialogue preferable to a more judicial one: if after a study it were decided to set up a tribunal, it should be competent only for interpretation and not for dispute settlement; interpretation should be a matter for legal experts, but the Committee of Experts had in certain cases gone a long way in interpreting Conventions beyond the true meaning of the actual text, which could create problems for some countries and discourage them from ratification. The Government member of Morocco doubted the need to create another body: the current system had proved its effectiveness, dominated by the spirit of pragmatism and dialogue; and the qualifications for judges of a tribunal would be the same as those for members of the Committee of Experts; in addition to which, a tribunal would risk bringing greater rigidity into the system at a time when flexibility is wanted. The Employers' member of the United States also considered dialogue preferable to implementation of article 37 (2), which he believed would lead to an alternative appeals procedure and would have the effect of diminishing the stature of the Committee of Experts. He recalled that article 37 (2) was included in the Constitution at a time when it was uncertain whether the ILO would enjoy direct access to the advisory jurisdiction of the International Court reconstituted as a United Nations organ; and the Governing Body had taken no action on the procedure because access to the Court was in fact provided for.

22. The Employers' member of the United States stated that the Committee of Experts had an expansive application of the right to strike, even though the legislative history of Convention No. 87 did not relate to it. He said that the Committee of Experts had first mentioned as an observation the right to strike being contemplated by the Convention more than a decade after the adoption of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98, and in the meantime many countries had ratified them with no knowledge that the right to strike was involved. He stated that from 1960 through the 1980s the Committee of Experts had concluded that those Conventions contain an everwidening right to strike, including sympathy, political and solidarity strikes, and that they applied a narrower and narrower definition of "essential services". He wondered at what moment evolving Committee of Experts' interpretations became "valid and generally recognised". On behalf of the Employers' members, he stated it was preferable to address these questions in the context of specific cases. It was in the interests of the Committee that the Committee of Experts should explain the basis for their decision making more clearly and listen to this Committee's concerns in "the spirit of mutual respect, cooperation and responsibility".

23. The Workers' members emphasised their support for the working methods and principles applied by the experts as a whole, including the right to strike.

24. The Workers' member of the United Kingdom observed that a State which does not agree with the Committee of Experts' views may take the matter to the International Court of Justice, but it should not expect the present Committee to contradict the Committee of Experts on points of law. The right of the present Committee to differ on interpretation does not extend to individual governments, as the standard-setting machinery could not exist in those conditions.

25. The representative of the Secretary-General stated that the question of an article 37 (2) tribunal would be studied in detail by the Office and submitted in due course to the competent bodies.

(iii) Recent trends: democratisation and tripartism

26. The Committee reflected further on the continuing evolution of the international environment in which the ILO's standard-setting system functions, and the conditions affecting the observance of international labour standards in developing and industrialised countries, especially those undergoing transition to a market economy. It noted with interest the information supplied by various members as to progress made, often with ILO assistance, in revising labour legislation and establishing or enhancing tripartite practices. At the same time, it was concerned that the ILO's standards and principles should nevertheless be strenuously defended and promoted.

27. The Committee welcomed States joining the ILO, since this must strengthen the universality of the Organisation's standards. For the same reason, the Workers, members hoped the new member States which have not yet ratified Conventions would rapidly do so. They remarked that many governments of developing countries, those undergoing transition to a market economy and industrialised ones are tempted to give near absolute priority to economic progress without paying due attention to freedom of association, tripartism and the participation of all social groups: the observance of international labour standards is of primary importance for safeguarding basic rights, social justice and democracy. The Workers' member of Venezuela gave his opinion that democracy and a market economy were not one and the same thing: he wondered whether democracy was only a question of electoral procedure or whether the concept is linked to workers enjoying decent working and living conditions. The Government member of Nicaragua said that tripartism is the most appropriate means of bringing about peace and social justice, and it should operate in all areas such as vocational training, wages policy and establishing conditions of work.

28. The Employers' members considered that major political developments in the world would influence the work of the present Committee in various ways, and the current increase in ILO membership brought about not just a quantitative but a qualitative change. Many States had returned peacefully to the community of democratic States and were making efforts to introduce a market economy: this Employers regard as particularly suited to democracy and individual liberty, although there might be major difficulties during the changeover which are attributable to a former dictatorial system. Imagination, patience and assistance - and the support of the Committee - would be needed. The International Organisation of Employers had also welcomed new members. The Employers noted that individuals and enterprises had a role in taking risks and investing to assist those countries, although changing political, ideological and economic structures is not easy.

29. The Workers' members referred to the role of the ILO in relation to democratisation as discussed in the Director-General's report to the Conference. Efforts by the ILO were needed to reinforce tripartite involvement in the transition to a market economy and structural adjustment; a market economy is not in itself a guarantee of the development of democracy, but it should be accompanied by real and increasing participation by all social groups, complete social and economic democracy, tripartism and free bargaining. They considered that new divisions in countries changing to a market economy and undergoing structural adjustment must not jeopardise the principles and working methods of the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee. The Workers' member of Colombia said that people in developing countries face the re-establishment of the old economic order disguised as a new one, with the imposition of a neo-liberal model provoking social marginalisation and, as events show, threatening the fragile democracies of Latin America: the ILO had an important role in that respect, and the present Committee should, as the political conscience of the ILO, ensure further progress by following up the work of the Committee of Experts and promoting on-the-spot missions to establish the facts. The WFTU representative said that the slowing of ratifications, frequent insufficiency of reporting and denunciations resulted less from standards being ill-adapted to conditions than from the development of neo-liberal approaches to labour and social rights, deregulation since the 1970s, and the threat to the protection of labour rights caused by ideas of financial profitability - all of this to the cost of full employment and social progress.

30. The Government member of Iceland speaking on behalf of the Nordic Governments observed that international political changes had had a noticeable effect on the Committee: arguments about "double standards" had subsided, enabling the Committee to carry out its work more efficiently. The Government member of Saudi Arabia in this context stressed the importance of directing dialogue with governments towards encouraging them, in particular, to ratify Conventions. The Workers' member of the United Kingdom feared that the disappearance of the East-West ideological divide might give rise to new alignments in the Committee and a new problem of different attitudes to rich and to poor countries in cases of failure to fulfil obligations under Conventions. The Workers' member of Italy stated that the end of ideological conflicts made more concrete work possible, and the supervisory machinery could now turn from an analytical to a synthetical phase, dealing with larger issues such as the maintenance of peace, internationalisation of the economy, the environment, new technology management, and North-South imbalances. As concerns social standards and technical cooperation in the field of work, the ILO should remain the privileged source of reference.

31. Several members representing governments of countries involved in the transition process informed the Committee of their experience, and in particular of assistance received from the ILO. The Government member of the Russian Federation indicated that international labour standards were, with the Office's advice, forming the basis for new labour legislation in his country; practices of tripartism and negotiation of conflicts were being turned to. He considered that further assistance from the ILO would help deal with problems of discrimination against the Russian-speaking population in certain newly independent States formerly part of the USSR. The Government member of Lithuania also referred to the creation of tripartite structures in her country and she hoped for continuing ILO technical assistance in relation to standards and reporting. The Government member of Latvia similarly described ILO assistance received in relation to standards and tripartism: his country looked to international norms as indicators for national legislation; eight of the most basic ILO Conventions had been newly ratified, and Latvia hoped for continuing help from the ILO. The Government member of Romania talked of the benefit his country had had from ILO assistance in respect of labour legislation for the democratisation of social relations.

32. The Workers' member of Italy remarked that the supervisory bodies were the pillars on which the ILO stands in order to reinforce democracy and social justice in the world. The Committee noted from the Committee of Experts' report that the highest ever number of observations had been received this year from employers' and workers' organisations, demonstrating their active interest in the supervision of standards and, as the Workers' members observed, considerably reinforcing the efficiency of all components of the supervisory system. The Government member of Uruguay informed the Committee of the contribution to economic integration in Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay made by a tripartite committee set up to deal with common labour and social questions: subject to the review of some international legal issues, the committee had, by listing certain international labour Conventions to be ratified as a minimum by those countries, established a consensus among them. The Government member of Portugal thought ratification of the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), had stimulated organisations into participating in the supervisory procedures, and she emphasised the value of the Office's work, especially for promoting and strengthening national tripartite machinery.

