1 / 17

Arguments for and against the inclusion of a

Arguments for and against the inclusion of a National Policy Framework in the Children’s Bill. Portfolio Committee briefing Department of Social Development 20 August 2004. Background.

quynn-petersen
Download Presentation

Arguments for and against the inclusion of a

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Arguments for and against the inclusion of a National Policy Framework in the Children’s Bill Portfolio Committee briefing Department of Social Development 20 August 2004

  2. Background • The draft Children’s Bill prepared by the SALRC and submitted to the Department provided for a National Policy Framework (NPF) as indicated in slides numbers 3, 4 and 5 • The identification of a need to develop a national policy framework comes from the draft proposed national strategy on child abuse and neglect developed in 1998 • For reasons indicated in slides numbers 6,7,8 and 9 the NPF was removed from the Bill. • This and the removal of other clauses led to an outcry from Civil Society who indicated that the Children’s Bill had lost its soul (see slides 12,13,14 and 15) • During the recent hearings most of the presenters requested the Portfolio Committee to once again to reinsert the NPF

  3. A National Policy Framework - SALRC version • The Minister • must prepare a national policy framework to guide the implementation, enforcement and administration of this Act in order to secure the protection and well-being of children in the Republic; • must review the policy framework at least once every five years • may, when necessary, amend the framework

  4. NPF - Continued • The Minister must publish the NPF and each amendment of the framework by notice in the Government Gazette • The NPF binds • all organs of state in the national, provincial and local spheres of government • all designated child protection organisations • any other NGO’s involved in implementing government or government-aided programmes and projects concerning children.

  5. NPF continued - contents • The NPF must • Be a coherent policy directive appropriate for the Republic as a whole to guide the protection and well-being of children; • Provide for an integrated, coordinated and uniform approach by organs of state in all spheres of government and NGO’s on which it is binding and • Be consistent with the provisions of the Children’s Bill

  6. Reasons why NPF was removed • Setting of a precedent – there are no other Acts that provides a policy framework • Should rather be taken into a White Paper – Policy Framework for services to children • Provision already made in PFMA that departments are required to have a strategic plan which in the case of this department and many of the implicated departments, includes services to children

  7. Reasons why NPF was removed • If required by the Portfolio Committees that framework should be available before approval of the Bill, the required consultative process will retard the finalisation and thus the implementation of the Bill • Reviews of the policy framework which also requires consultation, will imply continuous amendments to the Act, once the Bill has been approved

  8. Reasons why NPF was removed • Policy framework will require the approval of various Ministers (Cabinet) before it can be implemented and later before it can be amended. This can seriously retard service delivery to children • The NPF opens the various departments/government to litigation • The Department has already developed in collaboration with other critical departments, provinces and other stakeholders a policy and a strategy to prevent and manage child abuse,neglect and exploitation of children.

  9. Reasons why NPF was removed • A policy framework which spells out the roles and responsibilities of the different departments and other sectors, already exists. The National Programme of Action for Children in South Africa: Framework was approved by Cabinet in 1996. All that now should happen is that it be reviewed

  10. National Programme of Action for Children: Outline of framework • Introduction • The current situation of children • The Action Programme framework and its components • Nutrition • Child and maternal health • Early childhood and basic education

  11. National Programme of Action for Children: Outline of framework • Social welfare development (family environment, out-of-home care and social security • Leisure and cultural activities • Child protection measures • General measures for implementing the NPA • Conclusion • Summary of sectors responsible for implementing the NPA

  12. Reasons given by NGOs for the reinsertion of the NPF • The development of the NPF need not delay the implementation of the bill. once the bill is passed can be progressively implemented as explained yesterday Bill • The Children’s Bill is a comprehensive, complex piece of legislation involving many structures. Unless there is a structured effort to bring these together in adequately resourced, adequately focussed cooperative relationships it will be difficult to implement the full provisions of the legislation

  13. Reasons given by NGOs for the reinsertion of the NPF: The Constitution • The Constitutional imperative provides the broad principles of the Cooperative government but this requires “fleshing out” for the appropriate implementation of the Bill. • These basic principles are broad without the detail that facilitates the specifics essential to the implementation of the Children’s Bill – and other legislation • The Constitutional imperative does not include NGO’s, CBO’s and FBO’s who provide the bulk of services to children in the field of social development. It deals only with Government departments.

  14. Arguments for reinsertion • Relationships between role-players need to be formalised to ensure that children do not fall into the gaps and all role-players fulfil their roles • The NPF will enhance a developmental approach to the care and protection of children rather than promote a residual welfare approach • Scarce resources will be more profitably directed to where they are most needed and duplication of services and resource provision will be avoided. • Budgets submitted to treasury will be based on integrated and properly costed programmes

  15. Arguments for reinsertion • It is of note that the concluding observations of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child noted that it was “also concerned about the lack of inter-ministerial coordination between those ministries responsible for the implementation of the Convention (on the Rights of the Child)……

  16. The Committee recommends that the State party strengthen its efforts to ensure greater coordination between those ministries and departments responsible for the implementation of the Convention.[1] [1] UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, Concluding observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child South Africa, Unedited version, 28th January 2000, pp 3,4.

  17. Recommendations: • That the Portfolio Committee consider both the arguments for and against the inclusion of the NPF into the Bill

More Related