Presentation to the 3rd Forum on the African

Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
March 11-13, 2010

By
Josphat M. Mathe
“representing the SADC Child Budget Network”
 TITLE OF PRESENTATION

CHILD BUDGETING: WHAT WORKS? WHAT DOESN’T?

GAINS TOWARDS REALIZING CHILD RIGHTS

DEFINITION OF CHILD BUDGETING

This discourse requires that, for a start, we develop a common working
understanding of the two concepts – child and budget.

CHILD
Both the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child [UNCRC] and
the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child [ACRWC] define a
child as ‘a person below the age of 18 years’. Of course, it may be argued that
at times contextual and cultural factures do have a bearing on the
conceptualization of a child.
 BUDGET

In simple terms refers to ‘a planning tool expressed in monetary terms’. It shows

how expected income or resources will be shared among competing aspirations
and priorities.

OBJECTIVE

Child rights activists’ advocacy about Child Budgeting is about ‘influencing the
planning, allocation and utilization of resources with the objective “to realize
child rights”. This ideology is founded on the provisions of Article 4 of the
UNCRC that realizes that, appropriate legislative, administrative and other
support mechanisms are necessary conditions for the implementation and
realization of child rights.
ISSUES AROUND CHILD
BUDGETING
1. Only meaningful when driven
by popular will
• Child budgeting should be supported by
popular sections of the citizenry. For a
meaningful process, the citizenry –
communities, children, lobbyist groups
need to be well informed and empowered
to engage in child rights and budget
matters.
2. Prioritizing children’s articulated
concerns [embracing child
participation]
• For example, in Zimbabwe, there is a project dubbed
the Child Friendly National Budget Initiative [CFNBI]
implemented by the National Association of Non
Governmental Organizations [NANGO] in partnership
with Save the Children Norway – both organizations
being founder-members of the SADC Child Budget
Network. The Initiative has facilitated the formation of
the Zimbabwe Child and Youth Budget Network
[ZCYBN], to spearhead the participation of children in
the budget debate. This is important, as children are
encouraged to discuss amongst themselves and
articulate issues that concern them.
3. Selection of issues to focus
• Whereas child budget matters are many,
focusing on ‘a few manageable’ issues at a time
helps avoid ‘clouding and crowding’. The CFNBI
in Zimbabwe is currently focusing the Education
and Health sectors. This is in line with the SADC
Child Budget Network strategic choices, and co-
incides with the national development objectives
of prioritizing the promotion of basic education
and child health – which are also set targets for
the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs].
 4. Effective Targeting in
Advocacy work
• Budget advocacy requires robust lobbying. This
demands effective and appropriate targeting.
Thus, selective targeting of who or what
institutions to lobby is vital for an effective
advocacy process. In the case of budgeting, the
paramount target institution is Parliament and its
structures, such as portfolio committees. There
are also crucial activists groups that must be
targeted, such as Women’s Caucuses, and
others relevant to the issue on discourse.
 5. The Media and Publicity
• Effective publicizing of advocacy issues is
instrumental to reaping significant results,
and the role of the media is crucial in that
regard. Even when targeting, it is
important to deal with popular media
houses and personnel. It is also crucial to
sensitize the media about child rights and
friendly child budget reporting.
 ACHIEVEMENTS/GAINS

There are many achievements, though at

times nominal, that can be attributed to the
child budget advocacy project:
• Contribution to the democratization of the budgeting
process. In the past, the national budgeting process was
known as the preserve of government technocrats and
the parliament. The child budget project has gone into
the community, sensitizing it and interest groups about
the importance of getting involved in the budget making
process. This has been well received, and as a result
interest groups now articulate issues for prioritization,
and publicly demand accountability on utilization of
public funds. Even children have on occasions critiqued
the way ‘their’ funds have been used.
• Mainstreaming of child participation in the budgeting
process.
As alluded to, in the discussion above, structures such
as organized child-led groups have been created and
forums arranged for children to come together and
discuss issues that affect them. They have also been
empowered to critique the utilization of resources
through interface dialoguing with ministers, MPs and
government technocrats. Some child-inspired forums
have been so formidable, and successfully challenged
policy that infringed on their rights.
• Recognition of the project by state bodies,
and awarding it a consultative status on
child rights budgeting. Now, when a social
sector ministry discusses public budget
matters, it invites opinions and the
participation of the Child Budget project.
Even parliamentary portfolio committees
would invite the participation of the child-
friendly budget project in any debate that
affects the situation of children.
• Success in campaigning for the creation of
national programmes and budget lines in
the national budget to address situations
of children, eg. Children in difficult
circumstances, the Basic Education
Assistance Module [BEAM], the National
Action Plan for Orphans and other
Vulnerable Children [NAP for OVC].
• Propagation of the concept of District Child
Protection Committees [DCPC].
• Partnerships between government and
civil society organizations in child rights
promotion has seen the emergency of
child protection committees in all districts
and in some areas cascading through
wards to village levels – with the children
participating in the committees.
 CHALLENGES

The challenges the CFNBI faced are largely

socio-economic, and due to the unstable
political environment.
The most pronounced ones relate to the
following:
• The suspension of NGOs field operations during
the height of political polarization in 2007-8
• The absence of the main advocacy target
institution - Parliament - in 2008 and part of 2009
• No budget was prepared in 2008, and therefore
there were no debates around that issue
• The new crop of parliamentarians is not familiar
with child rights matters and budgeting. This has
the effect of drawing back progress as we have
to start sensitization anew
 WHAT CIVIL SOCIETY
ORGANIZATIONS [CSOS] SEEK
FROM THE FORUM
The SADC Child Budget Network is a loose
consortium of non-governmental
Organizations formed in 2003, and bent on
promoting child rights through influencing
child friendly national budgeting:
• We therefore seek from the Forum and
Committee of Experts recognition of our
existence and the crusade we propagate
to improve the situations of children in our
countries through Child Budget advocacy
work. The support may be manifested
through the creation of similar networks
and linkages throughout the Pan-African
region.
• We also seek support and technical
assistance in our endeavours to penetrate
SADC structures, and perhaps the AU
structures as well, that might influence the
establishment of child rights budgeting and
monitoring mechanisms in our countries.
 THANK YOU !!
Contact Details
15 Christchurch Avenue, Strathaven,
Avondale, Harare, Zimbabwe
Telefax: +263 4 308 475
Mobile: +263 11 433 573; +263 914 059 552
Email: joemathe@mweb.co.zw