A/HRC/36/58 246. The Farmworkers Association of Florida and Centre Europe—Tiers Monde stressed that undocumented migrant workers should not be excluded from the right to social security and that paragraph 2 should be retained in its entirety. 247. On paragraph 3, ILO proposed using the word “strengthen” in lieu of “maintain”. The Programme on Women’s Economic, Social and Cultural Rights suggested that social security should include violence and loss of livelihood as contingencies, childcare and maternity schemes, and be portable. 248. In paragraph 4, ILO and the Programme on Women’s Economic, Social and Cultural Rights suggested adding language on the adequacy of systems and procedures. 4. Article 23 249. The European Union requested that the title be aligned with agreed language and read: “Right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health”. La Via Campesina (Africa) suggested that the title refer to the “right to adequate health”. 250. ILO recommended that paragraph 3 refer to decent working conditions for health personnel. G. 1. Articles 24-27 and preamble Article 24 251. Guatemala reported that consultations were under way on the compatibility of article 24 with national law. 252. Bolivia (Plurinational State of) and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) supported the content of the article. South Africa suggested that the first sentence of paragraph 1 be aligned with agreed language and that “and the right to non-discrimination in this context” be added. 253. Several NGOs took the floor to highlight the importance of the right to adequate housing. One civil society organization suggested including additional paragraphs addressing the issue of natural disasters and adequate housing for migrant and seasonal rural workers. 2. Article 25 254. The European Union and Guatemala suggested deleting the second sentence of paragraph 1, as it might imply that elements that were not compatible with human rights might be permissible. 255. Switzerland suggested adding “and may be conceived as a contribution to Sustainable Development Goal 4” after “rural areas”, at the end of paragraph 1. Ecuador found that proposal valuable. 256. ILO suggested adding “uphold and promote the universal nature of human rights and” to the last sentence of paragraph 1, after “They shall”. 257. ILO, with Ecuador, Uruguay and La Via Campesina (Europe) concurring, recommended that additional text on child labour be inserted in paragraph 3. 258. According to the Plurinational State of Bolivia, alternative systems of education should not be disregarded and the article should remain as drafted to protect the interests of people in rural areas. Ecuador highlighted the importance for peasants of education and training, including in their own language. 3. Article 26 259. Argentina, Chile and Guatemala stated that discussions on article 26 should not preempt negotiations taking place within the World Intellectual Property Organization on traditional knowledge. 20