Arguments for and against

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

2
Background

• The draft Childrens 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
  Childrens 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 NGOs 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 NGOs on which it is
  binding and
• Be consistent with the provisions of the
  Childrens 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 Childrens 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 Childrens Bill
  and other legislation
• The Constitutional imperative does not include
  NGOs, CBOs and FBOs 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