VZCZCXYZ0009
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHQT #0176/01 0422201
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 112200Z FEB 10
FM AMEMBASSY QUITO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0962
INFO RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA
RUEHC/DEPT OF LABOR WASHINGTON DC
RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS
RUEHGL/AMCONSUL GUAYAQUIL
RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ
RUEHPE/AMEMBASSY LIMA
RUEHQT/AMEMBASSY QUITO

UNCLAS QUITO 000176 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ELAB EIND ETRD KTIP PHUM SOCI EC
SUBJECT: Child Labor and Forced Labor in Ecuador for DOL Reporting 
Requirements 
 
REF: 09 STATE 131997; 09 QUITO 20 
 
¶1.  The following is Embassy Quito's response to the request for 
child labor and forced labor information for DOL congressional 
reporting requirements (Ref A). 
 
 
 
---------------------------- 
TASKING 1/TVPRA 
---------------------------- 
 
¶2. Q. Action request for tasking 1/TVPRA: Posts listed in paras 5 
and 6 are requested to provide current information on forced labor 
and exploitive child labor in the production of goods.  Please also 
note: if goods from your reporting country(ies) or territory(ies) 
appear on the current TVPRA list, you are only requested to provide 
information on additional goods.  A. Information available to Post 
suggests that TVPRA list of goods produced by child labor in 
Ecuador remains accurate: bananas, bricks, flowers, and gold (Ref 
B).  Post does not have information on the production of other 
goods using child labor. However, we note that there are concerns 
expressed by a credible NGO of the risk of child labor in the 
agricultural sector in general, and that export markets for such 
products should be monitored carefully. 
 
¶3.  In addition to requesting information on new goods produced by 
child labor or forced labor, PolOff asked for information regarding 
trends in the use of child labor for those goods already listed: 
 
¶A. Bananas: The NGO reported that the problem of child labor in 
bananas remains at previous levels, in their estimate, but that 
there have been huge advances in convincing producers to move 
children out of the most hazardous jobs.  The banana industry in 
Ecuador is made up primarily of small and medium-sized producers, 
who have "traditional" views of the labor market and continue to 
use child laborers. However, the NGO source says that an 
industry-wide agreement to remove children from jobs that produce 
the most significant risks to their health and well-being has been 
widely adopted and appears to be helping keep young workers away 
from pesticides and other hazardous work conditions. 
 
¶B. Bricks: No change in previously reported trends.  Children 
continue to work in the brick industry, which is almost entirely 
small, family-operated businesses. Children often work at night and 
in the very early morning, then attend school. 
 
¶C. Flowers:  Child labor is significantly decreasing in this 
industry. The NGO notes that the flower industry has been "seized" 
with the issue of child labor and is making significant and 
thorough efforts to eradicate this problem in partnership with 
government, NGO, and private organizations.  Flower businesses are 
established almost entirely for export, notes the source, and 
businessmen are aware that a child labor problem will hurt their 
bottom line directly. Furthermore, she believes most of the owners 
in the flower industry are more 'advanced' in their views on labor 
in general and have no interest in employing underage workers.  The 
NGO says it believes the child labor problem in the flower industry 
would likely be eliminated in 1-2 years. 
 
¶D. Gold:  As with bricks, there is no new information to report; 
child labor continues to be a problem in small-scale, informal 
mining businesses. Child labor has not been reported in larger, 
multinational commercial mining companies. The Ministry of Labor's 
Child Labor Inspectors Office told PolOff that they would like to 
find the resources to conduct a serious baseline study of children 
working in mines, especially gold mines, with the purpose of 
establishing a plan of action to eliminate child labor in this 
industry by 2012, along the lines of their plan to eliminate child 
labor in landfills. 
 
------------------------ 
TASKING 2/TDA 
------------------------ 
 
¶4.  Answers to the questions for Tasking 2 are numbered according 
to the list in paragraph 21 of reftel. 
 
2A) PREVALENCE AND SECTORAL DISTRIBUTION OF EXPLOITIVE CHILD LABOR: 
 
¶1. Q: In what sectors (not related to the production of goods) were 
 
 
children involved in exploitive labor (such as domestic service, 
street vending, and/or child prostitution)?  A: The majority of 
child laborers continue to work in the agricultural sector, 
particularly family-owned businesses.  Children are also working in 
mines, landfills, the domestic service industry, street vending, 
prostitution, and to a lessening extent, begging. 
 