33. The Workers' member of Spain, supported by the Workers' member of Colombia, regarded tripartism as an essential element of the ILO over the last 40 years but was concerned that the principle was in crisis in many countries, especially where, as in his country, there is no real negotiation. He appealed for genuine negotiations, where each side listens. The Workers' member of Ecuador viewed governments' neglecting reporting obligations and their denunciation of Conventions as the reflection of an attack on workers' rights, with serious consequences for their living conditions and for tripartism and democracy, especially where these are already very weak.

(iv) Reporting obligations

34. The Committee noted with concern that the proportion of reports on ratified Conventions received in time for the Committee of Experts was, at just under 70 per cent, exceptionally low this year. It recalled that the supply of reports due is an important constitutional obligation on which the supervisory system is based, and that when reports are received either late or not at all or are incomplete, the work of the Committee of Experts and the present Committee risks destabilisation. Whilst recognising that most member States fulfil their reporting obligations, the Employers' and Workers' members hoped that all governments would make greater efforts in this respect. The Workers' member of Ecuador pointed out that a government such as his own could be considered by the Committee of Experts as having complied with reporting obligations even though the only action it had taken was to refer matters to the National Congress without making effort to make the necessary adjustments to legislation. He was concerned at some governments' lack of replies to comments of the Committee of Experts.

35. The Employers' members noted the reference in paragraph 116 of the Committee of Experts' report to certain governments systematically sending their reports during the period between the end of that Committee's session and the beginning of the Conference. They iterated their proposal, supported by the Workers' members, that such governments should be named, as their conduct constitutes a rather sophisticated form of obstruction to the supervisory system. The Committee was informed by the representative of the Secretary-General that the wish to see such list in the body of the Committee of Experts' report with a view to assisting this Committee's discussions would be duly transmitted.

36. The Employers' members pointed out that the deterioration in performance of the reporting obligation coincided with a constant increase in the absolute numbers of Conventions and of reports due. It might therefore be right to re-examine the periodicity of reporting on ratified Conventions. The number of observations had also increased, as well as the size of the report - double that of ten years ago. The Workers' members called for prior consultation of this Committee before decisions were taken changing reporting obligations. They stressed that in general the new arrangements should reinforce the supervisory system as a whole and not weaken it, given that it is a dynamic system.

37. Members representing Governments of industrialised as well as developing countries (Australia, Cuba, France, Germany, Iceland (and the other Nordic countries), Iraq, Italy, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, Syrian Arab Republic, United Kingdom, United States) referred to an increasing reporting burden and difficulties in meeting deadlines. The Government member of Pakistan warned of particular difficulties for federal States. The Government member of Iraq pointed to the difficulty in meeting time-limits because of having to consult various authorities and employers' and workers' organisations and obtain required information, and because of delays in correspondence with the ILO. And the Workers' member of Poland observed that the increasing numbers of comments being made by employers' and workers' organisations, while in itself encouraging, placed further pressure on the time-limits for dealing with the Committee of Experts' comments: he suggested that the Committee of Experts authorise the Office, where it received comments from organisations which had simultaneously been sent by them to the Government concerned, to invite the Government to comment immediately. The Government member of Morocco suggested sending requests for reports 12 months in advance and reducing the number of Conventions on which reports are due. Some Government members (Kenya, Pakistan, Portugal) indicated that the Office's assistance can help overcome administrative and technical difficulties. Others (Belgium, Cuba, Nigeria, United Kingdom, United States) called for further ILO consideration of the problem, with a view perhaps to staggering reporting deadlines through the year (United Kingdom), or otherwise extending deadlines (Iceland and the other Nordic countries, Syrian Arab Republic), or being more selective in reporting requirements (Australia). The Government member of France considered m this respect that account should be taken of which Conventions are formally listed by the Governing Body as priority ones; he further noted that the workload has increased also for the International Labour Standards Department and the Committee of Experts.

38. The Committee was assured by the representative of the Secretary-General that the possibility of a selective system of reporting was being examined, valuing quality over quantity. Any proposals the Office made would be submitted to the Governing Body in due course. It was demonstrated to the Committee by reference to earlier statistics that, after an initial decline in the numbers of reports requested following the introduction of changes in their periodicity, later increases meant there was in the end a worse result.

II. Principles of standard-setting

(v) Standard-setting policy

39. The Committee listened to the views of several members as to the form of future and some present ILO standards. Several speakers (the Employers' members, the Government members of Australia, Germany, Italy, the Syrian Arab Republic) considered that some older Conventions are out of date or no longer relevant and should be revised: the Protection of Wages Convention, 1949 (No. 95); the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 96); and - so far as they have special provisions for women - the White Lead (Painting) Convention, 1921 (No. 13), the Maximum Weight Convention, 1967 (No. 127) and the Benzene Convention, 1971 (No. 136), according to the Government member of Australia; and the Marking of Weight (Packages Transported by Vessels) Convention, 1929 (No. 27), according to the Government member of Germany. The Government members of Australia, France, Kenya, Nicaragua and Tunisia stressed the need for Conventions to be flexible or drafted as a "framework", in order to facilitate ratification by countries at all stages of development. The Government member of Iceland, speaking on behalf of the Nordic Governments, agreed on the need for flexibility but stressed that future instruments should not be drafted so flexibly as to leave it up to ratifying States to determine whether or how to implement them. Similarly, several members of the Committee (the Government members of France, the Syrian Arab Republic, the United Kingdom) referred to the need to ensure that the principle of universality is retained in international labour standards. The Government member of Morocco stressed the need for new standards to take account of new developments. The Government members of Australia and the United States called for relaxation of the pace of standard-setting, so that Conventions adopted would have a better chance of being ratified and implemented.

40. With regard to the link between the elaboration and application of standards, the Employers' members were of the opinion that this close link should not be overlooked. A number of governments complained regarding their ability to apply Conventions. The problem was not here however but with governments voting in favour of new international instruments containing highly complex and technical standards. These governments should adopt a more coherent policy in this respect. An examination of ratifications over the past 15 years showed that the new Conventions obtained fewer ratifications. An explanation for this could perhaps be found in the complexity of these instruments.

41. The Government member of Bangladesh noted that many developing countries do not understand the need to adopt so many standards dealing with the informal sector at one extreme and highly sophisticated manufacturing and operational units at the other. There was in the current adoption procedures no guarantee of effective interaction between the Office and the member States. The vast majority of States failed to participate in the committees drawing up Conventions and Recommendations due to the inadequate size of their delegations and their lack of expertise: thus, instruments adopted did not reflect the situations in member States, and the latter would not be able to implement or ratify them. He proposed greater time for member States to interact in the adoption process; a greater breathing space particularly for developing countries before deciding whether to ratify; examination of the subjects already covered by standards, to restrain the tendency to bring new areas dealt with by national legislation within the international norms; the revision of existing standards with a view to eliminating overlapping, if necessary, rather than the adoption of more new standards; and the highlighting of flexibility in order to encourage ratification and implementation. The Government member of Australia also referred to the lack of resources in many countries to enable effective participation in the standard-setting process: this detracts from the universality of standards.

42. The Government members of France, Germany and Tunisia pointed out that some recent Conventions are unclearly drafted, partly because they represent compromises reached in the Conference. The Government member of Germany mentioned that reservations cannot be made when ratifying. However, the Workers' members considered too general standards would create problems of interpretation. It was necessary also to avoid putting off problems met with in the tripartite technical committees for solution in the present Committee. The problems of protecting workers were moreover highly complex in view of the increasing complexity of work organisation and technology. The Government member of Iceland speaking on behalf of the Nordic Governments called for the International Labour Standards Department to be represented in technical committees elaborating new standards or revising old ones; and the Government member of France wished also for the responsible technical branches of the ILO to be made more aware of the problem when the original questionnaires are drafted. The Government member of Tunisia also thought the Standards Department had an important role to play in the adoption process.

43. The WFTU representative viewed requests for the slow-down of standard-setting and for revision of standards to make them more flexible in the context of social regression resulting from international competitiveness. The Government member of the Russian Federation called for current gaps in international labour law to be filled with adoption of new Conventions and Recommendations. The report showed quite clearly that coordination on standard setting between the ILO and the United Nations system should be reinforced. In this coordination the eminent position of the ILO in the development of international labour standards was obvious.

