How to endorse Learnfree's request for re-issuing the Call for Comment on the CAB Bill.
Below is the template to endorse Learnfree's request for re-issuing of the call for comment on the new Children's Amendment Bill, that is in effect the first new ECD Bill.
Please remember not to copy and send it as is, but to add in all the relevant details.
Instructions to help you fill it in are in CAPS and square brackets. Please don't include those.
If you press on the address next to the "To" field your browser should open an email for you to the relevant official. Copy and paste the text into the body section of your email application.
CAB Bill Call for New Comment Period Template
[“TO” field:] CAB2023@dbe.gov.za
[INSERT IN SUBJECT LINE]: Draft Children’s Amendment Bill - Request for a republication of the Call for Comment on the Bill.
Dear Dr Kotze,
I am a [PICK ONE – ECD Practitioner, Parent OR Grandparent of a child in ECD OR a concerned citizen.
I urgently request a new 30-day comment period on the draft Children’s Amendment Bill [B-2023] (“Bill”) for the following reasons, as extracted from LearnFree’s letter to your offices, and included below.
Kind Regards,
[NAME & SURNAME]
[EMAIL]
[DAYTIME TELEPHONE NUMBER]
“The public cannot currently make effective and meaningful public comment on the Bill for the following reasons:
a) Call for comment exclusively in English with no braille version available.
b) No SEIA was included when the Bill was published for public comment.
c) Lack of an explanatory memorandum and no link to Children’s Act included.
d) Lack of pre-education of stakeholders and the public.
e) Limited advertisement of the call for comment that has left much of the public and media unaware of the Bill.
The above omissions in the public engagement process violate the principles and practical best practices required to ensure proper public engagement as established in the “Mogale” judgement .
LearnFree, therefore, requests a new 30-day comment period, such period to commence after an amended call for public comment is made that remedies the abovementioned defects.
The ECD sector is the second largest educational sector in the country, with the potential to educate over 4 million children through some 42 420 existing ECD programmes.
It is also the largest independent education sector with its independent providers therefore dwarfing the independent basic education sector.
As such any legislation that impacts the sector must be subject to a thorough process of public engagement.
LearnFree is an educational consultancy and advocacy organisation that works with both local and international academics and groups to promote freedom in and of education. We have a simple mission and focus, doing all we can to make education available to as many as possible at the lowest possible cost and wherever possible. Our core value is that this is best done by promoting freedom in education and freedom of education. We work closely with researchers, educational law and policy associations, and the non-governmental sector both locally and internationally.
We are calling for a new 30-day comment period for the reasons set out below.
Neglect of African languages and Braille version
The call for comment is published exclusively in English. ECD practitioners are in the main Black Africans, as are most parents whose children attend ECD programmes. That the call for comment is not made in at least a few additional languages or at very least in the dominant language in a particular province is a serious limitation on all South African’s right to make informed comment.
Persons with disabilities are a vulnerable group worthy of special attention and consideration to ensure that they can effectively exercise their constitutional rights. The failure to provide copies of the Bill in braille at places or in a manner accessible to this community strikes directly at the equality and dignity provisions of the Constitution.
The above should be rectified and the Bill then re-published for public comment.
Failure to publish a Socio-Economic Impact Assessment
The role of a Socio-Economic Impact Assessment (“SEIA”) and proper adherence to the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment System (“SEIAS”) is crucial in the context of early childhood development, particularly in a developing country like South Africa. The SEIAS aims to minimise unintended consequences arising from legislation. This includes avoiding unnecessary costs related to implementation and compliance, as well as preventing unanticipated outcomes.
Additionally, SEIAS seeks to anticipate potential implementation risks and promote measures to mitigate these risks. Conducting a socio-economic impact assessment is especially important in this legislative context to ensure that early childhood development policies are effective, sustainable, and do not inadvertently burden the communities they are meant to support.
Paragraph 4.1.5 of the SEIAS Guidelines makes it clear that a SEIA must be published with the proposed Bill . A SEIA for the draft Children’s Amendment Bill [B-2023] has not been published with this proposed Bill.
We request that the SEIA be published with the Bill and the public then be allowed 30 days to make their considered comments.
Lack of an explanatory memorandum and failure to include link to the Children’s Act
The Bill cannot be adequately understood by the public unless the DBE provides an explanatory memorandum that locates the Bill within the current policy context and explains the Bill in a balanced fashion in plain language.
While it is understandable that officials in the DBE who have worked on the Bill in a dedicated fashion would support its provisions, but, they should still provide balanced information that highlights not only benefits but possible disadvantages of the Bill. These should be easily obtained from the Socio-economic Impact Assessment and should be included in the memorandum in plain language.
Amendment bills are by their nature complex as they must be read together with the current legislation that they are amending. During the recent passage of the BELA Bill through Parliament, Parliamentary Legal Services repeatedly reminded members those amendments had to be considered while reading the current Bill and not in isolation. If experienced legislators had to be remined of this how can the public be expected to understand the amendments without a link being shared to the full Children’s Act?
Here again this should be corrected, and a new call for comment issued.
Lack of pre-education of stakeholders and the public.
It is noted that the honourable Minister, the Ministry of Basic Education and DBE have been engaged in a series of road shows to engage with the ECD sector. It is not clear that these relate specifically to this amendment Bill and are to the best of our knowledge more general in nature.
While aspects of government policy have been explained, such as the intention to limit freedom of curriculum, which is of great concern to LearnFree, complaints have been received that these were “telling” rather than “listening” sessions with stakeholders being told what was going to happen rather than informed how they could express their views and influence the legislative process.
These sessions have also not engaged parents, while practitioners are a vital component of the sector, they are not the only party impacted. The very fact that parents place their children in ECDs should indicate that many of them are not available during working hours to participate in meetings. Meetings involving parents should be scheduled in the evenings and on weekends and to the best of our knowledge this has not been done.
Working parents, especially the working poor, are also overwhelmed with many responsibilities and cannot be expected to attend lengthy meetings during their limited evening or weekend hours. The working poor perform a disproportionate amount of shift and weekend work. Various alternative means of communication should be utilised to inform them.
Parents, the majority of whom are Black, single mothers may not have the time or means to make lengthy written submissions. During the processing of the BELA Bill, the South African Parliament as well as the Western Cape Provincial Legislature took innovative steps to employ social media, through means such as Google forms and dedicated WhatsApp lines to allow for comment.
LearnFree urges the DBE to follow a similar approach. The DBE must in any event republish the call for comment and this will afford the DBE an opportunity to improve its engagement processes.
Limited Public Awareness
The call for comment has not been widely publicised and the public in general are not aware of the Bill.
It is of concern that such an important Bill does not even appear on the DBE website’s call for comments section. This is indicative of the lack of communication that has attended the publication of the call for comment.
Making the call for comment over the election period has meant that the press has not given sufficient, if any, attention, to the Bill. This should have been anticipated by the DBE and the call for comment delayed.
In South Africa, public participation and engagement processes are constitutionally mandated to uphold democratic principles and ensure government accountability. This participation ensures that laws and policies reflect the will and needs of the people, promote transparency and inclusivity. Moreover, it empowers citizens to influence decision-making, thereby enhancing the legitimacy of governmental actions and fostering a more participatory democracy. Public participation also helps to prevent arbitrary decision-making and safeguards against potential abuses of power by providing a platform for diverse voices and concerns to be heard.
Unfortunately, the public engagement process for the Bill is already not meeting this standard.
If the above flaws are not remedied it may lead to unnecessary litigation which is neither in the interests of the Department of Basic Education, ECD stakeholders nor any other party."
Commentaires