 ¶2. Q: Posts are requested to determine if the government collected 
or published data on exploitive child labor during the period, and 
if so, whether the government would provide the data set to DOL for 
further analysis. A: The GOE published results of a 2006 census of 
child labor in numerous reports, and has been using those numbers 
for baseline statistics.  Data and statistical information on 
inspections, inspectors, training and other information is 
available on the GOE's measurements website at 
http://www.sigob.gov.ec/metas/main/consulta/d efault.asp 
 . 
Several of the measures tracked in those pages are broken down to 
the provincial level.  The Ministry of Economics and Social 
Inclusion and the Ministry of Labor both use that website to update 
information on the national plans of action to combat child labor 
and trafficking in persons. 
 
2B) LAWS AND REGULATIONS: 
¶1. Q. What new laws or regulations were enacted in regard to 
exploitive child labor over the past year?  If applicable, were the 
changes improvements in the legal and regulatory framework? A. 
There have been no new regulations or laws on child labor passed 
during the reporting period. 
 
¶2. Q. Based on the standards in paras 27 and 28, was the 
country/territory's legal and regulatory framework adequate for 
addressing exploitive child labor? Examples of indicators of an 
inadequate framework include instances in which children have been 
found working in hazardous conditions, but the sector in which they 
were working is exempted from minimum age laws; cases in which boys 
are being exploited as prostitutes, but the law only prohibits 
female prostitution; or cases in which there are prohibitions 
against exploitive child labor, but penalties are too weak to serve 
as deterrents.  A.  The legal and regulatory framework in Ecuador 
is generally adequate to address the worst forms of child labor, 
although NGOs note that there is insufficient interest on the part 
of judges to appropriately sentence employers for exploitative 
child labor practices. 
 
2C) Section I: Hazardous Child Labor and forced child labor: 
 
¶1. Q. What agency or agencies was/were responsible for the 
enforcement of laws relating to hazardous child labor? A. The 
Ministry of Labor has an office of Child Labor that inspects 
workplaces around the country for child labor offenses.  The 
National Police have a specialized unit for crimes against children 
and adolescents (DINAPEN) who rescue victims, gather evidence, and 
arrest the perpetrators of the worst forms of child labor and child 
trafficking. The Ministry of Economic and Social Inclusion's 
National Institute of Children and Families (INFA) may also receive 
reports of child labor, and provides protective services. The 
office of the Prosecutor receives cases and brings them to trial 
 
¶2. Q. If multiple agencies were responsible for enforcement, were 
there mechanisms for exchanging information? Assess their 
effectiveness. A. According to the prosecutor for Pichincha 
province (one of the most affected by child labor); an NGO, and the 
police unit dedicated to investigating crimes against children, 
cooperation across GOE agencies is generally very good.  Police and 
prosecutors work together closely to rescue and convict violators, 
and ensure the victims are receiving appropriate medical, 
psychological and social services care. 
 
¶3. Q. Did the country/territory maintain a mechanism for making 
complaints about hazardous and forced child labor violations?  If 
so, how many complaints were received in the reporting period?  A. 
Complaints or reports of hazardous (and forced child) labor can be 
filed through a number of agencies and hotlines.  They can be 
presented in person, over the phone, or in many cases by email. 
DINAPEN, the Ministry of Labor's Child Labor office, INFA, and 
local Councils for Children and Adolescents all receive complaints 
about the mistreatment of children, including hazardous child 
labor. Post does not have consolidated information on the number of 
complaints made to each agency. 
 
¶4. Q. What amount of funding was provided to agencies responsible 
 
 
for inspections?  Was this amount adequate?  Did inspectors have 
sufficient office facilities, transportation, fuel, and other 
necessities to carry out inspections? A. The Ministry of Labors 
Office of Child Labor Inspections had a budget of US$266,342 in 
calendar year 2009, according to the Ministry's website. This 
budget was insufficient to permit inspectors in all 24 provinces to 
adequately carry out their duties, despite the increased number of 
inspections in the last year.  Inspectors in several provinces do 
not have dedicated vehicles, nor sufficient funds for fuel or other 
means of transportation. 
 
