4. Attention may also be drawn to the fact that some parents and children from minority communities, particular in second and third generations of settlement, may prefer to integrate wholly with the dominant national language and culture rather than maintain their separate linguistic or ethnic identity. Examples of this were referred to by participants from Ecuador and Austria in their account of programmes designed to make education in a minority language compulsory in certain areas. The Draft Recommendations do not fully reflect this issue and could usefully emphasise that members of minority communities should not be deterred from abandoning their ethnic or linguistic origin and asserting their rights as undifferentiated citizens if they so wish. All the recent minority rights instruments assert clearly that membership of a minority is a matter of choice rather than allocation. 5. Some of these issues were developed in more detail in a paper for the Council of Europe Expert Committee on the Framework Convention on the protection of National Minorities in 2006. A copy is attached. 6. These considerations suggest that the Draft Recommendations should be revised at least to recognise more clearly that the same approach will not always be appropriate for each different type of minority and if possible to give some more explicit guidance on the most appropriate approach for each of the major types, in particular those resulting from current patterns of migration and the highly diverse communities which they give rise to in many major cities. Tom Hadden 17 December 2008