44. The Committee noted with interest the consideration given by the Governing Body to some preliminary suggestions as to the standard-setting system made by the Director-General. It noted that various matters would be examined further, and it hoped that the Office and the Governing Body would bear in mind the views expressed in the Committee. Preliminary consultation and cooperation with this Committee before decisions on the sending of reports would be very useful in ensuring the success of any decisions taken.

III. General aspects of the application of standards

(vi) Ratifications

45. The Committee welcomed the indication in the Committee of Experts' report that there were 58 ratifications in 1991, making a total of some 1000 new ratifications since 1980. The Government member of Saudi Arabia and the Workers' member of the Syrian Arab Republic stated the importance of the ILO's role in promoting and encouraging further ratifications. The Government member of Tunisia called on the Committee of Experts to make an analysis of ratifications, showing the tendencies and drawing conclusions; they should be presented by country and by Convention and a study should be undertaken of the difficulties in ratifying all Conventions, especially the human rights ones.

46. The Workers' members noted the low number of new ratifications in the Asian/Pacific Region (five in 1991) and in North America despite some recent improvements. The Workers' member of Japan regretted stagnation in the pace of ratifications. He spoke of the stress placed on ratification of Conventions by the ILO Asian Regional Conference held in Bangkok in 1991: with a few exceptions, despite the remarkable economic development there, Asian countries had a poor record in this respect, in particular relating to basic human rights Conventions such as the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) and the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111). The Workers' member of Finland regretted also that so few ratifications of basic human rights Conventions and those on trade union rights were registered in 1991. The Workers, member of France pointed out that large industrialised States sometimes ratify few ILO Conventions.

47. The Committee noted with interest the indications by several Government members that ratifications were envisaged or under consideration as follows: Australia (Minimum Age (Sea) Convention (Revised), 1936 (No. 58); Accommodation of Crews Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 92); Accommodation of Crews (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1970 (No. 133); Workers' Representatives Convention, 1971 (No. 135); Rural Workers' Organisations Convention, 1975 (No. 141); Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151)); Belgium (Paid Educational Leave Convention, 1974 (No. 140); Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (Disabled Persons) Convention, 1983 (No. 159); Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171)); Germany (Working Environment (Air Pollution, Noise and Vibration) Convention, 1977 (No. 148); Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162); Safety and Health in Construction Convention, 1988 (No. 167)); India (Labour Administration Convention, 1978 (No. 150)); Iraq (Working Conditions (Hotels and Restaurants) Convention, 1991 (No. 172)); Italy (Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171)); Lithuania (Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81); human rights Conventions); Portugal (Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171)); Romania (Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144); Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154); Employment Promotion and Protection against Unemployment Convention, 1988 (No. 168)); Russian Federation (Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144); Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154)).

(vii) Denunciations

48. The Committee took note of the indications in paragraphs 12-17 of the Committee of Experts' report, concerning in particular eight denunciations of the Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1948 (No. 89), not accompanied by ratification of the Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171). The Employers' members called for careful examination of the reasons behind denunciations, as conflicts may arise between the requirements of Conventions such as No. 89, which discriminated against women, and new realities. The Government member of Italy considered that Convention No. 89 maintained its importance for different situations and systems; and in this respect the Committee should relaunch debate on the relation between standards and the different contexts in which they are applied. The Workers' members were concerned also at the denunciation by Malaysia of the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), in 1990, which goes against the ILO's essential values. Whilst regretting the large number of denunciations registered, the Government member of India called for greater understanding for governments compelled to change their position as national conditions evolved.

49. The Workers' members pointed to the dangers of deregulation of working conditions which, in the case of night work, might be inspired by considerations of equal treatment, but risk harming weaker groups in the labour market - especially women and those in the unorganised sector, and especially when the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100), is not ratified and equal remuneration not satisfactorily guaranteed in law and practice. They feared that all the necessary tripartite consultations had not taken place in the EEC and the member States concerned. The agreement of 31 October 1991 between the European Trade Union Confederation and the organisations of employers in the private and public sectors as to an EEC consultation and bargaining model could solve and avoid problems of tripartism at the Community level. For the Workers' members, denunciation of Convention No. 89 was unnecessary in order to remedy difficulties met with by some member States. Member States could either observe Convention No. 89 as a whole or ratify its Protocol adopted by the Conference in 1990 in order to introduce greater flexibility in so far as derogations from the prohibition of night work are called for. They stressed the need for measures in aid of all workers through ratification of Convention No. 171, so as to promote the principle of equality of treatment in respect of salaries and conditions of work. They urged all States to ratify Convention No. 171.

50. The Government member of Tunisia also pointed out that Convention No. 89 could not be regarded as conflicting with the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), given amongst other things the adoption of the 1990 Protocol; measures for the protection of women were not considered discriminatory under the 1979 UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; and it was notable that recent denunciations of Convention No. 89 had not been accompanied by any new ratifications of Convention No. 171. No one disagreed with the fact that night work causes inconveniences for workers. The Workers' member of Uganda stated that one of the main reasons given for denunciation of Convention No. 89 was the principle of sexual equality; yet the workers' representatives spoke for both sexes and had never complained that men were discriminated against under that Convention; he rejected arguments alleging discrimination under the Convention and pointed out the hardships of mothers obliged to work nights. The Government member of Kenya thought there must be some particular difficulty preventing the eight denunciations of Convention No. 89 being accompanied by ratification of No. 171, and he suggested reexamination of the matter to ensure the necessary protection.

51. Several Government members supplemented the reasons for denunciation reproduced in paragraph 13 of the Committee of Experts' report. The Government member of Cuba stated that her country had denounced Convention No. 89 after consulting workers' organisations and other interested groups; the Federation of Cuban Women also favoured denunciation; legislation protects equality of economic, social and family rights for men and women in Cuba and night work is prohibited for pregnant women. Her Government considered Convention No. 89 contrary to the principles of an employment policy based on equality. The Government member of Belgium explained why Belgium had denounced the Convention: the Minister of Employment and Labour had been led by the adoption of the ILO's night work instruments in 1990, the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Community of 25 July 1991 and the Community Directive on the practical application of the principle of equality of treatment as between men and women in the workplace to consult the National Labour Council on the question of night work and equal opportunity. Following its opinion given on 10 February 1992, the Government decided to denounce Convention No. 89 and to initiate the procedure for ratifying No. 171 by preparing new legislation on night work and it suggested that a tripartite working party should elaborate a draft based on the principle of the prohibition of night work for women and men with exceptions based on precise criteria drawn up by the social partners. The Government member of Spain pointed out that his country was bound by Convention No. 111 and the UN Convention on discrimination against women, and it was on the basis of the Spanish Constitution that the legislation had been reviewed: workers' and employers' organisations, supported by the Women's Institute of the Ministry of Social Affairs, favoured the denunciation of Conventions which could be used to prevent the integration of women in the labour force; denunciation of Convention No. 89 was also in keeping with the EEC Directive. The Government member of Portugal mentioned also her country's ratification of Convention No. 156 concerning workers with family responsibilities; the Government had consulted employers' and workers' organisations before denouncing Convention No. 89.

52. The Government member of Morocco commented that denunciation was often incorrectly seen as a backwards step. The Government members of Germany and the United Kingdom recalled that States have the right to denounce Conventions after due consideration of changing conditions and following the established procedures, particularly in relation to consultations. The Workers' member of Finland reminded governments of the Governing Body's request for them always to give reasons when denouncing Conventions.

53. The representative of the Secretary-General stated that following discussion in the Governing Body of the question of denunciation of Convention No. 89 by certain members of the European Community the Office had been requested to prepare a document on the subject, which raised complex legal and institutional issues: the document would be made available to the Committee in due course.

54. The Workers' members also dealt with one denunciation of the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 96): transparency in the labour market is important for industrialised and developing countries; and the Convention allows not only the abolition but also the regulation of fee-charging agencies, which means that certain kinds of regulation of phenomena such as temporary work agencies are not necessarily excluded provided that workers' organisations at the national level agree. Total denunciation, as shown by the Committee of Experts, is not technically necessary; nor is it acceptable to the Workers' members, whether in industrialised countries under the pressure of EEC institutions, in developing countries or those in transition to a market economy. The Workers' member of Finland feared further denunciations of the Convention: his organisation was opposed to such a course, especially when application of the Convention had caused no problems.