¶5. Q. How many inspectors did the government employ?  Was the 
number of inspectors adequate?  A. The Ministry of Labor's Child 
Labor Inspections Office currently employs 29 inspectors. While 
this is an increase of two inspectors over last year, the office 
would be able to conduct additional inspections if it had more 
staff. 
 
¶6. Q. How many inspections involving child labor were carried out? 
If possible, please provide breakdown of complaint-driven versus 
random, government-initiated inspections. Were inspections carried 
out in sectors in which children work? Was the number of 
inspections adequate?  A. The office carried out 3,992 inspections 
for child labor violations in 2009, relative to 3,089 inspections 
in 2008 and 2586 in 2007.  These inspections were carried out based 
on a combination of government-initiated and complaint driven 
investigations.  The office does not maintain statistics on the 
breakdown of why an inspection occurred. 
 
¶7. Q.  How many children were removed/assisted as a result of 
inspections?  Were these children actually provided or referred for 
services as a result (as opposed to simply fired)? A. According to 
Ministry of Labor statistics, 2056 children were rescued as a 
result of the inspections.  Children and the circumstances of each 
case were evaluated to determine the needs of the child.  Services 
provided to children included medical, psychological, educational, 
living and counseling opportunities.  The GOE works with several 
NGOs to provide these services in addition to the ones the 
government fund. Particular emphasis is placed on educating 
families and putting children back into school at the appropriate 
levels, with accelerated programs as needed. 
 
¶8. Q. How many child labor cases or "prosecutions" were opened? A. 
Due to changes in the organization of the Ministry of Labor as it 
was merged with another government agency, the Office of Child 
Labor Inspections does not have data on how many employers were 
sanctioned last year. 
 
 ¶9. Q. How many child labor cases were closed or resolved? A. A 
total of 2,056 children were rescued. Data on sanctions in 2009 is 
not yet available. 
 
¶10. Q. How many violations were found or "convictions" reached?  A. 
Data on sanctions for 2009 is not yet available.  One credible NGO 
reports that some families were fined for putting their children 
into exploitative labor conditions, and that egregious cases were 
reported to the police, who arrested the perpetrators.  However, 
the source did not have data on the numbers of such cases. 
 
¶11. Q. What is the average length of time it took to resolve child 
labor cases?  A.  Data on sanctions is not  available. 
 
¶12. Q.  In cases in which violations were found, were penalties 
actually applied, either through fines paid or jail sentence 
served? Did such sentences meet penalties established in the law? 
¶A. Anecdotal evidence from a credible NGO says that some cases were 
met with fines and criminal sanctions, but data on 2009 penalties 
is not yet available. 
 
¶13.  Q. Did the experience regarding questions 7 through 10 above 
reflect a commitment to combat exploitive child labor? A.  The 
Inspections Office lacks resources, and the reorganization of 
government offices makes it difficult to track sanctions.  In 
addition, only the most egregious cases of exploitative child labor 
receive the attention of judicial authorities. However, the 
Government is committed to rescuing children and has made 
"restoring the rights of the child" a centerpiece of their efforts 
to combat child labor.  Their success in rescuing children is 
commendable, although more could be done with additional resources. 
We do not have sufficient data to evaluate their efforts to 
sanction employers at this time. 
 
 
¶14. Q. Did government offer any training for investigators or 
others responsible for enforcement? If so, what (if any) impact 
have these trainings had? A.  Forty government inspectors received 
training during the year, and an additional 861 people from 
municipal and local governments, businessmen, educators and others 
received some kind of training on child labor.  The Ministry of 
Labor and NGOs report great success in efforts to educate 
municipalities on the dangers of child labor in landfills. As a 
result, several municipalities have built fences around landfills, 
placed locks on gates, and generally worked to make landfills less 
accessible to children. 
 
