Re 1 for Generation Next

Re 1 for Generation Next

For the last 48 hours, everybody has been busy number crunching. Post budget, the calculators are out to compute what the budget really adds up to. The experts have proclaimed it’s a good budget for most people. But nobody’s thinking about children when they say that.

The 1991 census indicates that there are about 185 million children in the age group of six to 14 years. And, according to a recent study by non-governmental group HAQ that’s working on child’s rights, for every Rs 100 that is accounted for in the budget, only Re 1 is spent on children the next generation that Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha kept referring to in his speech.

Over the last 10 years, children, a category that the government defines as those in the age group of 0 to 14 years, have not got much from the State. While budgetary allocations in the social sector have been on the rise, they are dispersed over general heads like health and family welfare. Budgets rarely talk about or allocate funds for specific programmes for children.

Some facts and figures first: Within the social sector expenditure, the share of children is 15.2 per cent for all categories of children. The budget for child health is much lower than that for other sectors like education and child development. And all the ‘‘big, successful programmes’’ are largely externally funded.

According to data collated by HAQ, the 1995-96 budget brought good news for children. That year, the budget allocated was 53.4 per cent higher than the estimated budget. Also, that year, there were some new schemes and an increase in allocation.

But the next budget, the graph dipped again. In the 1996-97 budget, the allocations were 21 per cent lower than the estimates. This year, Sinha announced the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan for elementary education. Mentioned in point 63 in Sinha’s speech is a promise of ‘‘eight years of quality education’’ to children. In a year, he has promised to integrate all existing projects under this one umbrella programme. He has also promised I-T education in all schools, easy student loans and more IITs. ‘‘How is it all going to work out,’’ questions Bharti Ali of HAQ. ‘‘Even basic primary education facilities are not available in so many areas. Also, he has not specifically mentioned how much money will go into this programme.’’

The fact that the money is not reaching where it should has been raised in many forums. Exactly a month back, the Committee on the Rights of the Child (India) categorically stated that there ‘‘should be a systematic assessment of budgetary allocations on the implementation of child rights and to collect and disseminate information in this regard’’. Further, they recommended increased budgetary provision for programmes targetting the most vulnerable groups. All those working with children will tell you that the mathematics of the budget is all wrong. And they back it up with numbers. According to the 1991 census data, around 45 per cent of children in India, which adds upto 83 million, are out of school. Enrolment rate at the primary level is 88 per cent but about 40 per cent drop out of school before they reach class five.

Further, 54 per cent children don’t complete elementary education. The numbers notwithstanding, averages for the last 10 years indicate that only 0.6 per cent of the money that comes into the children’s kitty is spent on education.

On the health front, 0.2 per cent of the money goes specifically for children, this is excluding the allocation made under the wider umbrella of child and family welfare. Around 0.3 per cent goes to child development.

And where the union budget fails, external aid comes to the rescue. The HAQ report indicates that on an average, 19.3 per cent of the union budget spent on children is externally aided and this number is going up.

In 1997-98 budget, the share of external aid in expenditure on children was 28.6 per cent, the highest in 10 years. And in the budget estimates of 2000-2001 the projection was 34.1 per cent.

‘‘The government is getting more money from outside rather than do something for children on their own,’’ Ali says. ‘‘It just goes to show the attitude of policy makers vis-a-vis children.’’