(viii) Application of standards in particular circumstances: export-processing zones; offshore installations; "international "shipping registers

55. The Committee noted the Committee of Experts' indication (paragraphs 66-67 of its report) that it examines the application of ratified Conventions in export-processing zones and enterprises within the framework of the regular procedures. The Workers' members urged further examination of the matter, especially as regards the working conditions of young women working shifts and observance of fundamental Conventions such as those on freedom of association: the increases in numbers of zones put at risk the universal application of standards when governments operate exceptional labour legislation there. The WFTU representative also mentioned non application of freedom of association standards in the zones. The Workers' member of Argentina pointed out that the proliferation of zones - for example, in Dominican Republic - has resulted in the disappearance of industries such as electronics in some countries.

56. The Government member of Nicaragua informed the Committee of a meeting of Ministers of Labour of Central America and Dominican Republic in April 1992, which called on the ILO Office in San José (Costa Rica) to make a study of the legislation and practice in free-trade zones. She recognised that there were abuses and labour inspection deficiencies in the zones. Responsible finance ministers had been invited to meet the labour ministers so that the encouragement of investment should not be at the cost of workers' rights, and thought had been given to drawing up a list of uniform standards for the region's zones. She hoped the ILO Area Office would be able to help and called on the Committee of Experts to make a greater contribution in future. She suggested to the Conference a Recommendation or resolution on the subject.

57. With reference to paragraphs 64-65 of the Committee of Experts' report, concerning offshore industrial installations, the Workers' members again requested particular attention to be given to problems of safety, hygiene and health for workers, who face very difficult conditions.

58. As regards the Committee of Experts' reference to a possible study of the effects of "international" registers and external ship management on seafarers' working and living conditions (paragraphs 62-63 of its report), the Employers' members thought the Committee of Experts was beginning to take a more realistic approach and the complex issues involved needed careful study before conclusions were reached. The Government member of Germany welcomed the fair position taken by the Committee of Experts. The Workers' members continued to be concerned at the problem of "social dumping" caused by "international" registers and flags of convenience.

59. The Workers' member of Argentina observed that the establishment of "international" registers and flag transfers are spreading alarmingly in developing and traditional maritime countries of the world, with a weakening effect on labour laws and Conventions. His own country had by decree made it possible to transfer to flags of convenience. The WFTU representative saw the phenomena of flags of convenience and export processing zones as evidence of the erosion of social protection by neo-liberal approaches and deregulation.

(ix) Application of particular safety and health standards

60. The Committee took note of the Committee of Experts' general observation on the application of the Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115). The Workers' members stressed the importance of the subject, given the dispersal of nuclear installations and equipment in the world and the danger to workers of radiation exposure. The observations of the Committee of Experts being well founded on technical standards and recommendations of specialist bodies, governments should fully adhere to the radiation levels prescribed, giving full weight to the Committee of Experts' observations. The Employers' members agreed on the importance of radiation protection, but they observed that the experts formulated a long introduction to the Convention and treated amongst others in paragraph 25 of this general observation a very delicate problem in comparison with the protection against radiation, relating to the restrictions of the right to strike, to which question they would come back later.

61. The Committee of Experts' general observation on the Occupational Cancer Convention, 1974 (No. 139), calling on governments to take the necessary measures, was welcomed particularly by the Workers' member of the Syrian Arab Republic.

(x) Application of the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100)

62. The Committee noted the Committee of Experts' recommendation (paragraph 58 of its report) that the Office should endeavour to respond further to requests for technical assistance in implementing the Convention. The Workers' members emphasised the need to ratify and apply in law and practice Convention No. 100 especially in conditions where Convention No. 89 concerning night work for women is being denounced or where the Night Work Protocol has been ratified so as to allow derogations from the prohibition on night work. The Workers, member of the Syrian Arab Republic supported the use of technical cooperation to implement Convention No. 100, as did the Government member of Portugal, who pointed out that a key human right is involved which all ILO members are constitutionally obligated to promote.

(xi) Freedom of association

63. The Committee noted the Committee of Experts' general observation on the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), which asked governments reporting on the application of the Convention to include information on particular aspects, including the right to strike and the right of lockout. The Workers' members expressed concern at violations of trade union rights. The Workers' member of Nicaragua considered that the restriction of freedom of association for economic or political reasons hinders democracy and economic and social development. The Workers' members of the Syrian Arab Republic and Uganda praised the ILO's work in this area - and especially that of the Governing Body Committee on Freedom of Association. The Workers' members expressed concern for the future of trade union movements in Latin America. The Workers' member of France referred to efforts being made to include the right to strike expressly in a Convention, and noted that industrial relations do not evolve without conflict: well-adapted Conventions and evolving labour legislation influenced by collective bargaining would allow further social progress to be made. The WFTU representative remarked on the detriment to social and trade union rights caused by the pressure of international competition: calls for a loosening of the supervisory mechanism were exemplified by the position taken last year by Employers' members as to the right to strike; the right to strike was in fact laid down in article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the Committee of Experts took into consideration general international law including universal human rights standards.

64. The Workers' member of Poland supported the Committee of Experts' request for indications as to the right to strike and the right of lockout; but, while finding that requirements and procedures for exercising the right to strike are over-regulated in Eastern Europe, he considered lockouts under-regulated. He hoped the Committee of Experts would redress the balance. He also regretted there was no mention in the general observation of the issue of redistribution of former monopoly trade unions' assets, a problem in most countries in transition to democracy, where the trade union system was being transformed into a pluralistic one. Governments should contribute to the means of independent and democratic unions in these circumstances; the concept of "acquired rights" should be no defence. He pointed to the report of the Commission of Inquiry on the complaint against Romania relating to Convention No. 111 (referred to in paragraph 20 of the Committee of Experts' report), which stated in that case that the assets of the former monopoly union should be redistributed among the new unions, and he thought the supervisory bodies' position on this point should be consistent.

65. The Government member of the United States thought that, with a view to promoting more and better dialogue among the supervisory bodies, it was not too early for the Committee of Experts to start giving thought to its 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association. That Survey would be an especially good vehicle for providing the Conference Committee with an understanding of how the experts formulated their views on freedom of association and collective bargaining and how their views related to the conclusions of the tripartite Committee on Freedom of Association of the Governing Body.

66. The Employers' member of the United States also referred to the forthcoming General Survey on Conventions Nos. 87 and 98 and stated the experts would have the opportunity to address issues the Employers have had with respect to the Experts' interpretations regarding the right to strike. In this connection he made the further points mentioned in paragraph 22 above.

(xii) Labour inspection and enforcement of standards

67. The Committee supported the Committee of Experts' recommendations as to the application of the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), and the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129) (paragraphs 55-57 of its report). The Workers' members considered that problems in the application of these Conventions are often the result of deliberate policy and a manifestation of the Government's priorities; and they particularly subscribed to the idea that employers' and workers' organisations should complement government intervention, and that the ILO's technical cooperation would help, without in any way removing responsibility from governments. The victims were often workers and employers who respect standards and the social security institutions and funds. The Government member of Portugal also agreed with the Committee of Experts' conclusions; and the Employers' members in addition emphasised the importance of labour inspection and recalled the Committee of Experts' 1985 general survey of the subject.

68. The Government members of Iraq and Syrian Arab Republic referred to the practices in their countries of carrying out inspections in cooperation with employers' and workers' representatives. The Government members of Kenya and Nigeria informed the Committee of technical cooperation received from the ILO: in the former there was a comprehensive project with resources and equipment to enhance the effectiveness of the labour inspectorate; in the latter, a tripartite mission from the ILO had enabled the evaluation of the inspection system and identification of the needs. The Workers' member of Pakistan underlined the need to extend labour inspection to agriculture, where new technologies are affecting health, safety and working conditions.

69. Referring to paragraph 135 of the Committee of Experts' report, the Employers' members considered that sanctions to ensure the application of Conventions should not be read into instruments which do not expressly provide for them. The Conventions which do not provide for these sanctions leave it up to countries and their national legislation to freely so provide and it would be inappropriate for these supervisory bodies to provide for such sanctions.

(xiii) Minimum age for employment

70. The Committee noted with concern the problems described by the Committee of Experts (paragraphs 59-61 of its report). The Government member of Cuba described child labour as an expression of extreme poverty and the absence of effective social and economic policies which amongst other things guarantee all children education despite the difficult economic situation, her own Government had placed no budgetary restriction, on education, which was considered a priority of social policy. The Workers' members too attributed the phenomenon of child labour not only to difficult economic conditions but also to political choice; they thought the ILO's interdepartmental programme would help. They highlighted the Committee of Experts' references to the wide scope of the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138), and the policy it lays down of progressively increasing the minimum age - a point which industrialised countries too should remember; it also shows how to deal with questions of apprenticeship. Governments should provide full information on its application.