2C) Section II: Forced Child Labor (repeat of questions 1-14 
above):    Post has heard credible reports from an NGO of some 
forced child labor in Ecuador on some family farms and, for an 
increasingly small number of children, in begging and in domestic 
service.  However, the source said that it was "extremely rare" in 
Ecuador and, in her estimation, the number of children forced to 
beg through threats or coercion is small and shrinking.  Post has 
little credible information on the status of children in the 
domestic service industry.  The Ministry of Labor and the Ministry 
of Economic and Social Inclusion both note that forced child labor 
is not a significant problem in Ecuador relative to exploitative 
labor or CSEC, although there are related cases of abuse in some 
family-owned businesses, particularly on family farms and in some 
other family businesses. Enforcement mechanisms, reporting of 
complaints, and the legal remedies are all the same as those for 
crimes against children listed in Section 2D below. 
 
2D) INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISMS FOR EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT- child 
trafficking, commercial sexual exploitation of children, use of 
children in illicit activities: Q. Because agencies responsible for 
enforcement of other worst forms of child labor are usually police 
units, Ministries of Justice or related Ministries rather than 
labor inspectorates, Posts are requested to answer questions 1-13 
below for child trafficking; commercial sexual exploitation of 
children 
(CSEC) - such as prostitution, pornography, etc.; and the use of 
children in illicit activities. Posts are requested to respond with 
three distinct sections (i.e., Post should answer all questions one 
time for "child trafficking," one time for "CSEC," and one time for 
"the use of children in illicit 
activities (use of children).") Each section should be entitled as 
follows and include responses to each question: "2D, Section I: 
Child trafficking," responses 1-13; "2D, Section II: Commercial 
Sexual Exploitation of Children," responses 1-13, and "2D, Section 
III: Use of Children in Illicit Activities," responses 1-13. 
 
¶A. NOTE FROM POST:  The GOE does not differentiate resources used 
to combat different kinds of child trafficking as required by the 
report instructions.  We are unable to break down the questions 
into three different sections, and the answers below apply to child 
trafficking, CSEC, and use of children in illicit activities. 
 
¶1. Q. Did the country/territory have agencies or personnel 
dedicated to enforcement of child trafficking/CSEC/use of children 
in illicit activities? How many investigators/social 
workers/dedicated police officers did the government employ to 
conduct investigations? If there were no dedicated agencies or 
personnel, provide an estimate of the number of people who were 
responsible for such investigations.  Was the number of 
investigators adequate?  A. The National Police have a unit 
specializing in crimes against children and adolescents (DINAPEN) 
charged with investigating reports of abuse, sexual exploitation, 
child sex tourism, child smuggling, kidnapping, illegal 
confinement, disappearance, exploitative and forced child labor, 
use of children in the drug trade, and abandoned children. DINAPEN 
has approximately 500 police officers.  The Ministry of Social and 
Economic Inclusion's Institute of Children and Families (INFA) has 
a unit for "Special Protection" to work with children who are 
victims of extreme abuse, trafficking, exploitative child labor, 
and sexual abuse of all types.  The unit runs 43 Protection Centers 
staffed by social workers, doctors, psychologists, and educators. 
There are approximately 12 such staff members in each of the 43 
centers.  Due to the special nature of the crime, victims of CSEC 
were provided special assistance by the NGO Our Youth Foundation 
(Fundaci????n Nuestros Jovenes), which runs special shelters for 
these 
victims, in addition to their work with other trafficking victims. 
In addition, the police have units dedicated to victims and witness 
protection in each province. 
 
 
¶2. Q. How much funding was provided to agencies responsible for 
investigating child trafficking/CSEC/use of children in illicit 
activities? Was this amount adequate? Did 
investigators have sufficient office facilities, transportation, 
fuel, and other necessities to carry out investigations? A. 
DINAPEN's budget was not available.  However, the Narcotics Affairs 
Section reports that they have assisted DINAPEN with basic office 
supplies, computers, and cameras to take photographs of crime 
scenes. The implication is that DINAPEN is underfunded. 
 
¶3. Q. Did the country/territory maintain a hotline or other 
mechanism for reporting child trafficking/CSEC/use of children in 
illicit activities violations?  If so, how many complaints were 
received in the reporting period? A.  Complaints or reports of 
mistreatment of children, including all criminal activity relating 
to children, can be reported in person, by mail, telephone 
hotlines, and by email to each canton or municipal Council for 
Children and Adolescents, DINAPEN, and INFA, in addition to 
hotlines maintained by the national Ombudsman for any crimes 
against human rights.  National statistics on the number of 
complaints by type are not available. 
 
