... the question. Or to be more precise, council tax funded youth clubs or not?
The lead story in the NWN today is about protests related to planned youth club closures.
In my experience, most of the kids who actually attend youth clubs tend to be the 'joiners' - mostly from middle class families and who will typically find other things to do with groups or clubs run by volunteers when council run youth clubs are closed.
The teenagers we need to be more concerned about, I think, are the non-joiners and if there's a role for taxpayer funded youth workers, it's for the mobile kind - getting out and about, talking to them on the streets and looking out for those who are vulnerable or likely to get into trouble. This group don't tend to have vociferous parents who will organise campaigns on their behalf.
I may be completely wrong, of course. Anyone out there who actually knows about this topic and has some experience care to offer an opinion?
Logged
26
March 3, 2011, 4:50pm
Guest User
Does it not depend where you live? My childhood was in Bristol and most local areas would have one or more youth clubs. It tended to be that all sorts that went to youth clubs. Including the kind who on the nights when the club wasn't on, would be found on the street corner. They could be quite rough. Newbury could well be totally different though and times may have changed greatly.
Does it not depend where you live? My childhood was in Bristol and most local areas would have one or more youth clubs. It tended to be that all sorts that went to youth clubs. Including the kind who on the nights when the club wasn't on, would be found on the street corner. They could be quite rough. Newbury could well be totally different though and times may have changed greatly.
There was no playstation or xbox in those days (I assume you had TV though) so there was more incentive to join a club. Todays lot get bored very quickly if the club does not provide stimulating entertainment. Just having a big room with a few ping pong tables doesn't do it. That's why the skatepark could provide good value.
There was no playstation or xbox in those days (I assume you had TV though) so there was more incentive to join a club. Todays lot get bored very quickly if the club does not provide stimulating entertainment. Just having a big room with a few ping pong tables doesn't do it. That's why the skatepark could provide good value.
I agree about the xbox etc, but I do think that the skateboard park is unlikely to attract the type that Noobree is referring to (those that don't join clubs). I'm just guessing, but I would assume that the skatepark would attract enthusiasts. Not the type that hang around town in large groups and arguably need "engaging".
I agree about the xbox etc, but I do think that the skateboard park is unlikely to attract the type that Noobree is referring to (those that don't join clubs). I'm just guessing, but I would assume that the skatepark would attract enthusiasts. Not the type that hang around town in large groups and arguably need "engaging".
I'm sure you're right but the Skatepark was being used as an example of engaging with young persons. For others it will be part of the job to find what excites them and provide the encouragement both to make them want to join in and perhaps convey some enthusiasm to the parents who might not be too bothered about what their kids are up to.
I'm sure it does. I'm just interested to know what the rationale is for closing the clubs. There must be some reasons and I'm guessing that it's because they are either not well attended or those who use them aren't the ones that cause problems.
The same point applies to all the cuts (or, as BBC journalists have apparently been instructed to call them, 'savings). Whatever the underlying reasons for our financial predicament (and I think we've all heard enough about that and have got the 'it's all their fault' message) it's time to move on from the blame game. Politicians have a responsibility to explain clearly and carefully what is being done and why. We ain't seen nothing yet. It's worth noting that the councils which are cutting the hardest and deepest are mostly those which don't have elections this year.
A particular point we should be putting to WBC is whether they've looked at further sharing of back office services and senior management tasks with other councils in our area as way of reducing the impact on front line services.
Maybe other venues could open their doors. Hungerford Football Club lets young teens in early evening and it seems really popular. Bit 'cooler' to meet at the football club rather than the youth club.
Good idea Jay. I'm a bit sceptical about many aspects of The Big Society spin - particularly the fact that so few of its proponents seem to have done anything substantial on a voluntary basis themselves* - but I do think there are many aspects of life in our town which could be improved by a bit more community action.
People are far too ready to complain and moan about our local councils while at the same time being reluctant to get off their arses and actually do something. Maybe the cuts will be a good thing if they encourage/force people to get involved.
*anyone know if Richard Benyon has done any substantial volunteering? I don't count giving money away via his trust - that's easy for someone like him - or organising the occasional litter pick, as he did recently. I mean spending hours a week doing something for his community.
He was also a district councillor for many years - any money he received for this would be trivial in comparison to his wealth - so it was essentially voluntary work. Of course there was a secondary reason - the development of his political career.
But his main charitable work in recent years has, I believe, been for the Help for Heroes charity of which he was a founding trustee. He is a trustee of the Mary Hare Foundation - a pretty good local charity and the Citizens' Advice Bureau.
*anyone know if Richard Benyon has done any substantial volunteering? I don't count giving money away via his trust - that's easy for someone like him - or organising the occasional litter pick, as he did recently. I mean spending hours a week doing something for his community.
Easy to be critical, may I ask what voluntary services you give back to the community ?
Agreed... a touch of the "What have the Romans ever done for us" about that comment.... Politicians are an easy target, but I somehow doubt whether noobree has committed quite as much time to 'worthy causes' as RB. But then again, that's what politicians do...... While I'm happy to spend my weekend flopped in front of the box or pottering about in the garden, your average thrusting politician is out kissing babies, cutting ribbons, attending endless village fetes, jamborees, jumble sales and gatherings at old folks homes. Handing out prizes to schoolchildren or vegetable growers and giving impromptu speeches at the drop of a hat....
You could say that just doing the above is 'giving something back to his community'. Feked if I'd have the time for all that nonsense.....
I think the idea of the "Big Society" could work, if it was strategically planned and done in a way to allow proper planning. All of the youth services and all of the day care centres could have been taken on by the community if done in a strategic way. People are saying I'm being unrealistic by passing control of the dicovery centre to a charity or community group, giving long leases to other council owned facilities to reduce financial burden on the council. We either embrace the change that the Government want to get through whether we are affiliated politically or we don't. But for the "Big Society" to happen, there needs to be responsible thought processes involved and not knee jerk "savings".
Logged
Male