71. The Workers' member of China was concerned that the problem of child labour had worsened, and he emphasised the need for complete prohibition of child labour together with the provision of farsighted education facilities. Legislation such as that in his own country against the employment of children under 16 should be enforced by all social sectors, including trade unions.

72. The Employers' members placed the protection of children in the context of the ILO's collaboration with other international organisations in human rights matters, and they supported the idea of concrete projects in this area. The Government member of Kenya described an ILO project which had taken place in his country under the International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour in order to apply more fully Convention No. 138, which Kenya ratified in 1979.

73. The Government member of the United States pointed out that child labour often violates the Forced Labour Convention. 1930 (No. 29), one of the oldest, most fundamental and most widely ratified of ILO Conventions. She considered that, although it might take time to eliminate child labour, the Committee of Experts' observations on Convention No. 29 showed that more should be done to end the forced labour of children.

(xiv) Application of the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122)

74. The Committee noted the Committee of Experts' comments in paragraphs 48-54 of its report, which the great majority of members found both sober and sobering. The Workers' members remarked that the tendency towards increasing production and employment levels had not persisted, and unemployment had either gone up or stabilised at very high levels; labour market policy measures, while important, were not sufficient in themselves; economic, financial and monetary policy was still aimed at reducing inflation: it should be reoriented towards employment promotion, including internationally. Structural adjustment programmes imposed by international financial institutions or governments themselves should be the object of consultations with national organisations of employers and workers, since the social dimension - involving labour standards, education and training and health services - could not be ignored if such programmes were to be successful. The Employers' members found that the Committee of Experts had nuanced its comments more than in previous years, stating that employment policy cannot be taken in isolation: adaptation and restructuring are continuous processes in a market economy, and internationalisation and globalisation of markets requires closer and more active international cooperation.

75. The Government member of Iceland speaking on behalf of the Nordic Governments looked to the Conference Committee on Human Resources to give further guidance to the governments formulating structural adjustment policies. Several members of the Committee (the Workers' members of China, Ecuador, Pakistan and Venezuela and the Government members of Poland and Portugal) stressed the need for the ILO's values to be given greater weight in international consideration of structural adjustment; the Workers' member of Pakistan indicated that mass unemployment in the Third World has been aggravated by structural adjustment policies pursued by governments under pressure from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and the ILO's role should be more active to attenuate their influence.

76. The Workers' members were disturbed at the widespread precarious employment in Latin America and the tendency to introduce ever greater flexibility into the legislation. The Workers' member of Ecuador noticed that in many Latin American countries of high unemployment and underemployment labour flexibility was imposed as a pretext for creating employment, although it adversely affects workers' fundamental rights to employment stability and freedom of association. The Workers' member of Venezuela also viewed the problem of employment as directly linked to workers' income-earning capacity; neo-liberal policies encouraged productivity to the detriment of employment prospects: privatisation had led to drastic workforce reductions; nor had small and medium-sized enterprises had any benefit from structural adjustment.

77. The Workers' members were equally concerned as to Africa, and they called for greater resources to be put into education, health and social institutions. Current revisions of labour codes in various countries should fully observe international labour standards. The Workers' members also stressed that serious problems persist in Asia, even though this was only briefly mentioned in the report. The Workers' member of Uganda and the Government member of Cameroon drew particular attention to the problem of compiling labour statistics in developing countries, although labour market information systems are vital to employment policy implementation. They hoped the Office and the Committee of Experts would continue to consider the matter. The Government member of India informed the Committee of special efforts made in his country in respect to statistics, including ratification of the Labour Statistics Convention, 1985 (No. 160). The Government member of Syrian Arab Republic pointed to employment policy measures in his country involving investment promotion and tax exemptions. The Workers' member of Iraq talked of his organisation's role in aiding workers to find jobs or providing subsidies; he mentioned also the impact of the economic embargo on both prices and unemployment in his country. The Workers' member of China hoped the ILO would give close attention to employment in his country, where, despite heavy demographic pressures, policies to reduce unemployment were being pursued. The Workers' member of Pakistan stressed the role of governments in providing infrastructure and employment to workers while at the same time respecting the role of private enterprise.

78. The Workers' members noted the absence of growth strategy in OECD countries. In the transition economies, even if reforms did comply with international standards, unemployment remains a serious problem. The Workers' member of the United Kingdom referred to unnecessarily harsh reforms in the new Eastern European democracies: although the market was a necessary mechanism for economic progress, it could not, uncontrolled and unregulated, solve problems such as high unemployment - as countries in the West had found. The Government member of the Russian Federation made mention of the growth of unemployment in his country. And the Government member of Poland described the need for development of an active employment policy in her country, with further assistance from the ILO and some other nations: she emphasised the connection between the general economic situation and the labour market situation, and the importance of stimulating the economy, creating public employment offices, financing labour market programmes, and providing facilities for self-employment.

79. As well as the Workers' members, who recalled the requirement of consultations in Convention No. 122, the Government member of Portugal shared the views of the Committee of Experts as to the importance of engaging in a broad dialogue on employment policy with the social partners, including representatives of workers in the informal and rural sectors.

80. The Government member of the United Kingdom referred to paragraph 52 of the Committee of Experts' report: he found their comments and criticisms regarding the policies of some governments on unemployment unhelpful; and he felt the Committee of Experts had over-reached itself, because it was composed of legal experts and ill-equipped to judge economic policy in this way. The Workers' members particularly regretted the, in their view, unfounded allegations made in respect of the points made by the Committee of Experts as to Convention No. 122 by the Government member of the United Kingdom, which run counter to the spirit of mutual cooperation and responsibility in the relation between the Conference and the Committee of Experts.

(xv) Submission to the competent authorities

81. The Committee referred to the indications in paragraphs 136-146 of the Committee of Experts' report as to the fulfilment of the Constitutional obligation to submit instruments adopted by the Conference to the national authorities. The Workers' members dealt with the question of submission of certain instruments by ILO member States also members of the European Community to the competent Community authorities and favoured a solution which reinforces the commitment of those States to the ILO while also fostering the development of social policy inside the EEC. They considered that the agreement on 31 October 1991 between the European Trade Union Confederation and the European employers' organisations in the public and private sectors would help resolve or avoid problems relating to tripartism and submission at the level of the Community. The Government member of Belgium indicated that his Government avoided any problem by submitting to both the national Parliament and the Community authorities; he wished for further examination of the question of the competent authorities in the European context.

IV. Other standards-related activities

(xvi) Technical cooperation relating to standards

82. The Committee strongly supported the Office in the assistance it gives to governments in the form of direct contacts, informal advisory missions, seminars, training and legislative information in order to help them fulfil their standards-related obligations. The Employers' and other members recommended reinforcing the Office's activities in this respect as much as possible; and the Workers' members considered that governments which do not fulfil reporting obligations can have little excuse, given the Office's efforts to provide technical assistance. The Government members of Latvia and Romania praised the Office's helpfulness in giving practical advice in their countries' transition period, including on the drafting of labour legislation. The Government member of India mentioned ILO assistance in his country in clarifying Conventions being considered for ratification. The Workers' member of Pakistan mentioned too assistance given to employers' and workers' organisations to enable them to contribute to the implementation of ILO standards. The Government member of Morocco referred to the importance of the translation of ILO standards into national languages. The Government member of Bangladesh suggested exploring the possibility of associating officials from member States and representatives of workers' and employers' organisations with the work of the Office and the Committee of Experts so as to contribute to the ILO's standards-related activities.

83. The Committee was informed that the International Labour Standards Department is increasing the staff and other resources devoted to promotional activities and giving technical assistance, without any effect on the Department's overall resources. This should benefit in particular countries undergoing democratisation and structural adjustment. The Department's work for the application of standards would not suffer. The Office would take full account of the Committee's proposals and concerns in relation to these and other questions as to standard-setting activities.

