I have received two questions regarding my proposals. 1. Does it need government coordination? 2. How would I convince government to put in these resources
If I may start with the first question, definitely such a program must on the overall be coordinated by the government. Although we should know that the goal of rapid and significant expansion of such a program cannot be achieved by government alone. It requires all organizations and individuals, from communities, community, ministries, parastatals, non- governmental organizations, faith based organizations, trade union organizations and development parties to become active in the planning and implementation.
These implementing parties and coordinating bodies will need to be made responsible and accountable for achieving the desired results to which they commit themselves at local, national and regional levels. Government will be needed to strengthen mechanisms for continuous learning through performance monitoring and reporting. The key outcome indicators will be used by all implementing parties and government bodies to monitor performance, the coverage in all regions and in each sector and gaps which need to be filled. Performance will need to be reviewed every year and plans adjusted to ensure that targets are met.
We may need to formalize technical advisory committees and sectoral steering committees to promote greater focus. For example, a structure for just three top levels can be like this;
1. A national committee, being the highest policy decision making body on matters related to child affair. It would be attended by cabinet ministers to ensure that policy and resource mobilization is adequate.
2. National multi-sectoral coordinators committee, to provide leadership for multi-sectoral and regional implementation. Members could be at permanent secretary level and includes equivalent regional and civil society participants. It reviews progress and adapts annual work plans and budgets to give recommendations to the national committee.
3. National executive committee. This could provide the technical leadership and will be responsible for coordinating the detailed implementation of the multi-sectoral response. It’s membership could be that that reflects the hands on experience required to deal with implementation issues.
All these will ensure direct government involvement in the fight against trafficking. So we definitely need government in coordination.
Government is one of the best lobbying partners in case more funds are needed to run the program it can guarantee finances so definitely we need it onboard in terms of coordination.
Now about the second question,
One vital point we have to note is that any attempt to understand the effects of human trafficking must take a long term perspective and this has to be emphasized to government. I will argue that, from modest beginnings, the economic damage caused by trafficking can assume catastrophic proportions over the long run, and thereby threatening the social fabric it’s self which government so desire to maintain.
Government will have to be told that the responsibility for financing the program will be shared with all sections of society. Government will be assured that its commitments to the program will not affect national expenditure and national priorities to a great extent. This is because, a substantial proportion of the programs related expenditure will have to be financed by external grants, international sources, including bilateral sources, the United Nations system, the grant component of the world bank and international non-government organizations. All government needs to do is to define their own policies for guiding the inflow of external resources and complement them with domestically financed initiatives however small they may be.
Governments can have a financial mechanism where each ministry will have to adequately plan and budget for their contribution to the national response. Each permanent secretary as well as the accounting officer, will be responsible for ensuring that their ministry’s work plan and budget adequately finances child trafficking local responses in every constituency appropriate to that ministry’s area of function.
If government starts to incorporate or integrate their child policies, their human trafficking policies within their own budgets and everyday programs and try to raise funds within these frame works, then we will have a cheap program that government can afford and the finance minister will be happy to help.
Although simplistic, this analysis of the fiscal modalities of my suggested plan in a way suggest that the indirect fiscal effects of a comprehensive child monitoring and trafficking prevention program will contribute significantly to the program’s own financing since future generations and former victims in future will contribute to the financing and even still the country will have a bigger workforce as a result of keeping children in a safe environment that encourages education and other aspects of child development for a better future. Note that the indirect fiscal benefits are only part of the broader social and economic benefits arising out of the success of the program and this has to be emphasized to government.
All we have to do is to exercise persuasion in bringing such ideas to the attention of the government, governments are no full unaware of trafficking unless if we explain to them the program we have, and help them draft policies it’s only then that we can influence positive policy reforms and financial commitments.
Hanington Mulindwa
Am an independent researcher and program designer.
Return to Home Page