¶4. Q. How many investigations were opened in regard to child 
trafficking/CSEC/use of children in illicit activities? Was the 
number of investigations adequate?  A. National statistics on these 
specific crimes against children are not available. 
 
¶5. Q.  How many children were rescued as a result? A. Our Youth 
Foundation reports that they have assisted 69 victims of 
trafficking from cases in 2008 and 2009.  INFA's Protection Centers 
have assisted more than 10,000 children, but INFA's Director of the 
Special Protection Unit notes that 7 of 10 cases there are cases of 
abuse. IFNA does not maintain specific statistics of the crimes 
against the children their centers protect. 
 
¶6. Q.  How many arrests were made or other kinds of prosecutions 
carried out? A. DINAPEN opened 25 investigations in 2009 and 
detained 17 suspects.  Conviction information is not yet available. 
 
 
¶7. Q.  How many cases were closed or resolved? A. Information not 
available. 
 
¶8. Q. How many convictions? A. Information not available. 
 
¶9. Q. Did sentences imposed meet standards established in the legal 
framework? A. Information not available. 
 
¶10. Q. Were sentences imposed actually served? A. Information not 
available. 
 
¶11. Q. What is the average length of time it takes to resolve cases 
of child trafficking/CSEC/use of children in illicit activities? A. 
The province of Pichincha's prosecutor for trafficking in persons 
cases noted that some cases may take three or more years to 
resolve, citing in particular a case of CSEC involving a 15 year 
old girl that began in 2006.  The case was completed in December 
2009, when the trafficker was sentenced to eight years 
imprisonment.  However, she noted that changes to the penal code 
and the Constitution require that cases be resolved within a year, 
or the perpetrator cannot be held in preventive detention. 
 
¶12. Q. Did the government offer any training for investigators or 
others responsible for enforcement of child trafficking/CSEC/use of 
children in illicit activities? If so, what was the impact (if any) 
of these trainings? A. The government regularly trains groups in 
the area of trafficking in persons and the restitution of the 
rights of the child, including police, prosecutors, teachers, 
municipal authorities and others, as part of their ongoing efforts 
to combat all forms of trafficking.  Since 2005, particular 
emphasis has been placed on helping educate families on the dangers 
of trafficking in an effort to keep heads of household from 
allowing their children to participate in the annual Christmas 
begging activities or from letting their children leave the country 
to work. Anecdotal reports suggest that the efforts to reduce 
begging have been enormously successful, while emigration for work 
purposes continues.  The NGO Desarrollo y Autogesti????n (DyA) 
estimates that 2500 children have been removed from begging in 
Quito alone. 
 
¶13. Q. If the country/territory experienced armed conflict during 
the reporting period or in the recent past involving the use of 
 
 
child soldiers, what actions were taken to penalize those 
responsible? Were these actions adequate or meaningful given the 
situation? A.  There are no reports of child soldiers in Ecuador. 
 
2E) GOVERNMENT POLICIES ON CHILD LABOR: 
     ¶1. Q. Did the government have a policy or plan that 
specifically addresses exploitive child labor? Please describe.  A. 
The GOE has a specific Program for the Eradication of Child Labor 
(PETI), which is led by the Ministry of Labor, but includes offices 
and programs from the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Economic 
and Social Inclusion, and a host of other government agencies. 
PETI involves the national government, employer associations, 
employee organizations, and non-governmental organizations with a 
stated goal of defining and implementing actions to prevent and 
eradicate child labor in Ecuador under the principle of shared 
responsibility between the government and society.  The program is 
further supported by the Central Bank's Young Worker program 
(Muchacho Trabajador) to educate youth about labor laws and their 
rights, and additional funding from private sector donors.  The 
current goal of PETI is to eliminate child labor in landfills.  The 
Ministry of Labor reports that their baseline survey indicated that 
just over 2000 children were involved in this effort. Today, more 
than 2000 children have been removed from landfill work, but other 
children have started to take their place.  MOL is currently 
working closely with municipalities to close off and patrol 
landfills to prevent additional children from entering the trade, 
and reports that child labor in landfills has been eradicated in 49 
of 60 cantons.  MOL intends to eliminate this form of hazardous 
child labor in 2010. 
 