84. The Committee noted with interest the discussion initiated in the Governing Body by the Director-General on the dynamic interaction of standards and technical cooperation. The Workers' member of Japan stated that this Committee had long underlined the need for effective organic links between the two aspects of ILO activities, and he welcomed the Director-General's confirmation that standards must be the back-bone of the Organisation. The Government members of Belgium, Cuba, Germany and the United Kingdom agreed that there should be no "conditionality" between the observance of standards and the grant of technical cooperation: the Government member of Germany said it would be an element of discrimination against Third World countries, since industrialised countries do not receive technical assistance. At the same time, several members of the Committee (the Workers' member of Pakistan and the Government members of China, Italy, Portugal, Russian Federation, United Kingdom) stressed that the ILO's technical cooperation activities should aim more systematically to improve the implementation of the Organisation's standards. The Government member of Germany thought the ILO's Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour exemplary in this respect. The Government member of Portugal recognised the importance of the social partners participating in ILO activities in this connection. The Government member of India urged that technical cooperation should be accorded on a priority basis to countries facing the social consequences of structural adjustment or which had inherited a poverty syndrome.

85. The Workers' member of Pakistan and the Government members of Bangladesh and the Russian Federation emphasised the role of the ILO within the UN system as a whole, with particular reference to the need for coordination with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the international financial institutions. The Government member of Bangladesh called for greater resources to be found for technical cooperation, from the UNDP, from the ILO's regular budget and from bilateral sources.

(xvii) Collaboration with other international organisations, especially on human rights issues

86. The Committee noted with interest from the Committee of Experts' report (paragraphs 31-47) the attention given by the ILO to the need to work together with other international organisations for the promotion of the rights and standards falling within the ILO's terms of reference. The Workers' members and the Government member of Iceland speaking on behalf of the Nordic Governments particularly valued the ILO's involvement in preparations for the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights. The Workers' member of the United Kingdom considered that the present Committee's contribution to the World Conference would be to ensure that within its field of competence - especially where trade unionists are being killed or tortured or are disappearing - no violation of human rights would go unnoticed or uncondemned.

87. Together with the Government member of Italy, the Workers' members in addition called for closer relations with the European Community with a view to the development of the Community's social policy. The former called on the Community's Council of Ministers to adopt Convention No. 171 on night work. The Government member of Belgium stated that the Commission of the European Community had requested the Court of Justice of the Community to pronounce on the Commission's capacity to ratify ILO Conventions. The Government members of Belgium, Spain and Iceland speaking on behalf of the Nordic Governments praised the Office's role in revitalising the European Social Charter of the Council of Europe.

88. The Employers' members attached special importance to the protection of children as a matter of essential human rights, and to the ILO's role in respect of projects relating to their education, training and employment. The Workers' member of Pakistan saw these activities specifically in the context of developing countries and the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

C. Reports requested under article 19 of the ILO Constitution

(i) Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111)

89. Following the decision of the Governing Body at its 208th (November 1978) Session, governments of States which have not ratified Convention No. 111 were asked under article 19 of the Constitution to supply reports on the effect given to the Convention. In accordance with its previous practice for these special article 19 reports, the Committee of Experts included in its general report a section (paragraphs 82-96) summarising the information received and providing its own comments.

90. The Committee noted with regret that 22 of the 40 member States requested to send reports had not done so. The Government member of Portugal declared nevertheless that the special article 19 procedure had produced good results in that there had been 14 new ratifications since it was instituted.

91. The Workers' members regarded the Convention as sufficiently flexible to take into account particular situations and encouraged all member States to ratify it. The Workers' member of Japan underscored the non-ratification of the Convention by three major industrial powers (Japan, United Kingdom, United States) and noted with regret that the Government of Japan provided no information as to any ratification prospect. The Government member of Portugal suggested that the Office could help overcome problems, for example through the "special studies" procedure alluded to by the Committee of Experts.

92. The Employers' and Workers' members and the Government members of Argentina and the Russian Federation pointed to the need to give greater attention to newly-democratic countries where there has been a resurgence of ethnic, racial, religious and cultural discrimination and conflict: the Convention was as relevant as ever in these conditions, and the ILO should give all due assistance.

(ii) Minimum Wage-Fixing Machinery Convention (No. 26) and Recommendation (No. 30), 1928; Minimum Wage Fixing Machinery (Agriculture) Convention (No. 99) and Recommendation (No. 89), 1951; Minimum Wage Fixing Machinery Convention (No. 131) and Recommendation (No. 135), 1970

93. The Committee examined the Committee of Experts' General Survey based on the reports requested under article 19 of the Constitution on Conventions Nos. 26, 99 and 131, and Recommendations Nos. 30, 89 and 135. The General Survey also took account of the reports on the Conventions communicated under articles 22 and 35 of the Constitution and of the comments received from 18 employers' and workers' organisations. From the reports received, information had been obtained on the application of these instruments in 116 States and 18 non-metropolitan territories.

Contents and scope of the instruments

94. The Committee considered that the Committee of Experts' General Survey constitutes a good presentation of the options available for the fixing of minimum wages, the various national practices, the difficulties in application and the solutions for overcoming these difficulties. It showed that the means of fixing minimum wages had been, from the beginning, among the aims of the ILO and that this question had been the subject of international labour standards for a long time. Referring to the long-standing nature of the question, the Employers' members considered that the discussion in the Committee should enable it to be established whether the solutions provided for by these instruments were still the best in the light of present practices and situations. They recalled that the right to a decent minimum wage was recognised in numerous universal or regional instruments. The Workers' members stressed that almost all countries had one or more minimum wage fixing systems, although these were not always used in practice. They considered that the standards relating to minimum wages were still strategic instruments in the struggle against social exclusion and poverty, and that the Conventions on wages were among the priority Conventions, given their importance in a world of full economic and social reconstruction. The Workers' member of Pakistan emphasised the importance of minimum wage fixing in both developing and industrialised countries.

95. The Committee noted that while Conventions Nos. 26 and 99 require the establishment of procedures according to which minimum wages could be set, Convention No. 131 prescribes the actual setting of minimum wages. The Employers' members considered that this requirement explained why Convention No. 131 has only been ratified by a third of the number of States that ratified Convention No. 26.

96. The Workers' members pointed out that many categories of workers (including the young, apprentices, the disabled, home-based, temporary, seasonal or part-time workers) were partially or totally excluded from the application of the Conventions. In any event exclusions should be temporary and reexamined periodically in agreement with workers' and employers' organisations.

97. The Employers' members stated that the abundance of detail in the General Survey might give rise to confusion and they cited as an example the situation in Germany. Minimum wage-fixing procedures in that country were referred to repeatedly in the Survey; however, although legislation existed on this matter, it had not been applied for 40 years. The Government member of Germany recalled that the fixing of minimum wages by the State only had limited significance in his country, except for homeworkers. In Germany, the wages determined by collective agreements were really minimum wages.

The fixing of minimum wages and free collective bargaining

98. The Employers' and Workers, members noted that the level of wages is one of the most important conditions of employment, if not the most important. The Employers' members recalled that the ideal method of setting employment conditions, including wage levels, is to ensure free collective bargaining between the parties directly concerned, with no state intervention. Procedures for establishing minimum wages, according to the philosophy of the Conventions, had to come into play if a free system of setting wages between the parties did not exist.

99. The Employers' members raised the question whether minimum wage fixing interferes in collective bargaining. An answer was given in Article 2 of Convention No. 131, according to which the provisions of the Convention may not contravene the principle of freedom of collective bargaining. However, from a less theoretical point of view, it was noted that where the minimum wage became a widespread standard it took account of freely negotiated wages but, at the same time, had a direct impact on them. A minimum wage that acted as a wage index was in reality a restriction of free collective bargaining, and employers and workers responsible for working conditions could not counter this influence. Repeated references to wages for comparable work or wages for similar work covered by collective agreements could have negative effects on free collective bargaining. It would be preferable, if there is really a need for minimum wages, to refer to wages paid in collective agreements for the same work.

100. The Workers' members were of the view that minimum wage fixing is a fundamental aspect of tripartism and of collective bargaining. In so far as a system based on collective agreements did not directly or indirectly cover all workers, additional machinery for fixing minimum wages had to be established. However, the Workers' members considered that a system based entirely on collective bargaining was only effective if freedom of association, including recourse to collective action and free bargaining, were totally guaranteed.

Level of minimum wages and employment policy

101. The major result that could be expected from minimum wages was, according to the Employers' members, that those involved would be able to lead a decent life. However, the fixing of minimum wages was only one of a vast number of measures which could be taken by States to ensure a dignified existence for their citizens.

