Bundesjugendring warns against short-sighted cutbacks at the expense of young people

In the view of the German Federal Youth Council (DBJR), the proposed cuts are an expression of disregard for the rights and interests of children and young people and their families. Necessary questions about structural adjustments to child and youth welfare services are being instrumentalised here by viewing them exclusively from the perspective of cutting services without taking the needs of young people into account. The DBJR strongly disagrees with this.

The DBJR recognises the fundamental need to consolidate public budgets. However, in order to achieve this, the local authorities in particular must be funded in accordance with their statutory duties.[1] Cutting services in child and youth welfare in order to adjust services to budgets is the wrong approach. Any reform of child and youth welfare must be based on Section 1 SGB VIII: "Every young person has a right to support their development and to be educated to become a self-determined, independent and socially competent person." The basic mandate of child and youth welfare described there is derived from the constitutional mandate and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Parts of the proposals lack any basis. The principle of subsidiarity is a central basic principle of child and youth welfare and has proven its worth, enabling independent organisations to promote needs-based support for young people and their families. The assumption that the public administration can fulfil the tasks of child and youth welfare better and more cost-effectively is incomprehensible to the DBJR.

The DBJR welcomes any change that is in the interests of children, young people and young adults. 2] The consolidation of responsibilities for all young people in child and youth welfare, which has been in preparation for several legislative periods, must not be called into question again. The DBJR also considers proposals that would lead to a two-tier youth welfare system at the expense of unaccompanied foreign minors to be unacceptable. The services and tasks of youth welfare apply to all young people. Any deviation from the standards of child and youth welfare for unaccompanied minor refugees would be incompatible with this requirement and, above all, with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The same applies to the considerations, assistance for young adults and aftercare by cancelling the necessary adjustment of benefits in 2021. It is precisely during transitions that young people need reliability instead of new uncertainty.

The idea of giving the federal states the option of postponing the entry into force of the legal entitlement to all-day care or organising it differently is also incomprehensible. The legal entitlement to all-day care is not only crucial for greater educational equality, but also brings further important economic benefits by closing a gap in childcare provision. The demand for postponement after five years of preparation is incomprehensible. If it were to come into force at different times in individual federal states, access to education and childcare would become (even more) dependent on place of residence and increase educational inequality. The DBJR has taken a position on the organisation of all-day school[3].

The current debate must not be dominated by the question of where benefits for young people can be cut. What is needed are reforms that relieve the burden on local authorities without reducing the rights, protection standards and opportunities for young people to participate. Benefit cuts may reduce expenditure in the short term, but they cause long-term costs for the welfare state and the economy.

The DBJR will continue to campaign for young people to be at the centre of child and youth welfare. The DBJR has already commented on the draft bill of the 1st KJHSRG,[4] which also contains assessments of substantive approaches that can be found again in the paper that has become public.

[1] www.dbjr.de/artikel/forderungen-fuer-eine-jugend-und-generationengerechte-fiskalpolitik

[2] www.dbjr.de/artikel/bundesjugendring-veroeffentlicht-stellungnahme-zum-1-kjhsrg

[3] www.dbjr.de/artikel/umsetzung-des-ganztagsfoerderungsgesetz-gafoeg-in-den-bundeslaendern

[4] www.dbjr.de/artikel/bundesjugendring-veroeffentlicht-stellungnahme-zum-1-kjhsrg