¶2. Q. Did the country/territory incorporate exploitive child labor 
specifically as an issue to be addressed in poverty reduction, 
development, educational or other social policies, such as Poverty 
Reduction Strategy Papers, etc? Please describe.  A.  In addition 
to the PETI program described above, the GOE continues to work on a 
Program for the Schooling and Protection of Child Workers as part 
of its ongoing efforts to provide restitution of rights for 
exploited children.  The program is designed to get children back 
into school. A similar program is also run by the  NGO DyA, which 
is transferring the knowledge and training from their accelerated 
learning programs to local municipalities.  The Ministry of Labor 
also hosted an "Ecuador Free of Child Labor" program in June 2009 
to generate more public awareness of the problem. Ecuador's Social 
Agenda 2007-2010, part of the National Development Plan, 
established goals related to fighting child labor, which were 90% 
completed, with the worst forms of child labor as a priority. 
 
¶3. Q. Did the government provide funding to the plans described 
above? Please describe the amount and whether it was sufficient to 
carry out the planned activities. A. The GOE gave US$266,342 in 
calendar year 2009 to the Child Labor Inspectors Office, which has 
the primary responsibility of funding the PETI program.  Budget 
information from the other offices that support the effort, 
including the Central Bank's Young Workers program, was not 
available. 
 
¶4. Q.  Did the government provide non-monetary support to child 
labor plans?  Please describe. A.  Government-owned radio and 
television stations regularly broadcast messages in support of the 
PETI and Young Workers programs, in addition to running spots 
warning of the dangers of trafficking.  Government offices and 
spaces, including schools, were regularly made available to 
programs designed to combat trafficking and child labor.  DINAPEN 
and provincial prosecutors, for example, work with local schools to 
educate children on the dangers of CSEC and moving across borders 
in search of work. 
 
¶5. Q. Provide any additional information about the status and 
effectiveness of the government's policies or plans during the 
reporting period in regard to exploitive child labor.  A.  The GOE 
made great strides in combating child labor in landfills, although 
the work is not yet complete. (See answer to 2E.1) In addition, 
INFA has collaborated with NGOs and other government agencies, and 
raised awareness with the public, to significantly reduce child 
begging over Christmas.  Some reports estimate that child begging 
during the holidays fell 90% between 2005 and 2009.  In addition, 
the GOE and local flower industry have worked to reduce the 
incidence of child labor in the flower industry, although 
statistics are not available. 
 
¶6. Q. Did the government participate in any commissions or task 
forces regarding exploitive child labor?  Was the commission active 
 
 
and/or effective? A.  A tripartite child labor task force  (The 
National Council to Eradicate Child Labor) includes representatives 
from labor organizations, businesses and government works to 
implement ILO norms and conventions on child labor.  Credible NGOs 
say that the council is ineffective; the meetings produce 
agreements that are not transmitted back to unions or commercial 
organizations.  UNICEF also established a national Council on 
Children and Adolescents as an umbrella to the local councils to 
protect children.  However, the two organizations apparently do not 
work well together. 
 
 ¶7. Q. Did the government sign a bilateral, regional or 
international agreement to combat trafficking?  A.  The GOE 
ratified ILO Convention 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labor and 
uses the convention as the basis for setting goals to eradicate 
child labor. 
 
2F) SOCIAL PROGRAMS TO ELIMINATE OR PREVENT CHILD LABOR: 
 
¶1. A. Did the government implement any programs specifically to 
address the worst forms of child labor? Please describe.  A.  The 
GOE's PETI efforts described in the previous section are designed 
to be a holistic effort that identifies areas of exploitive child 
labor, removes the victims, and provides the victims with the 
social, psychological, and educational programs needed to resume 
their childhood.  In addition, INFA's Protection Centers manage 
cases on a long-term basis to ensure that the victims do not become 
victims again. INFA works very closely with families, especially in 
areas where children are often expected to help support their 
families, to educate parents and community leaders on the 
importance of keeping children out of work and in the schools. 
 