102. The Workers' members recalled that minimum wages are often so low that they do not ensure a satisfactory living standard or even cover the basic needs of workers and their families. Wages that were too low had many serious consequences as much for the worker and his or her family as for the enterprises and society in general. Child labour was thus often due to the inadequacy of the parents' wages. In addition, growth of the economy was linked to purchasing power and an equitable redistribution of income, and this affected positively the strengthening of social security funding. The level of minimum wages should be revised regularly so as to compensate monetary erosion, particularly in countries faced with structural adjustment policies or transition to a market economy. According to the Workers' members, such revision should follow consumer prices and the living standards of other social groups so as to avoid having too large differences between groups.

103. For the Employers, members, economic factors listed in Article 3(b) of Convention No. 131 had to be taken into account when setting minimum wages. Application of the Conventions on minimum wages would not be useful for workers if such factors were ignored. The payment of too high minimum wages would result in the loss of jobs, depending on the level of wages and the number of people drawing them. If young workers in apprenticeship and unskilled workers whose production was lower than that of the average worker were entitled to receive the same minimum wage as skilled workers, younger or less skilled workers would have fewer opportunities to find appropriate employment. Jobs only existed to the extent that there was a demand for products and services, and demand was dependent upon the price paid for these products and services. The particularly close link between the level of wages and the number of available jobs was established fact.

104. The Workers' members stated that the fixing of minimum wages has a positive impact on the labour market particularly through eliminating unfair competition by limiting recourse to excessive overtime. The proposition that minimum wages or their balanced increase had negative effects on employment, in particular of young workers, had not been confirmed by serious studies.

105. The Workers' member of the United Kingdom referred to the situation in his country, which denounced Convention No. 26 basing its action on flexibility and the freedom of action necessary to maximise employment opportunities, particularly for the young. He wondered whether this flexibility and freedom of action did not enable one group to exploit another or encourage unfair competition between States. The Workers' member of Pakistan, admitting the importance of providing employment opportunities, considered that it was the responsibility of States to eliminate exploitation and provide reasonable minimum wages. The Workers, members invited the Government of the United Kingdom to re-examine its position and to ratify one of the instruments concerning minimum wage fixing.

106. The Workers' members suggested that the question of the relationship between employment - particularly the employment of young people and low-skilled workers - and minimum wages be the subject of an Office study.

107. In addition, referring to Chapter IV of the General Survey as to the criteria for fixing and adjusting minimum wages, the Employers' members noted that minimum wages could not be set by means of mathematical formulae, and that what was needed was a compromise between what was desirable and what was feasible. There was a danger in establishing a uniform wage structure of the type established by the totally ineffective planned economies. They considered that there had to be a differentiated approach to setting minimum wages.

108. The Workers' members thought the consultations with employers, and workers' organisations on an equal footing provided for in the Conventions insufficient to enable real account to be taken of the views expressed. Sometimes, as shown in certain cases raised by the Committee of Experts, no such consultations took place. The Workers' members emphasised the importance of broad social dialogue in determining the effectiveness of wage policies, employment policies and social policies.

Practical application of the Conventions

109. The Workers' members noted that minimum wages are not always actually paid and workers are not always able to have recourse to efficient procedures to claim the amounts due to them. In their view, access to labour tribunals should be made easier, notably by giving workers the right to defence and assistance by their union, and employers should have to provide pay slips so as to avoid placing an impossible burden of proof on wage-earners. In addition, labour inspection services should be given sufficient human and material resources and effective legal powers to ensure the application of national provisions relating to minimum wages.

110. The Workers' member of Pakistan recalled that the application of Convention No. 99 is of great importance in rural regions particularly where there is migration between rural areas and urban centres. Also with a view to reducing international migration, which often took place to the detriment of workers' interests, it was important to raise the level of minimum wages in developing countries.

111. A large proportion of the reports sent by governments did not contain information which, in the opinion of the Workers' members, is essential. It was important that the Committee of Experts continues to request and receive this information. In addition, the Workers' members considered that the question of paying minimum wages partly in kind had to be re-examined since, contrary to the impression given by a quick reading of the Committee of Experts' report, difficulties of implementation did exist in several sectors (services, agriculture, etc.), including in industrialised countries.

Conclusions

112. The Workers' members' view was that the recent economic and social changes and adjustment processes make minimum wage fixing a strategic instrument in the struggle against poverty and for social justice. They requested governments, in a spirit of social justice and respect for tripartism, to take measures to implement or have effectively applied the instruments on minimum wage fixing. Since the Conventions in question leave plenty of room for national traditions and practices, the Workers' members appealed to member States to ratify them, thus contributing to the establishment or strengthening of a safety net of social protection for the most underprivileged groups.

113. While recognising the existence of a strong demand in many countries for minimum wage fixing, the Employers' members stressed that the systems for fixing minimum wages were an emergency measure, a second-class alternative in a world where free collective bargaining should dominate. In these conditions of free bargaining, the aims of the Conventions on minimum wage fixing would become obsolete.

D. Compliance with specific obligations

114. The Committee decided that, in examining individual cases relating to compliance by States with their obligations under or relating to international labour standards, it would apply the same working methods and criteria as last year, as amended or clarified in 1980 and 1987.

OBLIGATION_A Submission of Conventions and Recommendations to the competent authorities

115. In accordance with its terms of reference, the Committee considered the manner in which effect is given to article 19, paragraphs 5 to 7, of the ILO Constitution. These provisions require member States within 12, or exceptionally 18, months of the closing of each session of the Conference to submit the Conventions and Recommendations adopted at that session to "the authority or authorities within whose competence the matter lies, for the enactment of legislation or other action", and to inform the Director-General of the ILO of the measures taken to that end, with particulars of the authority or authorities regarded as competent.

116. The Committee noted from the report of the Committee of Experts that considerable efforts to fulfil the submission obligation had been made in a number of States, namely: Dominican Republic, Grenada, Malawi, Swaziland.

117. The Committee was informed by various other States of measures taken to bring Conventions and Recommendations before the competent national authorities. It welcomed the progress achieved and expressed the hope that there would be further improvements in States that still experience difficulties in complying with their obligations.

OBLIGATION_B Failure to submit

118. The Committee noted with regret that no indication was available that steps had been taken in accordance with article 19 of the Constitution to submit the Conventions and Recommendations adopted between 1984 and 1990 by the 70th to 77th Sessions of the Conference to the competent authorities, in the cases of Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh, Belize, Jamaica, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Zaire.

OBLIGATION_C Supply of reports on ratified Conventions

119. In Part B of this report (General questions relating to international labour standards) the Committee has considered amongst other things the fulfilment by States of their obligation to report on the application of ratified Conventions. 13.4 per cent of the reports due had been received by 15 October 1991, the date fixed by the Governing Body (9.8 per cent in 1990). By the date of the meeting of the Committee of Experts, the percentage of reports received had risen to 69.9, which is the lowest recorded since 1946. Since then, further reports have been received, bringing the figure to 76.8 per cent (as compared with 83.7 per cent in June 1991 and 81.9 per cent in June 1990). This year, the Committee of Experts noted that 50 per cent of the reports on Conventions for which information on practical information was requested contained such information, roughly the same as in 1991 (49 per cent), but less than in earlier years (56 per cent in 1990, 63 per cent in 1989). The Committee emphasises the importance of sending practical information, without which it is impossible to know if a Convention is actually being applied. The Committee joins the Committee of Experts in appealing to governments to make every effort to include the necessary information in future reports.

OBLIGATION_D Failure to supply reports and information on the application of ratified Conventions

120. The Committee noted with regret that no reports on ratified Conventions had been supplied for two years or more by the following States: Albania, Cambodia, Guinea-Bissau, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Madagascar, Papua New Guinea, Seychelles, Sierra Leone.

121. The Committee stresses the special importance of first reports, on which the Committee of Experts bases its first evaluation of compliance with ratified Conventions. It notes that this year there are no cases to which it should draw attention in this respect.

122. In this year's report, the Committee of Experts noted that 38 governments had not communicated replies to most or any of the observations and direct requests relating to Conventions on which reports were due for examination this year, involving a total of 328 cases (compared with 299 cases last year and 220 two years ago). The Committee was informed that, since the meeting of the Committee of Experts, 11 of the governments concerned had sent replies which would be examined by the Committee of Experts next year.