¶2. Q.  Did the country/territory incorporate child labor 
specifically as an issue to be addressed in poverty reduction, 
development, educational or other social programs, such as 
conditional cash transfer programs or eligibility for school meals, 
etc? Please describe.  A.  In addition to the programs listed 
above, the GOE eliminated the standard $25 school fee in 2007, and 
also made books and uniforms free, which helped remove a 
disincentive to education.  One reason for the elimination of the 
school fee was that parents were sending children to work because 
they could not afford school fees and associated costs.  The 
conditional cash transfer program implemented by the GOE called the 
"Human Development Bond" is targeted to households with children 
aged 0-16 among the poorest 40% of the population, which are 
eligible to receive a conditional cash transfer, dependent upon 
proof of school enrollment for children between the ages five and 
16, among other requirements.  Under this program, recipients must 
certify when requested, that their children are attending school 
and have been taken to medical check-ups.  If families do not 
present the requested documents in 45 days, they are removed from 
the program. 
 
¶3. Q. Did the government provide funding to the programs described 
above? Please describe amount and whether it was sufficient to 
carry out the planned activities.  A.  The programs described above 
are all government funded. In addition, upon taking office in 
January 2007, the Correa Administration almost immediately doubled 
the human development bond monthly payment from $15 to $30 per 
family.  In July 2009, this bond was increased again to $35 per 
family. The human development bond administered a budget of $384 
million in 2007, which increased to $430 million in 2008 and to 
$506 million in 2009. 
 
¶4. Q. Did the government provide non-monetary support to child 
labor programs?  Please describe.  A.  Government-owned radio and 
television stations regularly broadcast messages in support of the 
PETI and Young Workers programs, in addition to running spots 
warning of the dangers of trafficking.  Government offices and 
spaces, including schools, were regularly made available to 
programs designed to combat trafficking and child labor.  DINAPEN 
and provincial prosecutors, for example, work with local schools to 
educate children on the dangers of CSEC and moving across borders 
in search of work. 
 
¶5. Q. Provide any additional information about the status and 
effectiveness of the government's activities during the reporting 
period in relation to the programs described above. If the programs 
involved government provision of social services to children at 
risk of or involved in exploitive child labor, please describe and 
assess the effectiveness of these services. A. The government 
removed more than 2000 children from hazardous or exploitive labor 
 
 
conditions, provided those children with social services, and ran 
public campaigns to educate parents and employers about child 
labor.  The GOE coordinates with public, private, and 
non-governmental institutions to combat the problem.  The current 
programs appear to be effective for the resources the agencies have 
at their disposal, although additional funding would help expand 
the programs.  In addition, the GOE suffers from a lack of baseline 
data on children in some hazardous trades, such as mining, and 
information on the sanctions against those found violating the 
laws. 
 
¶6. Q. If the government signed one or more bilateral, regional or 
international agreement/s to combat trafficking, what steps did it 
take to implement such agreement/s? Did the agreement/s result in 
tangible improvements?  If so, please describe. A.  No new 
trafficking agreements were signed in 2009. 
 
2G) CONTINUAL PROGRESS: 
     ¶1. Q. Considering the information provided to the questions 
above, please provide an assessment of whether, overall, the 
government made progress in regard to combating exploitive child 
labor during the reporting period.  In making this assessment, 
please indicate whether there has been an increase or decrease from 
previous years in inspections/investigations, prosecutions, and 
convictions; funding for child labor elimination policies and 
programs; and any other relevant indicators of government 
commitment. A.  Inspections by the Child Labor Inspections Office 
went up from 3089 in 2008 to 3992 in 2009, but fewer children were 
removed from the workplace as a result of those inspections, 2264 
in 2008 v. 2056 in 2009.  The budget for the office was reduced 
from $462,000 in 2008 to $261,000 in 2009, reportedly due to 
problems in the overall GOE budget and with the Ministry of Labor's 
reorganization in 2009.  However, the GOE has demonstrated 
excellent success in reducing child begging over the last three 
years, and with providing services and the restitution of rights to 
children.  Post does not have sufficient data to evaluate 
convictions or sanctions at this time. 
HODGES