123. The Committee noted with regret that no information had yet been received regarding any or most of the observations and direct requests of the Committee of Experts to which replies were requested for the period ending 30 June 1991 from the following countries: Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Central African Republic, Congo, Dominica, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Ireland, Jordan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Mali, Papua New Guinea, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Zaire; France (Overseas Departments).

124. The Committee noted the explanations provided by the governments of the following countries concerning difficulties encountered in discharging their obligations: Belize (administrative problems); Central African Republic (misunderstanding as to deadlines for reporting); Haiti (military coup d'état); Ireland (inadequate understanding in some departments of the administration); Jordan (related to the current revision of the Labour Code); Lebanon (exceptional circumstances); Lesotho (administrative difficulties due to redeployment of officials because of structural adjustment); Madagascar (administrative difficulties); Papua New Guinea (administrative difficulties); Paraguay (administrative difficulties); Senegal (administrative difficulties); Sierra Leone (lack of human resources, breakdown of organisational machinery); United Republic of Tanzania (continuing administrative restructuring and political changes); Venezuela (delay due to consultations of employers and workers); Yemen (technical and administrative difficulties, especially translations; structural difficulties to do with unification); Zaire (paralysis of the labour administration due to transition to democracy); France (Overseas Departments) (heavy workload due to large numbers of ratifications and declarations of application).

OBLIGATION_E Application of ratified Conventions

125. The Committee noted with particular interest the steps taken by a number of governments to ensure compliance with ratified Conventions. The Committee of Experts listed in paragraph 126 of its report new cases in which governments had made changes to their law and practice following comments it had made as to the degree of conformity of national legislation or practice with the provisions of a ratified Convention. There were 50 such cases, relating to 30 States and four non-metropolitan territories in all regions of the world. Almost 1,950 cases of progress have been recorded since the Committee of Experts began listing them in 1964. These results are tangible proof of the effectiveness of the supervisory system.

126. At its present session, the Committee was informed of other instances in which measures had recently been or were about to be taken by governments with a view to ensuring the implementation of ratified Conventions. While it is for the Committee of Experts to examine these measures, the present Committee welcomes them as fresh evidence of the efforts made by governments to comply with their international obligations and to act upon the comments of the supervisory bodies.

127. The Committee thought it appropriate to draw the attention of the Conference to various important cases which it had to consider.

OBLIGATION_F Cases of progress

128. The Committee noted with satisfaction that in a number of cases - including many involving basic human rights - governments have introduced changes in their law and practice in order to eliminate divergencies previously discussed by the Committee. It considers highlighting these cases a positive approach towards influencing governments to respond to comments of the supervisory bodies. In this respect, it refers to the report of the Committee of Experts and the discussion of individual cases which appears in Part Two of this report.

OBLIGATION_G Special cases

129. The Committee considered it appropriate to draw the attention of the Conference to its discussions of the case mentioned in the following paragraph, a full record of which appears in Part Two of this report.

130. As regards the application by Sudan of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), the Committee noted that the Committee of Experts had not been in a position to consider the situation as the Government had not sent a report. The Committee also noted the oral information given by the Government. It expressed its deep dissatisfaction, taking into account that no progress seemed to have been made since it discussed this case some years ago. It was under the impression that the Government confined itself to a simple denial of slavery existing in the country. In that respect, it felt bound to remind the Government that various United Nations bodies had reported on such cases and that the Conference Committee could not but consider those allegations not to be completely unfounded, as long as the Government did not report in full on the existing situation. It therefore expressed the hope, in the strongest possible terms, that the Government would send in such a report. It felt bound, in view of the very serious matter under discussion on the one hand, and the Government's attitude as mentioned before on the other hand, to set these conclusions in a Special Paragraph of the Report.

131. The Committee trusts that the Government concerned will take all measures necessary to correct the deficiencies noted and invites it to consider appropriate forms of ILO assistance, including direct contacts, to ensure that real progress is achieved by next year in the observance of obligations under the ILO Constitution and the Conventions in question.

OBLIGATION_H Continued failure to implement

132. The Committee recalls that its working methods provide for the listing of cases of continued failure over several years to eliminate serious deficiences, previously discussed, in the application of ratified Conventions. This year the Committee listed no cases under this heading.

133. The Government of the country to which reference is made in paragraph 130 is invited to supply the relevant report and information to enable the Committee to follow up the above-mentioned matters at the next session of the Conference.

OBLIGATION_I Supply of reports on unratified Conventions and on Recommendations

134. In 1991, 40 reports were requested under article 19 of the Constitution on the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111): the Committee notes that 18 of the 40 reports requested were received at the time of the Committee of Experts' meeting, and a further one report since, making 47.5 per cent in all. The Committee notes that 463 of the 710 article 19 reports requested on the Minimum Wage-Fixing Machinery Convention (No. 26) and Recommendation (No. 30), 1928; the Minimum Wage Fixing Machinery (Agriculture) Convention (No. 99) and Recommendation (No. 89), 1951; and the Minimum Wage Fixing Convention (No. 131) and Recommendation (No. 135), 1970, were received at the time of the Committee of Experts' meeting, and a further 10 since, making 66.6 per cent in all.

135. The Committee noted with regret that over the past five years none of the reports on unratified Conventions and on Recommendations requested under article 19 of the Constitution had been supplied by the following: Cambodia, Grenada, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Saint Lucia, Sierra Leone, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen.

OBLIGATION_J Communication of copies of reports to workers' and employers' organisations

136. Once again this year, the Committee did not have to apply the criterion "The government has failed during the past three years to indicate the representative organisations of employers and workers to which, in accordance with article 23 (2) of the Constitution, copies of reports and information supplied to the ILO under articles 19 and 22 have been communicated".

OBLIGATION_K Participation in the work of the Committee

137. The Committee wishes to express its gratitude to the 47 governments which collaborated by providing information on the situation in their countries and participating in the discussions of their individual cases.

138. However, the Committee regrets that, despite repeated invitations, the governments of the following States failed to take part in the discussions concerning their countries: Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Jamaica (concerning Convention No. 81), Liberia, Somalia.

139. The Committee notes with regret that certain States which were not represented at the Conference (Bahamas, Cambodia, Dominica, Grenada, Lao People,s Democratic Republic, Saint Lucia, Seychelles), as well as another whose representatives had to leave the Conference before its closure (Guinea-Bissau), were unable to participate in the Committee's examination of the cases relating to them. It decided to mention the cases of these States in the appropriate paragraphs of this report and to inform them in accordance with the usual practice.

140. The Committee is pleased to confirm the trend referred to in its report last year, towards convergence of thinking as to the universality of standards and the absolute necessity of maintaining and strengthening the effectiveness of the supervisory system. Its discussions take place in a sober and constructive atmosphere. The dialogue which has always been the Committee's watchword continues to extend and deepen. It extends, both as the increase in membership of the Organisation offers the opportunity for more delegations to the Conference to take part in the Committee; and as the give-and-take between the present Committee and the Committee of Experts in the spirit of mutual respect, cooperation and responsibility intensifies. It deepens, with tripartism in action a clear sign of the democratisation which is the theme of the Director-General's report to the Conference this year, and thanks to the imagination and seriousness which the members of the Committee exhibit in their contributions to the discharge of its functions.

141. This said, complacency has no role to play in the supervision of international labour standards. The Committee is aware of the need to take positive measures to extend the dialogue further, in particular so that all the developing countries as well as new member States participate to the full in the Organisation's standard-setting activities. It is aware too of feelings in various quarters that there are imperfections: in the reporting system, in the question of how Conventions should be interpreted, in the question of how the ILO should go about relating standards to technical cooperation. And it is for this reason that the Committee is greatly encouraged to learn of various initiatives taken recently by the International Labour Office.

142. The Committee believes more than ever in the importance of international labour standards and the tripartite approach in finding practical solutions to pressing problems in the world: in industrialised countries experiencing the social consequences of economic stagnation, as well as in countries undergoing an often unsteady transition to democracy and market economy and, moreover, in developing countries where standards of living and working are so very hard to establish and maintain. A worthy aim and a contribution it might hope to make to the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights is to ensure that the need to improve and protect labour standards stays to the fore.

Geneva, 19 June 1992.

(Signed) MAX ROOD

FANNY MONTENEGRO DIAZ

Endnotes

Endnote 2

Endnote 3